Su búsqueda

Research on emotional intelligence (EI) may inform understanding of the characteristics of emotional functioning in gifted children (Pfeiffer, 2001). This construct remains controversial in educational psychology, but it may prove useful for exploring interrelationships between cognitive and social–emotional competencies (Matthews, Zeidner, & Roberts, 2002). Indeed, the pioneers of systematic testing for EI (Mayer, Perkins, Caruso, & Salovey, 2001) proposed that children high in EI should be able to represent information about emotional encounters in greater accuracy, depth, and richness, supporting social adaptation. In this chapter, we explore possible relationships between intellectual giftedness and EI, covering conceptual bases, empirical research, and applications in education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Bullying among school-age youth continues to be cause for concern. In a recent U.S. national survey, approximately 28% of 12- to 18-year-old students reported they had been bullied at school during the school year, and victimization was highest among sixth graders (37%) compared to seventh or eighth graders (30% and 31% percent, respectively; Robers, Kemp, & Truman, 2013). It is not surprising that sixth graders reported more bullying, given that this is the year that most students transition to middle school. Gifted youth are at particular risk for being targets of bullying (Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b). Longitudinal data show that victims of bullying have compromised social, emotional, and academic development (Ttofi, Farrington, Lösel, & Loeber, 2011) and even physical health (Copeland et al., 2014). Studies have documented that victims often experience depression, social anxiety, and low self-esteem, which could then contribute to academic and social challenges (Cook, Williams, Guerra, Kim, & Sadek, 2010). From 1970 through 2014, approximately 14 peer-reviewed articles and four dissertations focused on bullying, aggression, or victimization among gifted or exceptional children. Less than five of these studies were conducted outside of the United States. In comparison to numerous studies focusing on students in general education and students with disabilities (Blake, Lund, Zhou, Kwok, & Benz, 2012; Juvonen, Graham, & Schuster, 2003; Nansel et al., 2001; Rose, Espelage, Aragon, & Elliot, 2011), studies examining the rates of victimization and bullying among gifted students generally only include gifted students and lack a general education control group. However, studies including gifted students suggest that these students are bullied and victimized at similar, but not elevated, rates of other student populations, but they may experience it differently and in different forms (Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b). These two studies (one quantitative, one qualitative) were drawn from the same nationally representative sample of 432 eighth graders in the United States with no control group, indicating that the findings should be viewed with caution. In this chapter, we define bullying and giftedness and review of the few studies on this topic. Promising interventions for bully prevention are described and recommendations for future research are provided. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

We wanted a catchy title for this potentially pedantic topic, but now that we may have one, it probably needs to be explained. Why “double Slinky phenomenon”? A Slinky is a coiled steel spring that “walks” when the top end is pulled down from the first to the second of a series of stairs or the top part of a ramp, then the trailing part leap-frogs to the third step or lower down the inclined plane, and so on. With two Slinkys working their way down, the progress was mostly but not entirely smooth or predictable, and one or the other would pull ahead or fall behind. Sometimes the two might even contact each other. Now let’s name one Slinky “gifted education” and the other “general education” and send them on their way. This is the visual image we want to create for our narrative. Dual Slinkys, unevenly making their way along, only sometimes in synchrony even though they were made in the same factory. The analogy is imperfect, especially because education is an uphill rather than downhill enterprise, and not in a straight line, but we hope the image can remain in mind as we get to the main point of the chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter begins with a provocative enigma: On one hand, the absolute number of gifted and talented people in the world must be extremely large; they may even be considered “a dime a dozen.” For example, suppose that anyone in the top 10% of some ability distribution could be considered gifted or talented. That implies that for every million people, there are at least 100,000 who qualify. Therefore, every metropolitan area could contain enough gifted and talented citizens to populate a large town. This number may actually be an underestimate because this example assumes that there is only one cross-sectional distribution from which the gifted and talented are taken. Yet, that is very unlikely the case. In line with Gardner’s (1983) theory of multiple intelligences, the top 10% in mathematical ability need not be the same people as the top 10% in sports, art, or music. Accordingly, a city of a million would contain far more than 100,000 gifted and talented denizens. To be sure, some might argue that the 10% criterion is set too low and a top 1% threshold should be applied instead. Terman’s (1925) classic longitudinal study defined intellectual giftedness in terms of the top 1% of the school population in performance on an IQ test. Even when the bar is dramatically raised, the absolute number remains large: 10,000 gifted and talented people per million—and probably far more than this estimate if various abilities are largely uncorrelated. On the other hand, the absolute count of adults who have attained eminence in any given domain of achievement is appreciably smaller than the top 10% or top 1% of a population. When Zuckerman (1977) wanted to interview United States scientists who had received the Nobel Prize, only 56 laureates were then living in the country (out of which she was able to recruit 41). That figure is much, much smaller than even the number of scientific geniuses that would be expected to live in any major metropolitan area. Therefore, it seems that the probability of potential giftedness or talent developing to actual eminent achievement, or genius, is extremely small. Galton (1869) estimated that geniuses, as judged by eminence, number only around 250 per million adults, or about .025%—a very tiny proportion. Something seems to be happening between childhood and adulthood so that only a restricted elite progresses toward eminence. Many may enter the hopper at the beginning, but only a very small number emerge at the end. The purpose of this chapter is to examine this selection process by adopting a lifespan developmental perspective. The chapter begins with parental genetics and family environment, and then turns to education and training followed by a treatment of career trajectories and terminations, including death. To keep the discussion focused, the emphasis will be on creative talent. Even so, most of the developmental principles remain applicable to other forms of talent and giftedness, including exceptional achievement in music, sports, and games. Only simple talents, such as a gift for wiggling one’s ears, would likely fall outside the scope of these principles. