Su búsqueda

This reprinted article originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol 34(1), 21-26. The following abstract of the original article appeared in (see record 1990-21181-001). Compared performance on tests of specific abilities commonly associated with intelligence for 112 13-yr-olds who were extremely mathematically gifted (MG) or verbally gifted (VG). VG Ss scored higher on verbal and general knowledge tests, and MG Ss scored higher on tests of nonverbal reasoning, spatial ability, and memory. Findings suggest that speed might also be an important component of extreme giftedness. Results (1) have implications for the selection of MG and VG Ss for special programs and (2) support the use of the Progressive Matrices for identification of MGs in particular. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This reprinted article originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol 28(4), 149-151. The following abstract of the original article appeared in (see record 1985-23834-001). Discusses problems in the identification of gifted and talented children that can occur at any point in the identification process. The 5 major steps involved in such a process are outlined: defining program goals and types of youth to be served, nomination procedures, assessment procedures, individual differentiation, and validation of the identification process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

It is sometimes said of our profession, that we are practitioners without rationale. This reprinted chapter (originally published in Gifted Child Quarterly, 24[1], 24-28) is an effort to provide some logical reasons for some specific procedures with gifted children. To start, the following three postulates are regarded as obvious: (a) creativity is the objective of talent development; (b) the dynamics of developmental process is necessary for this development; and (c) developmental stage theory is a necessary part of developmental dynamics. Accordingly, we shall proceed with: General Developmental Stage Theory; Suitable Modifications for the Gifted Child; and Three Paramount Issues for Educators for the Gifted, namely: Stage 3 (age, 4-6)--Creative Fantasy or Magic Nightmare; Stage 4 (age, 7-11)--Teaching to Avoid the Creativity Drop; and Stage 5 (age, teens)--Establishing Verbal Creativity at Adolescence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This reprinted chapter originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol 25(3), Sum 1981, 99-101. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1984-25045-001.) Discusses those unique strategies and processes that each creative person uses to achieve his/her creative insights and perceptions. It is suggested that teachers of gifted and talented leaders-of-tomorrow be aware of the importance of personal creativity techniques and that they should be ready to help students develop such strategies and skills. Examples of personal creative thinking techniques are cited. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This reprinted chapter originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol 28(3), Sum 1984, 106-109. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1985-26673-001.) Reviews studies of the characteristics of significant scientific contributions, types of productive thinking, and the implications of this research for the design of educational programs that foster creativity and excellence in students. The need to achieve a balance between conventional and creative excellence is examined with reference to the system of education in Venezuela and to A. Toynbee's views of history. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This reprinted chapter originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol 37(1), Win 1993, 7-15. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1994-01215-001.) Presents an investment view of creative giftedness (CRG); discusses identification of the gifted; and addresses the resources necessary for CRG, the interaction of resources, and the domain specificity of CRG. The investment concept suggests that individuals must attempt to "buy low and sell high" to achieve creativity. In other words, they propose ideas that initially seem odd, out of sync with the ideas of others. Over time, however, these gifted individuals bring these ideas to fruition, convince other people of the worth of their ideas, and then metaphorically sell the ideas when these ideas are at a "high price." They then move on to the next novel idea. To buy low and sell high, one needs a combination of 6 resources that function interactively: intelligence, knowledge, style of thinking, personality, motivation, and environment. Each of these resources and its role in CRG are described. