Su búsqueda

First we describe one particular model of talent development (Jarvin and Subotnik in The handbook of secondary gifted education. Prufrock Press, Waco, 2006) and situate it in perspective to other models developed in North America and Europe. We then discuss the implications of this view of giftedness on education and review related resources and approaches available in North America and Europe. We will conclude with the need for further international coordination in our understanding and promotion of talent development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Giftedness, a dynamic construct, develops over time. During the transition from adolescence into adulthood, gifted individuals move first from broad educational experiences to more narrowly focused efforts in universities, colleges, institutes, or conservatories, followed by the pursuit of scholarly productivity, innovation, or artistry. The focus of this chapter is on the catalysts for these transitions. I take the view of talent development as the transformation of abilities into competencies, competencies into expertise, and expertise into outstanding performance or seminal ideas. Finally, I explore the stages of talent development experienced by gifted adolescents as they move into scholarly productivity or artistry in adulthood, focusing on the increasingly important role played by psychosocial variables in the fulfillment of their potential. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, I argue that researchers of giftedness should shift emphasis from null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) to confidence intervals (CIs) and other preferred techniques. I start with a brief summary of arguments put forward by statistical reformers and describe basic features of CIs. I then report a small survey of current statistical practices in giftedness research and a comparison with practices in psychology generally. The main part of the chapter is a discussion of p values and CIs in relation to replication; I focus on the Pearson’s r correlation, because r is so widely used in giftedness research. A simulation demonstrates the large variability in r, and even greater variability in p values, over replications of a simple experiment. Calculations confirm that a p value gives only very vague information about replication, and therefore any p value could easily have been very different, simply because of sampling variability (Cumming, 2008). The severe deficiencies of p values in relation to replication give an additional strong reason for giftedness researchers to turn from NHST and pursue statistical reform with vigor. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Asher (1986) identified two factors that limit theory development and validation in gifted education research: imprecise measurement and small numbers of participants. He made this important point: “These two factors...combine to insure (sic) that results are obscure and that statistical significance is difficult to obtain” (p. 7). Asher was right about statistical significance being difficult to obtain: In fact, it may well be an unnecessarily difficult hurdle. The fact that p < .05 is difficult to obtain is only really a problem if statistical significance is considered the only acceptable evidence of result noteworthiness. In this chapter, I argue that it should not be and that falsely equating statistical significance with result noteworthiness has serious consequences. To demonstrate this, I draw lessons from other disciplines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Especially gifted and creative people are in relatively short supply, but are also very interesting. Because Q-technique factor analysis is especially suited for the intensive study of a small number of especially interesting people, Q-technique factor analysis is especially suitable for inquiry about giftedness and creativity. The purpose of the present chapter is to provide a primer on using Q-technique factor analysis in the intensive study of gifted or creative people, or other especially interesting people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter addresses some of the most frequent misconceptions about the talent development framework. The misconceptions include: emphasizing domains of talent over general giftedness means that everyone is gifted in something; including a wider range of students may lead to talent development programs being watered down; talent development supporters do not value IQ or general ability; talent development ignores psychological needs by not focusing on the "whole child"; in a talent development framework, it is possible to 'lose' one's giftedness, whereas with the IQ model, once gifted, always gifted; a talent development framework does not serve underachievers; everyone could be gifted if they just had the right opportunities; and talent development only focuses on individuals who can become eminent. Gifted education will continue to evolve and change as new information is learned from basic and applied research studies. New conceptions of intelligence, giftedness, and talent development may emerge as a result. Revision of prevalent models based on new understandings keeps a field fresh and relevant. Talent development offers a new perspective on how to serve gifted and talented students with a greater focus on a broader range of students as well as a broader range of talents and abilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Two major objectives motivated us to develop a volume of contributions from developmental psychologists and from experts in gifted education. First, we wanted to better understand how recent advances in developmental psychology might enhance our understanding of high-level achievement and performance and help to translate the science in light of research, policy, and practice in gifted and talented education. Second, we wanted to interest developmental psychologists in a consideration of exceptionally high-end abilities in their conceptual frameworks. These understandings also have implications for clinicians working with clients throughout the life span. This concluding chapter discusses key themes across the volume; gaps in the research literature; implications for policy; implications for educational practice; and challenges met and challenges ahead. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

