Su búsqueda

As with all decisions about programming or selecting curriculum for gifted students, the choices made at the secondary level should be internally consistent and consonant with beliefs about giftedness and the most appropriate goals for gifted students. While all of the program models offered at the secondary level are unique, they are all based on a belief that gifted students are unique in their learning characteristics and that the traditional or standard school curriculum as delivered in a lock-step fashion in the heterogeneous classroom is insufficient to meet the needs that arise from the distinguishing characteristics that these learners present. The ways in which the differences are defined and the suggested responses differ across models, although the models share some common attributes or assumptions that allow general categorization as either enrichment or acceleration models. This chapter discusses a variety of program models that have been developed and implemented at the secondary level. The most critical concern of all schools should be to evaluate the outcomes of the options that are offered. Current research does not clearly support any one of the available options as the best or most appropriate for the achievement of the goals we have outlined for successful education for gifted students. Clearly, differences in definitions of giftedness and beliefs about giftedness, as well as the expectations and meaning of success in any community will drive the goal-setting and evaluation processes. A clear evaluation plan that has been approved by the stakeholders in the education of gifted students will be the best test of whether or not a given set of options is successful in addressing the needs of these students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Adolescence happens to gifted middle and high school students, just as it does to their nongifted peers. In fact, the adolescent period may be more prolonged among high ability youth, because their career goals may require a longer period of economic dependency during advanced schooling. How well do the conceptions of giftedness previously developed in the field of gifted education pertain to the adolescent years? Do we need conceptions of giftedness that focus specifically on adolescents? In this chapter, we provide a brief overview of the developmental tasks of adolescence. Then we review some of the conceptions of giftedness that have been developed by leaders in the field of gifted education and analyze their relevance to gifted adolescents. Finally, we offer a framework for gifted education at the secondary level that focuses on the developmental tasks facing high ability students during the adolescent period. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The term twice-exceptional refers to students who have or show potential for remarkable gifts and talents in specific areas, but whose deficits and difficulties in learning, paying attention, or meeting social and emotional expectations impede their development. For too many practitioners, however, the terms deficits and giftedness are incompatible, therefore being twice-exceptional is an impossible phenomenon. In fact, many youngsters who are bright, but who have been diagnosed with some sort of disability are more likely to receive special education services than talent development opportunities. Likewise some gifted students use their talents to mask their learning difficulties and struggle in school to compensate for undiagnosed problems, thus obscuring their need for special education support. Twice-exceptional students have a unique set of academic, social, and emotional needs. The very dichotomy of abilities and disabilities that comprise their dual diagnosis sets them apart from their peers who are identified as gifted and from those who receive special education services. In fact, twice-exceptional students require dual differentiation in order to meet their often-contradictory sets of needs. This chapter discusses these unique needs and describes how developmental needs of adolescence exacerbate the issues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, research from the last two decades concerning gifted and talented male and female adolescents is summarized, with particular attention paid to how gender, giftedness, and adolescence interact. Current research is summarized about academically talented adolescents in areas such as test differences; abilities and beliefs about abilities; the effects of stereotyping; peer, parent, and teacher influences; and career choices. Some prior conclusions are reaffirmed, present contradictory research evidence is discussed; older findings are reviewed in light of new information; questions are raised about the importance, significance, and broader applicability of prior conclusions; and future research is suggested about the interaction of gender, adolescence, and giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter attempts to survey the scientific literature of the past few decades on the process of talent development in sports. We structure that overview around Gagné's (2003) Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT). We examine separately the relevant literature associated with each of the DMGT's five causal components: (a) natural abilities or gifts, (b) the developmental process itself, (c) intrapersonal catalysts, (d) environmental catalysts, and (e) chance factors. This survey brought us to a crucial integrative question: What makes the difference between reaching and not reaching high levels of talent in sports? We had to acknowledge that there was not yet a very clear and final answer to that complex question, and that the best way to summarize the existing literature was to speak of complex interactions between the components, acting differently from one athlete to the next, and from one stage to the next in a sports career. Of what use can this chapter be to educators in schools? What suggestions can the field of sports offer to teachers of gifted and talented adolescents, and to the professionals and school administrators responsible for planning, funding, and implementing enrichment programs in the school system? Two major observations come to mind. First, it seems clear that the vast majority of trainers and coaches in sports readily recognize the large breadth of individual differences in natural physical abilities. The second observation