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This article presents a pentagonal implicit theory of giftedness and a set of data testing the theory. The exposition is divided into five parts. First, we discuss what an implicit theory is and why such theories are important. Second, we describe the pentagonal theory, specifying five conditions claimed to be individually necessary and jointly sufficient for a person to be labeled as gifted. These conditions help us understand not only why some people are labeled as gifted but also why some others are not. Third, we consider the relation of the pentagonal theory to explicit theories of giftedness. Fourth, we present data supporting the theory. Finally, we discuss some implications of the pentagonal theory for gifted education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This reprinted article originally appeared in Gifted Child Quarterly, 37(4), 155-160. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1994-19557-001.) Compared a national sample of gifted underachievers and gifted high achievers on a number of characteristics. Giftedness was measured as a composite score at or above the 95th percentile on the ACT. Underachievement was defined as reporting a high school GPA of <=2.25 (on a 4.00 scale), and high achievement was defined as reporting a GPA of >=3.75 (on a 4.00 scale). Ss were 30,604 high school juniors and seniors: 257 gifted underachievers and 30,347 gifted high achievers. The underachievers generally had lower scores on the ACT and less extensive out-of-class accomplishments. Over 90% of the underachievers were Caucasian males. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The seminal articles from Gifted Child Quarterly in this volume address this issue of what giftedness is. They thereby inform our efforts to do research on giftedness and to identify children as gifted. What are some of the major issues raised in these articles, and what are examples of some ideas proposed to address each of these issues? What is the nature of giftedness and talent? One can learn more about the nature of giftedness through viewing responses to enrichment activities than through conventional tests(Passow, 1981). Giftedness involves excellence, rarity, productivity, demonstrability, and value attached to the skills/products of the individual (Sternberg & Zhang, 1995). How should we study giftedness? We need more to use the techniques of mainstream psychological research to study giftedness (Jackson, 1993). Should we expand conventional notions of giftedness, and if so, how should we do so? Metacognition is crucial to giftedness (Shore & Dover, 1987). Creativity is an important facet of giftedness (Runco, 1993). Wisdom is an important kind of giftedness (Sternberg, 2000). How, if at all, are giftedness and talent different? Giftedness refers to domains of human abilities, talents, to domains of human accomplishments (Gagne, 1985). Are there different profiles of giftedness and talent, and if so, what are they? Six profiles of giftedness and talent are successful, challenging, underground, dropouts, double-labeled, and autonomous (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Different kinds of gifted individuals (e.g., statesmen versus religious leaders) develop through different profiles of strengths and weaknesses (Walberg, Tsai, Weinstein, Gabriel, Rasher, Rosecrans, Rovai, Ide, Trujillo, & Vukosavich, 1981). How do giftedness and talent develop? They develop in part through certain kinds of overexcitabilities, namely, psychomotor, sensual, intellectual, imaginational, and emotional (Piechowski & Colangelo, 1984). Prodigies develop in a way that is different from that of most gifted individuals in part as a function of opportunities made available to them in their environments (Feldman, 1993). Giftedness can be understood in part in terms of the interaction of the organism and the environment, which produces diverse developmental outcomes (Horowitz, 1987). How valid are available assessments of giftedness and talent? Measures of multiple intelligences appear, in general, to be reliable but not particularly valid (Plucker, Callahan, & Tomchin, 1996). It would, of course, be delightful if a consensus could be found on all or even many of these issues, but consensus is hard to find. Nevertheless, there appear to be at least several points of broad agreement. Giftedness involves more than just high IQ. Giftedness has noncognitive (e.g., motivationally driven) components as well as cognitive ones. Environment is crucial in terms of whether potentials for gifted performance will be realized. Giftedness is not a single thing: There are multiple forms of giftedness. Hence, one-size-fits-all assessments or programs are likely to be too narrow. Measures for identifying or evaluating gifted individuals need to be proposed to operationalize theories, and then they need to be evaluated rather than merely being assumed to be valid. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)

