Su búsqueda

This chapter comprises three sections: (a) commentary on the Colombo, Shaddy, Blaga, Anderson, and Kannass chapter titled "High Cognitive Ability in Infancy and Early Childhood" (chap. 2, this volume; see record 2009-00231-002); (b) consideration of issues concerning early prediction of gifted intelligence; and (c) discussion of implications regarding early identification of intellectual giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Although my own research program was not intentionally designed to study gifted and talented developmental processes or outcomes, it nevertheless offers some relevant data and perhaps insights. The work discussed here concerns children's developing competencies in understanding and producing spatial-graphic representations. These may be defined as stand-for symbols (the representational aspect) that involve marks of some kind (the graphic aspect), whose representational components are distributed over the surface in a way that corresponds to the distribution of components of the referent (the spatial aspect). This chapter is organized as follows. First, I expand on what I mean by spatial-graphic representations (in the section entitled "Defining Spatial-Graphic Representations"). Second, I sample from work that my colleagues and I have conducted to study children's developing spatial-graphic competencies. In doing so, I highlight performance that might well be classified as gifted ("Illustrative Empirical Work"). Finally, I offer some speculations about implications this work has for research, public policy, and education ("Implications for Research and Practice"). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

I was asked to respond to chapter 7 of this volume by Sandra Graham on giftedness in adolescence (see record 2009-00231-007). When I read the chapter, I found, as expected, that Graham's social-psychological perspective and my psychosocial perspective have much in common, including a focus on the interaction of motivation and social context. Therefore, I have endeavored to expand on some of the issues that Graham addresses in her chapter, in the hope of stimulating discussion among researchers and practitioners concerned with giftedness in adolescence. In this chapter, I discuss identification practices in some detail, as I believe that there are some fundamental misunderstandings in this area. I highlight some of the more recent research on teachers and the messages that they send. I also address the potential role played by identity variables such as stereotype threat. In addition, I discuss the concept of oppositional identity, which relates to Graham's notion of "I can, but do I want to?" Finally, I briefly discuss the idea of cultural learning styles. Although much of what I discuss is applicable to adolescents of all ethnic and racial backgrounds, the implications may be different for youth who are traditionally underrepresented in gifted and talented education (e.g., African Americans, Latinos). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The purpose of this chapter is to expand the perspective of psychology to include the dynamics of the later years of life. I describe the stages of late life that have been proposed and the diversity of the older population as revealed by longitudinal studies. The abilities of older adults are described in terms of social intelligence, self-regulation, creativity, and wisdom. Unique contributions by elderly persons are described as the products of late-life bloomers, or individuals who express latent talents late in life. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Although there is considerable overlap in the scientific study of giftedness and of child development in terms of research traditions as well as participating investigators, it is important to recognize that there are substantial differences in the history of each research tradition. The historical divergence in the core conceptual frameworks guiding each field has led to conflicting positions at least as often as to a productive connection between them. At the risk of overemphasizing the conflict between these conceptual frameworks, it is important to draw out the distinctions because they illuminate many important issues, particularly with relevance to the goal of this volume, an integration of developmental science and the study of giftedness. I thus first provide a brief history of those two approaches, recognizing of course that there is a personal filter through which such a historical analysis must proceed. I take up the implications for a life-span integrative framework in the final section. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Chief among the attributes of giftedness is the expression of exceptionality in one or more domains of talent or ability, and most commonly this exceptionality is expressed in the domain of cognition. In this chapter, we address issues pertaining to the concept of such high ability within the period of infancy and early childhood, and we do so from both the empirical and theoretical realms. In the empirical realm, we present new data on the prediction of high cognitive ability (HCA) from infancy and early childhood. In the theoretical realm, we outline a recent significant advance in the field of early cognition and its implications for how intelligence is thought about. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

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)

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)

In this chapter, I consider some of the specific challenges experienced by high-ability learners as they grow out of childhood and into adolescence. I also address evolving perspectives on giftedness that can work to obviate some of the added complications, with a focus on talent development and other theoretically grounded evidence-based approaches that incorporate individual and developmental diversity, including the domain specificity and fluidity of cognitive development, and the importance of mindsets in regulating young adults' responses to the challenges and opportunities in their lives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The consideration of giftedness and talent in a developmental perspective requires an understanding of the current issues in developmental theory with respect to the origins of individual differences and prediction across the life span—from infancy through the adult years. In this chapter I discuss these matters along with changes in the definition of giftedness and talent, the emerging themes in the developmental discourse on giftedness and talent, the role of cultural contexts and matters of diversity, and the implications of all of these issues for setting the research agenda in the field. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Lynn Liben raises three broad, thought-provoking issues in her chapter on giftedness in the spatial-graphic domain (see chap. 4, this volume; see record 2009-00231-004). First is the role of the study of giftedness in developmental psychology and the question of why giftedness is such a neglected area of study within psychology. Second, she prods readers to consider just how one should undertake the study of spatial giftedness, which is itself a much neglected domain of study within the area of giftedness relative to the study of mathematical and verbal giftedness. And finally, she leads readers to recognize what can be learned from the study of spatial-graphic giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, I want to capture what it is like to be young, gifted, and Black in America. My theoretical perspective is that of a motivational psychologist, so I focus on how contemporary approaches to motivation research can shed light on giftedness in African American adolescents. I organize my discussion of African American gifted adolescents around overarching questions about "can" and "want." In framing my discussion, I focus on both the normative challenges of adolescence relevant to giftedness as well as the unique challenges that gifted Black adolescents are likely to encounter. To do this, I must cast a broad net and begin with factors that are unique to the everyday lives of people of color. Everything that I write in this chapter is shaped by the recognition that many racial and ethnic minority groups in contemporary America are positioned at the bottom of a status hierarchy wherein barriers to opportunity often override personal strivings for achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In an ideal world researchers and educators could collaborate to compile a definitive and exhaustive list of characteristics of gifted learners, which then could be used to guide identification, teaching strategies, and curriculum selection for this population. Unfortunately, no such list can or should be created, for one of the unifying themes in research on characteristics of gifted learners is, in fact, the great diversity among them. Gifted and talented learners are not a homogeneous group; to the contrary, they are varied and unique. Despite this diversity, research suggests that there are a handful of traits that may occur with greater frequency in gifted learners than in the general population. In this chapter, some of these characteristics are discussed, with the caveat that it is not the intention to provide a checklist by which students may be identified as either "gifted" or "not gifted." Rather, the intent is to provide educators with an overview of characteristics that may be present in some gifted and high-ability students, and to illustrate how these characteristics may vary based on a variety of factors, including gender, sociocultural group, the presence of a hidden or overt disability, age, and whether a student is achieving or underachieving. By discussing the heterogeneity associated with gifted and talented learners, this chapter may be useful to educators attempting to look beyond rigid stereotypes to more diverse and flexible conceptions of giftedness in a broad spectrum of children and young adults. To begin, the following illustrative case studies are presented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

