Su búsqueda

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)

The original article on The Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness appeared in a 1978 edition of the Kappan. Although it was originally rejected by the journals in gifted education, it has now become the most widely cited article in the field. Over the years, I have updated the article three times to include new research and changes in identification and programming that have taken place in the field over the years. The original article and subsequent follow-ups have been cited approximately 3,000 times in national and international journals. The most important point in the chapter is that our field needs to make differentiated provisions for both high-achieving students and what I have described in this chapter as creative productive giftedness. These two types of giftedness are not mutually exclusive, but it is important to recognize that creative and productive people represent the kind of giftedness found in people who have changed the world in both large and small ways. The chapter presented here is the most recent update. I am proud of the influence all of the Three-Ring articles have had because they show that a field can change its mind regarding long held beliefs about the nature of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The Enrichment Triad Model was developed in conjunction with the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness discussed in Chapter 3 of this book. This model, which is essentially a learning theory, is primarily designed to serve as a practical guide for promoting what I referred to in Chapter 3 as creative productive giftedness. It was originally published as articles in a two-part series and subsequently a short book. Both of these models were greeted with a fair amount of skepticism in the gifted education community because they disagreed with prevailing trends about the conception of giftedness, a focus on advanced lesson-learning approaches to developing giftedness, and the belief that higher level thinking skills were the exclusive province of gifted students only. The Three-Ring and Triad models, however, "got legs," and as they grew in popularity over the years, I gained new insights about issues related to practical strategies for implementing the three types of enrichment around which the Triad Model is organized. This chapter is an updated version of the original work on Triad and a compilation of the original theory plus various conceptual and practical additions that have been added over the years. The chapter serves as an overview rather than as a practical guide for implementation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This recently written chapter is designed to set the stage for a better understanding of the chapters that follow in this section of the book. As will be pointed out, epistemology, the study of knowledge creation and use, was a topic examined by ancient philosophers and is reflected in modern educational templates for learning such as Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. I was surprised that no articles in the gifted literature had addressed this topic. It wasn't until recent years that I realized different types of knowledge are the "grist for the mill of mind." Understanding different levels of knowledge helped me to better recognize the argument made in the following chapter about the importance of focusing special programs on creative and productive giftedness. This work also reflects my growing fascination with the importance that technology is now playing for learners of all ages and the easy accessibility to the wide world of knowledge that young people now have through the Internet. An examination of the three levels of knowledge discussed in this chapter and the importance of blending them together will strike some readers as "common sense," and this is exactly what I intended. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In the early 1970s when I began work on the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness, I embedded the rings in a houndstooth background that represented the interaction between personality and environment. In recent years, further research and theory development coupled with a growing concern in the field related to social and emotional development has led to a new dimension of my work on characteristics that calls attention to a series of six co-cognitive factors that are discussed in this chapter. A comprehensive review of the literature and a series of Delphi technique studies led to the development of an organizational plan for studying these six components and 13 subcomponents. Factor analysis identified these clusters of discrete but interrelated traits. I refer to these as co-cognitive factors because they interact with and enhance the cognitive traits that we ordinarily associate with the development of both high achievement and creative productive manifestations of giftedness. This new initiative was prompted by a longstanding concern about the role that gifted education should play in preparing persons with high potential for ethical and responsible leadership in all walks of life. Investments in this type of social capital benefit society as a whole because they help to create the values, norms, networks, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation geared toward the greater public good. Striking evidence indicates a marked decline in American social capital over the latter half of the century just ending. National surveys show declines over the last few decades in voter turnout and political participation, membership in service clubs, church-related groups, parent teacher associations, unions, and fraternal groups. These declines in civic and social participation have been paralleled by an increasing tendency for young people to focus on materialism, self-intelligence, narrow professional success, and individual economic gain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter provides a summation of four subtheories developed over approximately five decades. Although my early work on Subtheory I (the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness) and Subtheory II (the Enrichment Triad Model) gained more attention than I ever expected, I began to feel that there were still characteristics and programming opportunities that needed to be added to the overall search for factors that contribute to total talent development. This concern, coupled with my own belief that programs for our most able young people should: (1) promote a sense of social justice and the use of one's gifts to make positive contributions to society, and (2) provide experiences in the development of strategies for acquiring self-regulation skills, using time and resources wisely, taking action, and managing change. And, of course, I wanted to come up with ideas that interacted with rather than replaced Three-Ring and Triad. The result was several years of research and development that led to Subtheories III and IV that are discussed in this chapter. I refer to the traits discussed in Subtheories III and IV as co-cognitive factors because they interact with and enhance the cognitive traits that are ordinarily associated with the development of human abilities. A number of researchers have suggested that constructs of this type, including social, emotional, and interpersonal intelligence, are related to each other and are at least partially independent from traditional academic measures of human abilities. I invite readers to draw their own conclusions about whether or not these four interactive subtheories promote what I describe as a fully functioning self-actualized individual. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Thinking and writing about creativity immediately causes us to reflect upon our own experiences and wonder whether or not we think of ourselves as being creative people. This chapter describes an approach to developing creative activities and creativity in children, particularly, ways of influencing teacher behaviors to identify, promote, and develop creative teaching and the strategies for infusing creativity in educational experiences. The chapter provides a brief description on new directions in creativity program (NDC); the three-ring conception of giftedness; the schoolwide enrichment model; and the challenge of change in the real world of schools. The NDC includes five volumes: Mark A, Mark B, Mark I, Mark 2, and Mark 3. The NDC program is designed to help teachers develop the creative thinking abilities of primary and middle grade youngsters, and the premise of NDC is that almost all children have the potential to think creatively and that creative production can be improved by providing systematic learning experiences that foster the use of imagination. The general purpose of NDC can best be explained by contrasting the creative or divergent production abilities with the convergent production abilities emphasized in most elementary school classrooms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In an applied field such as education we have always maintained that a theory doesn't have much value (beyond generating research proposals) unless it can ultimately guide practice, and hopefully policy. We also maintain that there is no such thing as a "perfect" identification system and any system is always a series of compromises that must take into account state rules and regulations, political realities (e.g., parent pressures, under representation of low-income and minority groups), practical issues (e.g., time and costs of testing), and of course the conception(s) of giftedness and the programming models) that guide the services for which students are being identified. In this chapter, we first discuss a number of considerations that must be taken into account when designing an identification system for a school, district, or even a state. The step-by-step system that is described here is an attempt to address as many of these considerations as possible, but we must also state up front that the system presented in this chapter is based on the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness. Further, it is designed for programs that focus mainly on creative productive giftedness as delineated in the Enrichment Triad Model. The system does, of course, provide a major pathway for the highest achieving students but it also "opens the door" for participation by students who show potential for high performance through one or more nontest criteria that may not be adequately assessed by cognitive ability or achievement tests. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The study of gifts and talents and how innate abilities interact with one's environment, personality, educational opportunities, family support, and life experiences has fascinated psychologists, educators, and parents for decades. Why is it that one child with remarkably high potential born into a particular family in a particular environment grows up to become a neurosurgeon while a child of similar intellectual potential who lives in the same community and attends the same schools, decides to drop out of high school? What have researchers and scholars learned in the last few decades about the nature of talent development and intellectual giftedness? In this chapter, these questions, none of which can be answered simply, are discussed and current research about intellectual giftedness is summarized. As the research points out, one of the core concepts that has emerged about intellectual giftedness in the last few decades relates to its diversity, for there is no more varied group of people than those labeled intellectually gifted. Despite this broad diversity, however, several common themes about intellectual giftedness and the conditions for its development exist. We begin our review of the research related to intellectual giftedness with a discussion of these themes, summarizing highlights about research on intellectual giftedness in the United States, including the seminal work of Lewis Terman, and presenting an overview of what we believe to be some interesting and potentially important American theories to date. We conclude the chapter with some interesting research-based trends related to new ideas in defining and developing academic gifts and talents. It is important to understand, however, that there is no agreed-upon consensus about who is gifted and no final answers about our evolving understandings of how intellectual giftedness develops and the characteristics that help us to identify and nurture intellectual gifts and talents. To introduce the challenge associated with both defining and identifying giftedness in students, four brief case studies are introduced in the first section of the chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

An overview of definitions of giftedness, special populations of gifted and talented children, methods of identification, and a continuum of services are summarized in this chapter. These services include organizational strategies (such as instructional grouping options), instructional strategies (such as acceleration and enrichment options), and a variety of talent development opportunities that should be included in a continuum of services that will engage and challenge all gifted and talented students. Also included in this chapter are some social and emotional challenges that may affect gifted and high potential children, such as the potential underachievement of children who do not encounter sufficient challenge in school. The chapter ends with a summary of research about the effectiveness of grouping, instructional, and talent development strategies, as well as recommendations for the creation of a continuum of services in each school district that will challenge and engage all students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The question "What makes giftedness?" has been debated for decades, with renewed interest over the past 20 years as new theories of intelligence emerged, questions of equity were raised, and resources in schools declined. To shed light on this complex and controversial question, we will draw heavily on the theoretical and research literature associated with the study of gifted and talented persons, but our approach also reflects the point of view of educational practitioners who have devoted significant time and effort to translating research and theory into defensible identification and programming practices. In this chapter, an explanation of key features to be included in a definition of giftedness is followed by a review of the types of giftedness typically identified by school personnel and a summary of purposes for educating gifted students. Subsequent discussion of the developmental nature of giftedness and a rationale for viewing giftedness as a displayed behavior rather than a possessed trait lead to an explicit definition—the Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