The family of statistical techniques that make up structural equation modeling (SEM) offers many potential advantages in education research, including studies about gifted students. These techniques are highly versatile and permit the evaluation of a wide range of hypotheses, including those about direct or indirect effects, measurement, or mean differences on either observed or latent variables. They have also become quite popular among researchers. Indeed, it is increasingly difficult to look through an issue of an education research journal and not find at least one article in which results of SEM analyses are reported. In gifted research, SEM has been used less often, but there are more and more such studies in this area, too. However, there are some potential pitfalls of using SEM in gifted research that are inherent to the study of a special population, including range restriction, regression effects, and the need for large samples. Accordingly, the goals of this chapter are to (a) review the general characteristics of SEM with special consideration of possible advantages in educational research and (b) consider specific potential pitfalls of using SEM in gifted research. Outlined next are important issues in basically all applications of SEM. Later sections deal with problems specific to the use of SEM in education research in general and in gifted research in particular. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Given my interest in statistics and design, I was pleased to be able to read the chapters in Parts 1 and 2 of this book and think about applying the concepts within them to my own work. I am going to respond to the earlier chapters from two different perspectives—as a former editor of two of the major journals in the field of gifted education and as a current reviewer for several others, and as a researcher in the field of gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

To understand and better serve the needs of the gifted, the field must produce quality research to inform practice. Far too often, recommendations in the field of gifted education are based on conventional wisdom or anecdotes instead of data-driven research. This book provides accessible introductory treatments of several modern analytic methods that can be used to advance our knowledge within the field of gifted education. It also alerts researchers about potential pitfalls of inferential statistics in general as well as analytical areas of particular concern within the field of giftedness. As someone who is passionate about both gifted education and research methodology, I am honored to be able to provide some comments about the techniques contained in this volume and to provide thoughts about future methodological directions for our field. This chapter contains three sections. First, I describe some of my own research within the field of gifted education. Then, I briefly describe studies that I am planning or contemplating that utilize some of the methodologies described in this book. Finally, I offer some thoughts on methodological issues that researchers in the field of gifted education should consider as they are planning their studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Factor analysis is often used to summarize relationships among many variables into a manageable, smaller set of factors. The methodology is frequently employed in instrument development and assessment of score validity, but it has other applications as well. This chapter reviews some common applications of factor analysis, provides an accessible treatment of how to conduct and interpret the analysis with a heuristic example, and discusses some potential benefits and problems that may be faced when conducting factor analysis in the study of giftedness. Factor analysis has enjoyed a long history of use across the social sciences. With most approaches, factor analysis is employed when researchers seek to reduce many variables to a smaller set of factors. The factors can then be thought of as a synthesis, or representation, of the many variables from which the factors were created. There are other uses of the methodology, such as Q-technique factor analysis, which can be used to identify types of people (see chap. 2, this volume), but most often variables are the subject of the analysis and therefore are the focus of this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Five strategic steps posited here suggest a course of action that can lead to systemic and sustainable innovation in public-school music education: (1) reconcile perspectives regarding the purpose of music education; (2) establish a framework for comprehensive, interdisciplinary programs that are intended to benefit all children; (3) prepare advanced college-conservatory students to contribute to the development and sustainability of innovative programs as 'artist-teacher- scholars'; (4) form networks of college-conservatory, arts organization, and public school partnerships; and (5) explore and promote new conceptions of giftedness that result from the implementation of innovative forms of music education practices in public schools. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this article we present research concerning important aspects of domain-specific giftedness. Specifically, we address the evidence regarding the relationship between specific abilities and achievement. Empirical evidence suggests that specific abilities have been used widely and validly for identification of exceptional talent in performance domains, and mathematical and spatial reasoning ability have demonstrated predictive validity for achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) domains. We note that domains of talent have unique trajectories and discuss four critical aspects of domain-specific giftedness. These include the developmental nature of giftedness (giftedness moves from potential to competency to expertise and possibly to eminence over time); the temporal nature of giftedness (that domains vary in their starting, peak, and ending points); the contextual aspect of giftedness (societal value of some domains over others, changing of domains and emergence of new domains, and the environmental influences in fostering domain-specific achievement); and the relative nature of giftedness (childhood giftedness is advancement relative to age peers, and adult giftedness is exceptional achievement relative to other domain experts). Finally, we present some implications of a domain perspective on giftedness for educational practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This article provides a definition of giftedness that is useful across all domains of endeavor and acknowledges several perspectives about giftedness on which there is a fairly broad scientific consensus. The article summarizes what we have learned about giftedness from the literature in psychological science and suggest some directions for the field of gifted education. Throughout its history, the field of gifted education has been troubled by a lack of agreement on a definition of giftedness. Outstanding performance is almost always judged relative to others in one’s peer group. Increasing the number of individuals who make path-breaking, field-altering discoveries and creative contributions by their products, innovations, and performances is the aim of proposed framework for gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

