Su búsqueda

This article describes a continuum of definitions of giftedness from conservative to liberal, and how these definitions relate to the development of the 3-ring conception of giftedness. In this definition, above-average ability, task commitment, and creativity are seen as 3 interactive clusters of traits that gifted students may exhibit or are capable of developing. The 3-ring conception of giftedness provides an operational definition that can be used by schools as the basis for identification that, in turn, leads to more targeted programming options for gifted students. Recent research related to the 3-ring conception focuses on the infinite number of interactions that contribute to giftedness including personality and environmental factors that have an impact on one's ability to engage in creative and productive endeavors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Outlines an identification system that translates a 3-part conception of giftedness (above average ability, task commitment, creativity) into a practical set of procedures for selecting students for special programs. Procedures include (1) test score nominations, (2) teacher nominations, (3) alternate pathways, (4) special nominations, (5) notification of parents, and (6) action information nominations resulting from inservice teacher training regarding giftedness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Why and how should a society devote special resources to the development of giftedness in young people for the twenty-first century? If we agree that the goals of gifted education and talent development are to maximize young people’s opportunities for self-fulfillment and increase society’s reservoir of creative problem solvers and producers of knowledge, then it would seem wise that programming and services enhance students’ capacity for creative productivity, not just content acquisition. This general theory for the development of human potential is discussed through an exploration of four research-based subtheories: the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness, the Enrichment Triad Model, Operation Houndstooth, and Executive Functions. In this article, a reexamination of current gifted and talented programming is intended to generate future research, extend dialogue among scholars, and inspire continued support for programming based on theory and related research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This author provides reflections on the last 25 years of his work, focusing on the evolutions of models designed to help identify and meet the needs of gifted and talented students. The cited models include the Three Ring Conception of Giftedness, the Enrichment Triad Model, and the Schoolwide Enrichment Model. Summaries focus on the rationale supporting each model, including practical applications of the model in various school situations and underlying research. Also included are insights related to potential modifications and future developments of the models. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Responds to R. H. Jarrell and J. H. Borland's (see PA, Vol 63946001) criticisms of the research underpinnings of the Renzulli 3-ring conception of giftedness by suggesting selectivity and bias in their methodology, especially their decision not to review recent updates. Jarell and Borland have misunderstood the restriction of range issue. Their threshold effect argument, their claims that Renzulli believes that ability is irrelevent, their analysis of L. Terman's work, and their minimization of motivation and task commitment are questioned. Renzulli believes all special programs must assume some of the obligation for addressing equity issues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Examines some of the reactions to J. S. Renzulli's (1978) 3-ring conception of giftedness by analyzing statements made by different commentators. The author summarizes related research, discusses additions to the original theory, and explores the implications of this work for public policy and the development of identification procedures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Proposes that the display of gifted behaviors by students is a developmental process that should be viewed as the goal of education rather than a pre-existing condition. This suggests that the labeling of students as gifted is a questionable practice. A system of schoolwide educational enrichment that takes into account this concept of giftedness is presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Discusses the use of pull-out programs in relation to the education of the highly able student. It is suggested that the use of pull-out programs is a way to maintain flexibility in services to highly able youth and to avoid identification procedures that are based on an absolutist conception of giftedness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

"The gifted and talented constitute one single homogeneous group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time and experiences." We believe there is no more potentially dangerous and false myth than the one above. Let us, therefore, begin this response with the following resounding statement: There is no single homogeneous group of gifted children and adults, and giftedness is developmental, not fixed at birth. Our current federal definition suggests that gifted and talented students are indeed a diverse group of individuals, students with varying abilities and potentials in one or many domains. This widely accepted federal definition of giftedness (Ross, 1993) highlights students’ intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas; unusual capacity for leadership; or excellence in specific academic fields. This definition discusses outstanding talents present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, in all areas of human endeavor. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Examines 4 research designs of potential use in addressing the meaning of giftedness, including the traditional test-score-as-criterion design and 3 performance-based-research designs (academic mastery in a domain-specific area, creative productivity in domain-specific/interdisciplinary areas, and long-range creative productivity). It is suggested that the designs offer different conceptions of giftedness and imply different ways of providing educational services. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The main argument of this article is that human living systems are open, dynamic, intentional systems and, therefore, are capable of building ever more complex behaviors through self-organization and self-direction. This principle underlying general human development is also applicable to the development of gifted and talented behaviors. These behaviors are dynamic because persons demonstrating such behaviors are forming dynamic, functional relations with a specific environment, with unique temporal trajectories capable of engendering emergent properties that feed into further development. This Contextual, Emergent, and Dynamic Model provides an alternative to traditional static, reductionistic, trait-based conceptions of giftedness. The article further elaborates on three dynamic facets of the making of gifted potential: selective affinity, maximal grip, and being at the edge of chaos. These facets allow for dealing with the genesis of talents, developing expertise over an extended period, and developing creative potential. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Investigated 3 issues: whether gifted and nongifted children differ in their self-concepts, the effects on the self-concept of labeling the child as gifted, and effects on self-concept of placing a child in special programs for the gifted. The authors discuss theoretical and methodological issues associated with the self-concept and giftedness constructs. This is followed by a meta-analysis of studies bearing on the 3 issues. Two types of studies are reviewed: (1) cases where gifted and average students are compared in terms of the self-concept and (2) studies in which gifted children are exposed to differential programming and the effects on self-concept explored. The studies indicated generally higher academic self-concepts for gifted students, but otherwise the results of the investigations were highly variable. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Describes the lag between theory and research in gifted education and proposes reasons for gifted education to move away from the IQ test cutoff (or test score criterion) as a method of identification. Guidelines for identifying and developing gifted behaviors are outlined, and recommendations are made for necessary improvements in policies and procedures at the local, state, or national levels. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The authors reply to S. Kontos et al (see record 1984-19044-001), who challenge the logic and practicality of the Revolving Door Identification Model proposed by the 1st author and colleagues (1981). It is suggested that the study by Kontos et al contains conceptual and methodological errors and that they misinterpret the definition of giftedness. (4 ref) (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)