When it comes to theories for educating gifted and talented students two additional and related caveats must be taken into account. The first caveat is that there should be a logical relationship between the theory-guided services provided to students and the conception of giftedness that serves as a rationale for the development of that theory. An acceleration-based theory that recommends the use of advanced mathematics courses, for example, should obviously be related to a conception of gifted that targets students with high aptitudes in math. The second caveat is derivative of the first and pertains to the enrichment-based theory presented in this chapter. This theory argues that services should be provided for both advanced cognitive development and what are referred to below to as "intelligences outside the normal curve." A rationale for this conception of giftedness is provided in the various subsections that follow. This chapter is an overview of a theory that has been developed over the past 3 decades to guide the implementation of school programs designed to develop giftedness and talents in young people. The overall theory is composed of four interrelated subtheories and is based on the belief that when one is reexamining the role of theory in gifted education we should always begin the why question—why should a society devote special resources to the development of giftedness in young people? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The term gifted means that an individual is exceptional at something and we prefer to use the term as an adjective (e.g., he or she is a gifted pianist, etc.) rather than as a noun (e.g., the gifted). We also talk about gifted behaviors rather than use giftedness to represent a state of being. The study of gifts and talents and the ways in which individuals’ abilities interact with and are affected by environment, personality, educational opportunities, family support, and life experiences have fascinated researchers for several decades. As we consider our scholarly and school-based experiences in developing programs and identification systems for high potential students, as well as our knowledge base about how giftedness can be developed in children and adolescents, several common themes emerge about talent development and giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Both qualitative and quantitative longitudinal studies of school-wide enrichment model (SEM) gifted programs demonstrate positive outcomes in cognitive, affective, and social development of participating students. The participants increased their college and work aspirations, and maintained interests and creative productive work that begin in gifted programs after they finished college and graduate school. It is our hope that more schools and districts will continue to implement talent development programs based on the SEM in the years to come, whether as part of gifted or enrichment programs, magnet or theme schools, or as a part of a general education program. During the last decade, several Renzulli Academies, schools based on the SEM using the SEM-based strategies and methods described in this chapter, have been developed, focusing on the pedagogy described in this chapter for high-potential students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter is based on a research project that produced some "hard data" to support the assertion made earlier stating that the field has changed its mind about the conception of giftedness and the types of information that should be used in the identification process. Strong agreement was found among classroom teachers, gifted education teachers, administrators, and consultants (experts in the field and state directors) from urban, suburban, and rural districts. Overall, respondents disagreed with a totally test-score approach and supported approaches that used individual expression, ongoing assessment, and context-bound identification procedures. Furthermore, they strongly agreed with the importance of using multiple criteria for the identification of gifted and talented children. This study has important implications about the need for change in both policy and identification practice and its most valuable use to the field is that it should be brought to the attention of policy makers responsible for developing state and district guidelines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The term identification, when used in an educational context, is very broad and encompasses processes that might be in place for deciding which students will be offered particular services within a school or school district, which students might be selected for a special school, or who is given the option of attending a summer Governor's School. Before any program personnel can determine who will be selected for participation, the definition of whatever construct is to be identified must be clear and agreed upon. Because of the many conceptions of giftedness found in the theoretical and research literature, the first and most important decision that should be made regarding practical procedures for identification of gifted students is to select a conception or definition of giftedness to guide decision making. Once consensus is reached on a definition of giftedness, this definition provides guidance in determining who needs to receive special services and the method one will use to select those students. The process of identification will, of course, vary considerably depending on how a school district defines giftedness. But in any identification plan, regardless of the definition chosen, a common set of questions can be used to guide how decision makers respond to the recurring and problematic questions surrounding the identification of students for special programs and services. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This reprinted article originally appeared in Parenting for High Potential, December 2003. For many years, our definition of giftedness has been based on the interaction of three characteristics: above-average (but not necessarily superior) ability, creativity, and task commitment. In other words, high ability is not enough to explain giftedness. It also takes an intensity and focus in a certain area, along with the willingness to try new ideas or look at something with a different perspective. Gifted behaviors occur when these three components intersect, and this happens in some people (not all people) at certain times (not all times), and under certain circumstances (not all circumstances). We only recently began to turn our attention to understanding more fully the sources of these gifted behaviors and, more importantly, the ways in which people use their gifts and talents in a constructive and positive way. This article addresses the following questions: (1) Can a better understanding of people who use their gifts for the greater good help us create conditions that expand the number of people who willingly contribute to the growth of both social and economic capital?; and (2) How can parents provide opportunities so their children develop their abilities in responsible ways? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)