Discusses the concepts of adult giftedness in the context of domain achievement and questions whether giftedness in women is somehow unique. The seemingly inequitable eminence model standard of adult giftedness is juxtaposed against the "relative context" model in which one's achieved potential is compared with members sharing characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, SES, etc. The issues of the psychological needs and unique circumstances facing gifted women are focused upon as they enhance or inhibit their exceptional abilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

In this article, we provide a response to the Active Concerned Citizenship and Ethical Leadership (ACCEL) model put forward by Sternberg (see record 2018-07419-003). Our commentary focuses on four critical areas that do not receive sufficient attention in Sternberg’s proposed model: (a) the developmental nature of giftedness; (b) that giftedness is domain specific, particularly at later stages in the talent development process; (c) the challenge in applying ACCEL in the real world of schools; and (d) whether the arts and other performance areas are compelled to have an ethical theme in order to be valuable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

The authors present a historical perspective on giftedness, highlighting the impact of key research studies on practice, research, and policy. A comprehensive model is presented emphasizing that giftedness is domain specific and developmental and involves the cultivation of psychosocial as well as cognitive skills. Implications for counselors are discussed, specifically which psychosocial issues and skills should be the focus of counseling at each stage of talent development and what counselors can do to support the development of gifted students. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In this article, the authors respond to the eight commentaries, J. Y. Jung (see record 2012-24309-003); A. Ziegler, H. Stoeger and W. Vialle (see record 2012-24309-004); M. C. Makel, M. Puttalaz and J. Wai (see record 2012-24309-005); A. Robinson (see record 2012-24309-006); A. N. Rinn (see record 2012-24309-007); M. T. McBee et al. (see record 2012-24309-008); T. C. Grantham (see record 2012-24309-009) and J. A. Plucker (see record 2012-24309-010) , on the original article “Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science” (see record 2012-24309-002), using several themes to organize their response. These themes include ability, developmental trajectories, effort and opportunity, psychosocial factors, eminence, and equity. The authors reaffirm the contention that eminence is an appropriate standard for assigning the gifted label in individuals with well-developed talents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

We all have an intuitive feel for the terms gifted, talented, high performer, expert, and eminent and often use the words interchangeably. Most have identified themselves as talent developers as well as psychologists of high performance. They have in some way engaged with programs serving children, youth, and adults who have been classified as gifted. They have been called experts themselves, and some are eminent psychologists, scientists, artists, and sporting greats. This chapter serves to frame the discussion of talent development and high performance. It begins with an overview of the talent development mega model because it provides the theoretical basis for this volume. The chapter provides brief definitions of several of the terms that reoccur in discussing high performance including potential, giftedness, talent development, high performance, expertise, and eminence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Mathematical talent is an intriguing human phenomenon. From the time of Poincare (1908/1952), who linked mathematical talent to mathematical creation, the relationship between mathematical talent and mathematical creativity has been at the heart of the discussion of mathematical talent. Analysis of the criteria used for empirical examination of mathematical talent shows that researchers connect mathematical talent to general giftedness, to mathematical achievement, or to mathematical creativity. This chapter discusses the developing mathematical talent in schoolchildren. It starts by discussing the components and complexities of mathematical talent and goes on to review several frameworks for its development. It briefly addresses characteristics of mathematical content and didactical principles directed at the development of mathematical talent. Finally, it briefly addresses the proficiency required for teaching the gifted and presents examples of mathematical problems and their solutions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)