In comparison to most research approaches and theoretical traditions in other fields of psychology, educational-psychological approaches to these concepts have been related more closely to practice in a wide variety of educational settings in and out of schools. For example, topics of research in the areas of motivation and cognition have been concerned with learning and achievement, and the language used has tended to be familiar to educators and teachers. Educational psychologists integrated new concepts and methods from other fields of psychology into their research as a way to more fully address issues of practice. Thus, when psychometric approaches relying on quantitative measures became dominant in the area of intelligence research, many investigators in the field of educational psychology began to conceptualize and measure variables using psychometric approaches. Statistical tools were adopted to measure talent (giftedness), as well as cognitive factors based on traditional intelligence tests. As a consequence, research efforts focused on interindividual differences. This line of research however, did not address intraindividual development, nor information about the relations between the variables under consideration (Krapp, 1999; Medved, Midi, & Ainley, 2002; Murphy & Alexander, 2000). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This book is intended to answer questions of parents whose children may need psychological testing. It begins with deciding whether the child needs testing, what to do if they need testing--including finding a competent professional to administer the test, and the benefits and costs of having a child tested within or outside of the school system. It also covers when it is appropriate to seek a second opinion. The book then covers commonly used tests. The authors briefly describe the tests, so the reader can know how the tests used for a child will help the clinician determine the child's strengths and weaknesses and also so that they may participate in decisions about which tests are appropriate. Tests covered include intelligence, achievement, and neuropsychological tests, as well as tests of emotional functioning. The book then covers how to read and interpret test reports, including definitions of commonly used terms. The last part of the book describes the most common disorders for which a child would undergo testing, so that parents can understand why a particular diagnosis was appropriate and a different diagnosis was inappropriate. It also provides information on appropriate treatment strategies for each disorder, as well as resources for parents and children. Throughout the book, the authors provide reassurance and further options for support to the reader. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)

Dr. Moss's book addresses the diverse situations that the teacher may encounter. She addresses everything from learning disabilities, to a child dealing with trauma, to working with the gifted student. This book will facilitate the teacher's ability to consider the individual needs and strengths of atypical children, to improve the input given to the team of educational specialists who will help develop an educational program specific to each child, where indicated, and to make the primary observations and refer, if necessary, to psychologically and medically trained professionals who are best able to help these children with their psychological and medical needs. This book is written in clear and concise language that is easily understood by those who do not have a complete education in psychology, psychiatry, or neurology. This book offers a necessary contribution to all current teachers and those planning to enter the profession. It is especially important in this twenty-first century, when so many more responsibilities for the child's welfare fall to our teachers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: foreword)

This chapter provides a historical background on counseling for the gifted, including defining giftedness and the identification of gifted students. Other areas addressed are differential needs, family issues, counseling for gifted students, and special concerns. Programs and services can be developed, but none can or will address all the myriad aspects of the life and times of students with exceptional gifts. In the end, the attitude of significant others will bridge the gap in determining the quality and impact of any intervention with gifted students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The focus of this chapter is to explore the affective states and needs of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) gifted adolescents during the acquisition of a second language and second culture. While many new immigrants arrive with some knowledge of the English language, most are unable to compete on an equal footing with their English-speaking peers in the secondary or postsecondary educational environment because of a lack of academic literacy. There is no unitary description that may address their cultural backgrounds. An English language learner (ELL) may have arrived after a childhood wholly lived in one foreign country or, instead, may be a member of an increasingly significant group of global nomads, children who have lived in multiple countries. An ELL, too, may be a member of an indigenous culture whose life has been lived within U.S. borders, but who shares many characteristics with the foreign-born. Within this group of culturally and linguistically different adolescents, it is expected that the occurrence of giftedness in the population should parallel the membership of giftedness in the majority native-speaking culture. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This book offers the most extensive look available at how gifted education can rise to encourage a more diverse student population and become enriched by the diversity of those children. This book looks specifically at diversity in gifted education as it relates to race, gender, and socioeconomic status. Topics include the identification of giftedness among an increasingly diverse population of students; specific service modifications to address diversity; improved counseling and guidance; and specific curricular and pedagogical methods for supporting the success of every gifted child. This is not like the usual book or textbook about gifted and talented boys and girls. All of its authors are specialists on the topic for which we invited them to submit one of the chapters. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: book)

