Su búsqueda

Definitions of giftedness developed in the USA have included both creative and leadership giftedness for over 40 years, but there has been relatively little empirical study of the implementation of programming in either of these areas. Because gifted education practices in the USA may provide models for the development of these practices in other countries, it seems important to evaluate the presence and content of programming in creativity and leadership in the USA to develop an understanding of what strengths and barriers these aspects of giftedness may face in other settings. In this pilot study, I examined gifted policies to identify US states that would be highly supportive of programming in leadership or creative giftedness. I then searched systematically for evidence of such programming on the gifted education pages of district Web sites within two of these states. Findings reveal that a widely varied level of detail is provided online at the district level; while there was at least one strong description evident in both the creativity and leadership areas, these were the exception rather than the rule. Further study is needed to confirm and extend these findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Leadership has been retained in the federal definition of giftedness, across major revisions, since its inclusion in the Marland Report (1972) definition more than 30 years ago. Despite this history, there appears to be little consensus regarding the relationship between leadership education and education for talented and gifted youth. This review analyzes publications about leadership education among talented and gifted students since 1980. Four major emphases are identified within this literature, and empirical articles within each area of emphasis are summarized and critiqued. Analysis confirms that a consolidated theoretical framework for leadership giftedness has not yet materialized, although limited consensus may be emerging regarding the aspects of leadership that are more or less responsive to instruction. Findings suggest that more research may be needed to justify retaining leadership ability within the federal definition of giftedness. Three suggested directions for future research on youth leadership giftedness are extrapolated from this foundation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Language minority students, while often underrepresented in traditional gifted programs, can benefit from "heritage language" courses focused on developing academic proficiency and exploring challenging content in their home language. We describe how heritage language courses can provide an appropriate venue for the identification of gifted potential among language minority students, how such courses can enhance student motivation for learning, and what cognitive benefits may be associated with additive bilingualism developed through such courses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Despite numerous calls for research on parents of gifted learners, researchers have given only cursory treatment to the topic. In this article, the authors review and synthesize 53 sources, published since 1983, on parents of gifted learners. Existing research on parents of gifted learners may be categorized into three thematic areas that include (a) parent influence, (b) parent perceptions of giftedness and ability, and (c) parent satisfaction with gifted programming. Theory-driven research is conspicuously absent from this body of work, and study designs emphasize self-report measures and lack control groups. The analysis of this literature reveals gaps in the research record and offers recommendations about where future research should be focused. These areas include attitudes, values, and expectations of families of underserved gifted children; relationships between parents and schools; parents’ understanding of giftedness; parents of gifted underachievers; and how parents support and influence their children at home. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this chapter, we choose to use the term advanced academics in place of gifted and talented for many reasons that will become clear later in this chapter. However, first we want to make a few points before we discuss this approach. We believe that the goals of gifted and talented education are the same as those of any advanced academics program: to assure that all students learn, are appropriately challenged, and have their academic needs met in school. Of course, not all references to "giftedness" deal with K-12 schools. This is the first major difference between the differentiation paradigm and the talent development paradigm, and is part of the reason why we have chosen to avoid the term gifted. The advanced academic model is concerned solely with the education of students in schools. It is not focused on adult learners, talent in other areas of the lifespan, or those individuals who are gifted or otherwise advanced in areas not addressed in schools (e.g., gifted welders or potters, unless those areas of study are part of the academic curriculum of a school, in which case these domains would fall under the advanced academic model). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Current practices in study design and data analysis have led to low reproducibility and replicability of findings in fields such as psychology, medicine, biology, and economics. Because gifted education research relies on the same underlying statistical and sociological paradigms, it is likely that it too suffers from these problems. This article discusses the origin of the poor replicability and introduces a set of open science practices that can increase the rigor and trustworthiness of gifted education’s scientific findings: preregistration, open data and open materials, registered reports, and preprints. Readers are directed to Internet resources for facilitating open science. To model these practices, a pre peer-review preprint of this article is available at https://psyarxiv.com/nhuv3/. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

A major review of research from 1951 to 1982 on parents and families of students with gifts and talents identified the following themes in the research literature—(a) family characteristics, (b) parental attitudes and values, (c) family problems with gifted children, (d) achievement and underachievement, (e) role of parents in identification, (f) parental encouragement and provision of enrichment activities, and (g) parents and schools. Although the focus of research has narrowed over time, parents' expectations of services and programming and parents' perceptions of their child's giftedness consistently have remained a focus of study. The distinctive challenges that parents of gifted children face should be of interest to researchers as well as to teachers, parents, and the gifted children themselves. Awareness of these challenges can help faculty to design appropriate educational experiences for preservice and in-service teachers who work with students with gifts and talents, can ameliorate some of the isolation felt by parents of gifted learners, and can help gifted individuals to understand and come to terms with their own family environments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, we outline contemporary efforts to create and implement “alternative” models of gifted education identification or program selection. We address where these models have been successful and where they have stumbled, and on the basis of these findings, we offer recommendations for practice for psychologists and teachers who are charged with developing and implementing identification practices in K–12 schools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The premise is that gifted education should have the same goal as any other educational intervention or curriculum in schools—that is, to assure that all students are challenged in their learning to the degree necessary to develop to their full potential. To meet this goal, we argue that gifted education programs and services are needed only when and if students are not otherwise having their instructional needs met. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)