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The purpose of this chapter is to provide psychologists and other professionals with a foundation for working with twice-exceptional students in clinical and educational settings. The discussion is grounded in a historical context outlining how twice-exceptionality has evolved since first recognized, and the rationale for why professionals should conceptualize students’ strengths and areas of concern within a social–ecological theoretical perspective. Extant research findings describing empirically validated interventions with twice-exceptional students are summarized, followed by practice and policy implications and multicultural considerations. Finally, future directions will be offered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter argued that talent, giftedness, creativity, and elite performance are not solely the products of innate genetic gifts resulting in superior abilities. Instead, we agree with other scholars in these fields (e.g., Simonton, 2014; Subotnik et al., 2011) that what is most important is to understand the dynamic interplay between individual abilities and environmental opportunities. The experience of flow is influential in the development of the individual and of society because it requires an ongoing balance of challenge and skill, immediate feedback, and clear and proximate goals, and serves the development of an increasingly complex self, which is capable of expressing the full range of human potentialities. By providing opportunities for these types of optimal experiences in daily activities, parents, teachers, gatekeepers of social institutions, and policy makers can serve the development of creative individuals and the evolution of culture. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Talented students who are unmotivated to engage in academic tasks frustrate parents, educators, and psychologists (Colangelo, 2003; Renzulli, Reid, & Gubbins, 1991). When the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented conducted a national survey of educator concerns, the underachievement of gifted students topped the list (Renzulli et al., 1991). It is similarly a concern of psychologists and counselors. Colangelo (2002) suggested the “most intense counseling focus” (p. 14) for gifted students is underachievement. Colangelo (2003) also noted that underachievement is the problem that counselors in his Center most often addressed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

There is a tension when it comes to educating underrepresented (i.e., racial/ethnic minority and economically poor) students. This tension may be especially heightened within the field of giftedness. It is impossible to discuss identifying and educating underrepresented gifted students without first addressing the history of marginalization in education. Genetics and race were considered related when determining who performed well (White students) and who did not (all other students; Helms, 1992). Detailing the extent of this marginalization is beyond the scope of this chapter, but it is clear that racial/ethnic minority psychologists have identified these biases in education, testing, and assessment (Guthrie, 1976; Helms, 1992; Suzuki, Ponterotto, & Meller, 2001). This history of marginalization and bias against underrepresented students, which many argue continues today, is not idiosyncratic or an issue for a specific teacher or psychologist. Instead, this marginalization has permeated many aspects of our society. R. T. Carter and Pieterse (2005) described interlocking and interdependent aspects related to the function and perpetuation of racism. They further elaborated on these interdependent aspects: sociopolitical refers to the unequal distribution of power and privilege, sociohistorical refers to the biased and inaccurate histories of peoples, and sociostructural refers to the established institutions and systems that perpetuate inequality (e.g., educational, legal, economic; Liu & Ali, 2005). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In the absence of a federal mandate, policies and funding for the identification of and service options for gifted students are left to the discretion of individual states. Therefore, there is inconsistency in how the educational needs of gifted students are addressed across the nation. This chapter provides a national snapshot of the history and current status of gifted education as it relates to identification, programming, personnel preparation, and funding. Emerging trends that influence gifted education policy development at the state and local levels will also be examined with focus given to those policies intended to remedy equity issues. Following a discussion on the history and current condition of gifted education policy, legal issues that have resulted from a lack of coherent policy are explored. Seminal court cases, due process proceedings, and letters of findings from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights pertaining to gifted education are also examined. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the future direction of gifted education policy. Advocating for strong state and local gifted education policies requires informed advocates, influence, consensus, partnerships, and public relations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter focuses on a conception of giftedness that encompasses five main principles in defense of domain-specific talent development. First, ability is a cornerstone of talent development, especially ability in specific domains (e.g., mathematics, music, creative writing). Second, foundational abilities are malleable and need to be developed. These developing abilities begin, peak, and end their trajectories at different ages. That is, talent in violin or mathematics may be recognizable in elementary school with reasonable accuracy, whereas potential giftedness in diplomacy or mediation skills may not emerge until adulthood. Third, to transform potential into accomplishment, opportunities need to be offered to talented individuals that match their stage of talent development, and it is important that talented individuals take those opportunities. Fourth, all individuals can benefit from psychosocial skills training or coaching to enhance their performance and confidence in risk taking. Some children and adolescents are reluctant to take opportunities when offered, which may be due to underdeveloped psychosocial skills. Fifth, in this conception of talent development, the aspired outcome of gifted education is to prepare talented youth seeking to “change the world” to transform their abilities into creative or path-breaking contributions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter focuses on the remarkable research base and impact on practice of the talent search model. Researchers, educators, psychologists, and policymakers citing Pressey’s (1949) definition of acceleration typically do not include Pressey’s explanation of conventional education. However, understanding conventional or regular education is critical to a thorough understanding of the phenomenal impact of the talent search model, most of which occurs outside of the typical school setting. Pressey described “conventional or regular for an American child [is] to enter school shortly before or after his [or her] sixth birthday, to take a grade a year thereafter for twelve years, to enter college around eighteen, and graduate around twenty-two” (p. 2). In other words, Pressey’s definition of conventional education does not include acceleration. Pressey’s definitional paragraph concludes with questions salient to the topic of acceleration and the talent search model: “Whether the conventional pace and the normal ages are desirable [emphasis added] is an issue still to be determined, as is also the extent to which deviations from an established rate may be desirable for certain individuals” (p. 2). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Motivation is generally regarded as an important component for success, in school and at work. Motivation provides the fuel to ignite abilities and transform them into achievements. Although natural talent or giftedness predicts academic and career success, motivation is the catalyst that allows ability to be harnessed to accomplish those great successes. Even when endowed with natural talent or potential, without adequate motivation, gifted students are unable to fully develop their talents. The word motivation comes from the Latin root moveo, which means “to move.” In the Merriam-Webster dictionary motivation is defined as the act or process of giving someone a reason for doing something. It is also described as a force or influence that causes someone to do something. These general definitions of motivation capture the emphasis on being moved to action. Deckers (2001) defines motivation as “inducing behavior”—stimuli that motivate us to take action are those that transform potential energy into kinetic energy. This transformation is literal and figurative. In the absence of motivation, ability or potential cannot be transformed into products or performance. Therefore, ability without motivation is like wind without a windmill. The energy produced by the wind must be harnessed to produce electricity. So too must ability be coupled with motivation to produce achievement. Often motivation and ability are pitted against each other. An admission of the importance of one of these traits is often perceived as an indictment of the other. In fact, a recent issue of Intelligence was devoted to answering the question “Is ability necessary to explain the development of expertise?” (Detterman, 2014, p. 1). Interestingly, the special issue treated as fact the necessity of motivation and deliberate practice on the development of expertise in a domain. Instead, the authors debated whether ability played any role in the development of expertise. We agree with Ackerman (2014) that achievement or performance in any domain requires ability and motivation: “In any theory of performance…, motivation is one of the two essential ingredients of performance (the other being the capacity to perform the behavior)” (p. 11; see also Chapter 17, this handbook). Although academic and occupational success appear to require ability and motivation, the relationship between giftedness and motivation is less clear. Are gifted students more motivated than other students? Are gifted adults more motivated than other adults? Does motivation manifest itself differently in the gifted? Is motivation more or less essential to the success of the gifted? Do traditional motivational theories apply to the gifted? Or are different theories necessary to explain the formation and role of motivation within gifted populations? In this chapter, we explore the empirical research on motivation as it relates to giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Mental health providers in schools and the community are likely to see gifted clients who have high ability in one or more domains, and who represent a range of achievement levels, concerns, and contexts. This chapter underscores the importance of not only being knowledgeable about the potential impact of giftedness on a presenting issue, development, or wellbeing, but also of approaching practice accordingly. When giftedness is involved, providers should communicate respect for cognitive and affective aspects (Peterson, 2015). However, other areas are also discussed, such as therapist postures and biases, perspectives related to case conceptualization, clinically based theories important for practice, and approaches. Throughout, counseling refers to what helping professionals do, whether they are school psychologists, school or mental health counselors, counseling or clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, family therapists, or social workers. The phrase characteristics associated with giftedness refers to heightened sensitivity to environmental stimuli because of rapid information-processing (Mendaglio, 2007), anxiety (Tsui & Mazzocco, 2006), overexcitabilities (Probst & Piechowski, 2012), intensity (Daniels & Piechowski, 2009), and asynchronous development (Silverman, 2013), all of these are especially pertinent to social and emotional development and counseling practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Our economy and quality of life increasingly depend on innovative ideas and products, and businesses and society in general are calling for more creativity in our communities. This is being seen in schools, with an emphasis on problem solving and creativity in the curriculum, such as can be found in efforts to focus K–12 education on 21st century skills (Plucker, Kaufman, & Beghetto, 2015). Although there are increasing amounts of research on how to enhance creativity in the classroom, teaching for creativity is not a common practice in most K–12 schools (Sternberg, 2015). For example, Schacter, Thum, and Zifkin (2006) found on average that teachers perform very few creative behaviors. Many teachers know little about how to implement interventions for creativity enhancement, and they may even feel reluctant to learn how to approach the topic. In this chapter, we review the major theoretical work that underlies intervention efforts, review specific techniques and strategies for fostering creativity, and examine broader policy issues that may impact creativity enhancement efforts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