It had been said by many educators of the gifted that it is easier to define what differentiation of the curriculum is not than it is to define what differentiation of the curriculum is. Over the years, the concept of differentiating the curriculum for gifted students has changed commensurate to the changes in the definition of giftedness, the contemporary emphasis in general education, and the political and parental responses to general and gifted education. The many definitions of differentiation have resulted in the term becoming a referent for any learning experience that attends to individual differences. In reality, differentiation can be defined by the who—the learner and his or her needs, interest, and abilities; the what—the content and skills of the subject matter to be taught; the how—the pedagogy to be used to teach the content, skills, or both; and the where—the setting, grouping, or both needed to effectively implement the curriculum (the what) to the learner (the who). The original need to differentiate the curriculum for gifted students was based on the recognized strengths of these learners and the acknowledged inadequacy of the regular or core curriculum to meet these needs. The discrepancy theory assesses the core curriculum against the traits of gifted students in order to determine the missing curricular elements that would be responsive to the needs of students. This comparative analysis between the needs, interests, and abilities of gifted students and the content, processes, and product components of the core curriculum traditionally justified the purpose for a differentiated curriculum. To the degree that the core curriculum correlates with the defined attributes of gifted students, it is perceived as either appropriately or inappropriately differentiated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The affective characteristics of gifted individuals, as well as the social and emotional needs related to those characteristics, have been well documented by researchers in the field of gifted education (Clark, 2002; Cohen & Frydenberg, 1996; Cross, 2001; Delisle,1987; Roeper, 1995; Silverman, 1993). However, despite the evidence and support provided by the literature, proactive attention to the affective domain is still overlooked in many schools unless that attention is in reaction to some overt problem identified by teachers or the administration (Peterson, 2003). Addressing the affective domain within the curricula is appropriate for all students, but it is essential for gifted students whose affective traits may include divergent thinking, overexcitabilities, sensitivities, perceptiveness, and entelechy (Lovecky, 1992). In order to meet the program standards set forth by NAGC, gifted programs must incorporate the affective domain. Specific strategies to meet students' affective needs can be integrated into any subject area through individual activities, lessons, curricular units, or separate units. It is essential, however, that teachers who endeavor to address the affective aspects of giftedness be willing to follow up on issues that are inadvertently revealed. Whenever classroom activities touch upon the affective realm, it is important to remember that most teachers are not trained counselors. Teachers may not be prepared for all that is disclosed. A support system must be in place in the form of school counselors, school psychologists, and/or therapists. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

My perspective on an affective curriculum in education for gifted students is colored by my clinical experiences as a counselor, including those as a counselor of gifted children, adolescents, and adults. During my last 5 years as a teacher in K-12 education, I directed a complex program for gifted high school students, which included an emphasis on affective concerns (Peterson, 1990). Ten discussion groups per week, geared almost entirely to social and emotional development and involving 115 students per year, taught me a great deal about nonacademic concerns of highly able students. The program actively sought out gifted underachievers, who became approximately 30% of total participants and were articulate contributors in the groups as well. Later, I facilitated several similar groups for diverse gifted middle school students, counseled gifted children and adolescents and their families in a clinic geared to giftedness, and also worked with medical students and others with high ability in private practice. The individuals I met while doing ethnographic research on perceptions of giftedness in nonmainstream cultures educated me further. I also sometimes encountered gifted individuals as a counselor in two substance-abuse treatment centers, in an alternative school for expelled high school students, and as a substance-use evaluator in a K-12 school district. Currently I prepare counselors for work in K-12 schools and advise and supervise many highly capable graduate students. These varied clinical experiences with gifted individuals inform this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter focuses on the influence of multiple intelligences (MI) theory in special and gifted education in Australia. In both contexts, the MI impact is evident in changes of teachers' attitudes and practices toward these students. In gifted education, MI has provided a means to more broadly define and identify giftedness in students across all economic and cultural groups. It has also influenced the design of curriculum materials for gifted students. In special education, MI teachers have transcended a deficit approach; they have become more positive toward students and recognize a wider range of learning potentials. Through the framework provided by MI theory, teachers have learned to genuinely value and appropriately respond to the diversity of learners in integrated Australian classrooms. (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)

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)

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)