This chapter begins with a discussion of the stereotype of giftedness of children of Indian origin. The main reason is, of course, the talents and hard work of the students themselves. Nothing in this chapter should be interpreted as taking away from the accomplishments of the students. However, the essence of the belief systems of parents of Indian origin is that their children can and will succeed and that no sacrifice on the part of the parents or the children is too great. These parents impart to their children a culture of hard work, clear focus, building strong credentials, and a single-minded pursuit of careers that lead to prestige and material rewards and recognition. No discussion of the "giftedness" of Indian children and the pressures on them can be complete without recognition of the role of their parents. A more complete understanding of the pressures on children of Indian origin in U.S. schools today requires an understanding of their parents and the culture in which they grew up. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

This chapter addresses the underrepresentation of certain non-Asian racial-ethnic minorities in gifted education programs. One possible explanation for the racial imbalance in gifted education is that the ways giftedness is defined and identified are biased in favor of Whites and Asians. A second possible explanation is that giftedness is not, in fact, distributed equally across all demographic groups. This chapter examines these two theories. The tradeoff between racial balance and rigor in intellectual standards has led educators of the gifted to consider evaluating participants' strengths against other, less cognitive standards. The aim is to "desegregate" gifted education by "democratizing" it, in particular, by expanding the range of skills, abilities, and achievements counted as gifts and the variety of people enlisted to identify them. By enrolling students with many different and vaguely defined kinds of personal strengths, but often weaker academic ones, educators cannot differentiate the curriculum to suit the needs of remarkably talented students of any sort. Narrowing the current large racial gaps in academic achievement is an important social goal, one that often dominates American political discourse and drives social policy. But, these gaps are precisely the reason why "racial equity" cannot be attained in gifted education at this time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)

The data from our diverse sources, the normally developing gifted, as well as ordinary children, and the findings on the autistic savants support a developmental analysis in terms of an orderly sequence in the acquisition of graphic skills, especially in the early years. We also note the powerful impact of the culture on the young artist's style and infer that these children acquired the pictorial skills valued in their culture by consistently exploring the possibilities and constraints of their medium and by discovering the major rules that underlie their chosen art form. As my review has indicated, the rate of acquisition of mature representational skills was greatly enhanced in the talented children; but, beyond their precocity, their artistic achievements also differed qualitatively from that of their ordinary agemates. To what extent does prodigy status or childhood giftedness in the visual arts predict the pursuit of a career in the arts? To pursue a career in the arts requires cultural supports and at least some financial rewards. Personality factors also play a significant role. The finding that childhood giftedness is not a good predictor of adult career choices need not detract from our appreciation of artistically gifted children's talents and the roles they can play in their lives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter explores empowering and serving Hispanic students in gifted education, their curricular and instructional needs, and methods for balancing their home, school, and community worlds. Assessment alternatives for determining mastery of skills and content are also provided. This chapter is written with the understanding that the changing demographics of the United States is readily seen in its public schools, and this diversity permeates every school-based program that exists, with the exception, perhaps, of gifted education. Programs including gifted Hispanic students should be designed to nurture individual giftedness and provide a classroom climate that encourages them to use their talents in productive ways. Identifying, recruiting, and retaining Hispanic students in gifted education can provide them with a brighter future and increase their opportunity for securing a postsecondary education. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Giftedness in the narrow sense refers to a high level of general mental ability, or psychometric g. The present article pertains only to giftedness in this narrow sense, i.e., high g. Schools typically consider as gifted those pupils who score more than two standard deviations above the population mean of children their own age on certain mental tests. This is equivalent to an IQ of 130 or above, a cutoff score that includes approximately the top-scoring 2-3% of the population. Any particular IQ cutoff, however, is not essentially important for this discussion. An arbitrary point on an age-standardized and normalized ordinal scale that roughly estimates psychometric g theoretically has the same statistical and predictive properties throughout its entire range. Empirical evidence, so far, has not contradicted this theoretical conjecture. Individuals classified as gifted in the narrow sense are not uniquely different from the rest of the population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)