For most people, talent development is the implementation of specific resources aimed at fostering the growth of outstanding performances in specific occupational fields: natural and social sciences, technology, visual and performing arts, health and education, commerce, sports, and so forth. Considering this handbook focuses on the field of gifted education, this chapter similarly adopts as its focus the emergence of outstanding school achievements, from kindergarten forward. I analyze academic talent development (ATD) from two distinct perspectives: theoretical and practical. Each of these perspectives can be circumscribed by the following questions. Which personal and contextual causal influences contribute significantly to the emergence of excellence in school subjects? Which educational resources will maximize the transformation of outstanding aptitudes into academic excellence? These two questions will guide the contents of this chapter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Giftedness as a concept has evolved in history to become an entity of its own, on which conceptual, social, and educational enterprises have been built. Conceptually, whether what we call giftedness denotes an essence or quality that holds its identity, unity, and continuity relies on empirical verification in differential and developmental psychology research as well as theoretical and practical justifications. Socially, whether giftedness as a social construct serves an equitable, productive social cause or the public good relies on the affirmation of cultural values as well as cognizance of the nature of this precious human capital. Educationally, effective identification and education for the gifted and talented depends on a deep understanding of the nature and nurture of human potential. In this chapter, I provide an overview of the 100-year history of searching for this elusive human quality or exceptionality, delineating major historical periods and identifying related issues. I provide a critique of the construct of giftedness and its history, and discuss alternative ways to build on the legacy and move forward. The chapter concludes with the argument that a talent development approach to understanding human exceptional competence in the form of increasing differentiation and multiple developmental trajectories/pathways (involving nature and nurture) leading to various forms, kinds, and degrees of talent, high-level expertise, and creativity will help us get out of the conceptual quagmire and better guide educational policy and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter addresses the status of gifted education in several Middle Eastern countries. It includes a brief history and description of the main studies that informed the development of subsequent gifted education in the Arab countries, which constitute the majority of countries in the Middle East. I describe the institutional, public, and private support for gifted students in six Middle Eastern countries, and explain why I choose to focus on these countries and not some of the other countries in this region. The chapter concludes with a list of tests in use for identifying giftedness in the relevant languages: Arabic and Hebrew (See Appendix 8.1). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Family is the first and often most powerful influence on a developing child, impacting the existence and quality of educational opportunities, promoting productive mindsets and meaningful values and beliefs, and encouraging cognitive, social, psychological, and emotional growth. For a gifted child, the influence of family can determine whether talent is recognized and allowed to flourish. In this chapter, we present research findings on the psychological aspects of family functioning as they affect talent development. We also discuss parenting within a general conceptual and developmental model for talent development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, we try to note wherever presence or absence of privilege may mediate or moderate the results of investigations. What follows is an attempt to highlight all the research at the intersection of giftedness and gender—with attention to other intersectionalities that may make it more or less likely that a gifted girl will achieve eminence in her field. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Negative responses to the proposal that eminence should be the ultimate outcome of gifted education was surprising to us, especially as this outcome emerged from the extant literature (e.g., Albert, 1992a). As should be the case, the responses led us to revisit the proposed role of eminence in a formulation of gifted education. We concluded that we did not articulate what we meant as clearly as we intended, an omission that this chapter attempts to rectify by incorporating our most recent thinking on this issue. Additionally, much of the pushback against eminence is based on a misunderstanding of the concept and the process by which eminence is attained. To set the stage for addressing these misconceptions, we discuss definitions of eminence, and propose a definition of our own (see also Chapter 18, this handbook). We review some of the definitions of giftedness and talent in our field, and the reasons why individuals are identified for gifted and talented programs. We also highlight the similarities between the goals of gifted education in several of the well-known models of gifted education and the quest for eminence, drawing from the extant literature on outstanding performers as well as more popular media, and addressing the focus on a small elite population. We also discuss eminence in relation to groups that are underrepresented in gifted and talented education programs in school. Finally, we conclude with a rationale for proposing eminence as a goal for gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)