concerns the way professionals in sports foster the talent development process. Two key concepts could summarize typical programming activities in sports: ability grouping and accelerative enrichment. Implications of these observations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Although many gifted students are provided adequate school opportunities and most do not develop social or emotional problems as they move through childhood and adolescence, it is a myth that gifted students will make it without positive and supportive interventions from school and family. Although gifted students may achieve in school, schools are failing these students, as well as society and schools themselves, when they do not provide gifted students the opportunities to achieve their full potential. The evidence indicates that schools are not responding fully to the educational and learning needs suggested by the defining characteristics of giftedness. Failure to respond to those needs creates an environment that is likely to foster frustration, underachievement, and social and emotional problems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In the sections that follow, I summarize the two major theories underlying my work: the three-ring conception of giftedness and the enrichment triad model. Also interrelated with this phase is a subtheory that defines a procedure for regular curriculum modification called curriculum compacting. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Israel is a small country in which the academic and creative abilities of people are considered a major natural resource (Milgram, 2000). The identification and education of gifted and talented children and adolescents have been the focus of considerable interest in Israel for many years. The rationale underlying this interest is that a small country, bereft of natural resources, must place high priority on its human resources, that is, on the abilities and talents of its people. This chapter is divided into four sections. In the first section, we present a summary of research in Israel on topics of creativity. In the second section, we present a theoretical model of the structure of giftedness and creativity (Milgram, 1989, 1991) that has generated the bulk of theory-driven empirical research on creativity in Israel. In the third section we report on international research on learning style and creativity that included Israel, and in the fourth section we discuss new directions in research on creativity in Israel. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This article reviews the basic neuro-anatomic foundations and psychological concepts of intelligence, aptitude, talent and giftedness and their relevance to music. There are several academic traditions with different approaches which are based upon various scientific paradigms. Starting with a brief survey of the historical contribution of differential psychology and the European tradition of investigating musicality, different concepts of intelligence from the g-factor paradigm (Charles Spearman) up to the theory of multiple intelligences (Howard Gardner) are reviewed. The neural correlates of intelligence introduce into the discussion to what extent (if ever) music abilities and general cognitive competences interact. For this, the debate on the Mozart effect is critically viewed. From a meta-analysis it can be stated that although a moderate positive correlation between studying the music and academic achievement is observed, there is no empirical evidence to suggest a causal relation between music and verbal or math advancement. In the last section a hierarchical structure of the different aspects of intelligence and how they relate to and possibly interfere with music is outlined. An integrated model of general intelligence and music achievement is finally elaborated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

One of the most contentious debates in psychology, education, biology, and other related disciplines centres on the source of exceptional ability. To what extent can the remarkable achievements of eminent musicians, intellectuals, visual artists, writers, and so on be explained through 'nature' (innate aptitudes) or 'nurture' (the environment)? How can these achievements, regardless of their source, be identified and fostered? Certainly, the multitude of complex issues surrounding this debate have kept scholars busy for decades, and it is probably true that, in many ways, researchers are no closer to agreement than they were 20 or 30 years ago. The only possible exception to this is the general recognition that traditional views of intelligence, especially those based exclusively on a single measure such as an IQ score, are no longer seen as valid nor reliable forms of explaining the multifarious abilities evident throughout childhood and beyond (Hettinger & Carr, 2003). In this chapter, we address fundamental issues surrounding the nature/nurture debate in music and, in doing so, scrutinize much of the folklore that typically accompanies remarkable musical abilities. Specifically, we outline a broad framework that distinguishes between 'giftedness' and 'talent' and discuss, in turn, six core components of this framework: giftedness, the developmental process, intrapersonal factors, environmental catalysts, chance, and talent. We then explore the scope and potential for identifying musically gifted children. Throughout, we draw on the early experiences of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, commonly evoked as the paradigmatic example of childhood accomplishment, to elucidate these components. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this essay I will be questioning the origins and viability of Gardner's u-curved aesthetic development hypothesis. I will advance two sorts of critical material--contextual-historical and empirical. But before I question the premises and predictive power of one of Gardner's very numerous and robust intellectual offspring, I first must acknowledge his support over the years. He has been a generous mentor and he has functioned as a prolific and inspiring researcher. His work in the fields of multiple intelligences, creativity, giftedness and the arts have all been important landmarks in my professional landscape. It is true of original and synoptic thinkers like Gardner, that their predictions and observations are hugely generative. Thus for example, MI theory has been a fruitful source for practical change and theoretical research in education. Educators do need to have a clearer idea of what constitutes intelligence and MI theory has certainly prodded them into thinking afresh on this topic. The same can be said of the u-curve theory--its claims, provable or not, have brought about an important debate in art education and psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In the first part of this chapter, differences and similarities between static and dynamic measures of intelligence are presented and analyzed. Static measures of intelligence are generally obtained by testing either a ratio of mental age to chronological age or a score of deviation from age norm. Dynamic measures of intelligence are generally obtained by administrating novel problem solving tasks to the subjects, supplying them with gradual and balanced assistance that progressively disclose the solution of the problem, and determining the amount of aid the learner needs to be able to solve the problem. The amount of aid is inversely proportional to the modifiability index. The modifiability index is the general propensity to change, and can better measure intelligence. In the second part of this chapter it is hypothesized that some subjects can obtain a normal score with static test measures and a giftedness score with dynamic test measures. Two experiments were conducted to examine the relationship between dynamic measures and static measures of intelligence in low socio-economic background subjects and in ADHD subjects. In the first experiment 24 subjects with either high (12) or low (12) level of socio-economic background were trained to master problem solving tests with dynamic and static measures of intelligence. In the second experiment 57 subjects, 10 with ADHD-IA, 10 with ADHD-HI, 10 with ADHD-C and 27 controls were trained to master problem solving tests with dynamic and static measures of intelligence. The results showed that subjects with ADHD-C and Controls scored similarly on dynamic and static measure, but subjects with ADHD-HI and subjects with a low level of socioeconomic background had lower scores with static test measures and higher scores with dynamic test measures. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for intelligence tests. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The United States' commitment to gifted education, and the relative importance the government has placed on it, has fluctuated throughout its compulsory education history. The presiding political and societal beliefs of the times have been reflected in how the construct of "giftedness" was defined and how this definition influenced both the identification process and the specialized education for gifted children and adolescents. The U.S. population is becoming increasingly diverse and is projected to increase by 50% among culturally and linguistically diverse groups in the year 2050 (U.S. Census Bureau, 1996). Therefore it is imperative to advance our understanding of giftedness and culture to develop procedures that will facilitate the identification of special gifts and talents among culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children and adolescents. The goal of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive review of identification methods used with gifted and talented CLD children and adolescents. A historical background is provided to illustrate the evolution of the definition of giftedness from one that was unitary in nature toward a multidimensional construct based on theory and research, as well as the challenges faced when identifying CLD children and adolescents. This is followed by a review of culturally sensitive approaches and alternative assessment procedures and their implications on the interdisciplinary practices of school psychologists, teachers, and parents. Finally, the authors provide suggestions for a comprehensive multicultural identification model of giftedness and its implications for future research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter will present a brief history of tests of intelligence or cognitive abilities, particularly as to how they have been used in identification of students with gifts. Next, the chapter will explore theories of intelligence and how they have influenced the most commonly used measures of cognitive abilities. In addition, there is a discussion of some of the strengths and weaknesses of common measures of intelligence or cognitive abilities for gifted identification and how these tests can be used as part of a comprehensive assessment to develop a learning profile of a student. Finally, there is a discussion of some of the challenging and controversial issues facing those who use intelligence or cognitive abilities measures to identify students who have gifts, cultural factors in tests, and methods of testing and identifying students with both gifts and disabilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The goal of this chapter is to assist the psychologist in these tasks by highlighting the major findings from the empirical literature on twice exceptional children and by exploring their implications for psychological practice. In particular, the chapter aims to answer six questions: Who are twice exceptional children? What distinguishes them from other populations? How might they be effectively identified? What issues, if any, are unique to this population? What interventions have been demonstrated to be most effective in enhancing their achievement and social-emotional adjustment? How should educational placement decisions be made? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Creativity is arguably among the most important--yet least understood--psychological constructs. Creativity is often conceptualized as an engine of economic development as well as the impetus behind technological advances, workplace leadership, and life success (see Amabile, 1998; Davila, Epstein, & Shelton, 2006; Kappel & Rubenstein, 1999; Stevens & Burley, 1999; Tierney, Farmer, & Graen, 1999; Torrance, 1981a). Florida (2002,2005) goes so far as to make a strong case that the American economy is, in fact, a "Creative Economy." Of course, creativity's virtues extend beyond economic benefits. The recent rise in popularity of positive psychology, with its shift in emphasis from pathology to prevention and personal strengths, has focused attention on the use of creativity and creative development as paths to improve the human condition. For example, creativity has been associated with maintaining healthy, loving relationships (Livingston, 1999), effective therapy (Kendall, Chu, Gifford, Hayes, & Nauta, 1998), learning to resolve conflicts effectively (Webb, 1995), combat grief (Davis, 1989), and even the use of humor to defuse potentially violent circumstances (Jurcova, 1998). With such a diverse array of effects, one might presume an abundance of attention and funds have been spent researching creativity. However, Sternberg and Lubart (1996) concluded that psychology researchers have committed far too few resources toward creativity given its importance to the field and the world, and the situation appears to have changed little since their observations a decade ago. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

During the last few decades, an increasing number of psychologists have become interested in gifted and talented students, and the reasons they underachieve or excel in school and, subsequently, in life. While some research has focused on this population, comparatively little has been conducted on the ways that psychologists can help male and female gifted students to achieve well both in and out of school, and find challenging work, as well as contentment in their personal lives. In this chapter, research from the last few decades concerning giftedness and gender is summarized, with special attention paid to how psychologists can help intervene for positive outcomes for both girls and boys. When we refer to academically gifted and talented students, we include those who have been identified as academically gifted and talented, high achieving, or very creative. In this chapter, current research is summarized relating to gender differences in ability, achievement, belief in self, social and emotional factors, socialization factors including teacher and parent influences, and barriers to the development of giftedness in males and females. The chapter concludes with some suggested strategies for talent development in both gifted boys and girls, and the psychoeducational and clinical implications of the interaction between gender and giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, we examine barriers to the recruitment and retention of CLD students in gifted programs, including advanced placement (AP) classes. In addition to discussing barriers, we propose recommendations. Several premises guide our work and this chapter. First, we recognize that change is difficult--resistance to changing is high, specifically if it threatens the status quo. We also recognize that, as we seek to preserve the status quo, a significant segment of our student population is denied access to programs that they are legally entitled to participate in. Second, we believe that increasing access to gifted education cannot occur unless we decrease and, ideally, eliminate, deficit thinking about CLD students. This move away from low and negative expectations requires substantive training and preparation, as well as leadership to set the tone and ensure accountability. Third, we believe that many policies and procedures must be viewed through a lens of equity so that we can see more fully their impact on underrepresentation. A further assumption and proposition is that no group has a monopoly on "giftedness." Giftedness exists in every cultural group and across all economic strata (USDE, 1993). Consequently, there should be little or no underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minority students in gifted education. A fourth premise is that giftedness is a social construct; subjectivity guides definitions, assessments, and perceptions of giftedness (Pfeiffer, 2003; Sternberg, 1985). This subjectivity contributes to segregated gifted education programs in numerous and insidious ways. Sapon-Shevon (1996) states that "the ways in which gifted education is defined, constituted, and enacted lead directly to increased segregation, limited educational opportunities for the majority of students, and damage to children's social and political developments" (p. 196). Accordingly, educators must examine their views about the purposes of gifted education in particular and their perceptions of students from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The report entitled A Nation at Risk: The Imperative of Educational Reform was prepared by the National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). It brought great attention to the phenomenon of underachievement among gifted children, pronouncing that fully half of gifted children do not work to their abilities in school. Unfortunately, that report did not reference any basis for the calculation of that dramatic conclusion, so the percentage of underachievers is not clear and can be calculated in many ways. Although the exact percentage is not known, most educators agree that underachievement is a major problem. A broad definition of underachievement is a "discrepancy between children's school performance and their abilities" (Baum, Renzulli, & Hebert, 1995; Butler-Por, 1987; Colangelo, Kerr, Christensen, & Maxey, 1993; Dowdall & Colangelo, 1982; Emerick, 1992; Kedding, 1990; Lupart & Pyryt, 1996; Richert, 1991; Rimm, 1986a, 1995; Supplee, 1990; Whitmore, 1980; Wolfe, 1991), but that broad definition only alerts one to the fact that problems exist. Not all underachievement is attributable to psychological defensive patterns, the focus of this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The family has very powerful effects on the developing child, impacting attitudes, beliefs, opportunities, habits, and personality traits. The family plays a critical role in determining who a child becomes and what he or she accomplishes. For a child with talent, the influence of the family can be the determining factor as to whether the ability is developed to a high level or not. We all know individuals who are very accomplished and successful despite less than advantageous family circumstances or even truly awful ones and similarly, individuals with seemingly loving and supportive families who do not live up to their potential. In this chapter, we will explore some of the reasons why these different outcomes occur with a focus on the psychological aspects of family functioning as they affect talent development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)