Su búsqueda

This editorial presents the current issue of Journal of Advanced Academics. In the development of this special themed issue on rural giftedness, we wanted to offer critical explorations into the ways in which we typically define both ruralness and giftedness. The authors examine the complexity of defining rural with a review of rural education research in the past decade, examining whether or not locale codes fall short in capturing the concept of rural education itself. The articles also explore how place leverages or potentially limits educational opportunities for high potential rural students. The articles represented in this issue examine rural giftedness with attention to equity and issues of social justice. The articles also highlight the unique needs of rural populations and offer findings that allow educators to develop the talent of young people living in these settings. We hope these articles call further attention to the needs of talented youth living in rural America. Rural students, like their suburban and urban peers, want to live a life of significance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

Procedures used for identifying giftedness have been widely discussed in the literature. The present study aimed to investigate the evidence of validity based on the internal structure of a self-report scale to identify characteristics of giftedness. The sample consisted of 276 Elementary and Middle School students, aged between 9 and 12 years, and was 60.0% female. The instrument used was the first version of this scale, which was composed of 44 items related to the topic. Exploratory Factor Analysis was carried out, and the results revealed a two-factor solution, explaining 40.4% of the total variance. The first factor was denominated Socio-emotional Characteristics, and the second factor was denominated Cognitive Characteristics. The results corroborate the data in the scientific literature, which suggest that giftedness is a multidimensional construct that encompasses attributes that go beyond the intellectual scope. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract) Resumen en idioma originalAs diversas formas de identificação das Altas Habilidades/Superdotação têm sido amplamente discutidas na literatura. O presente estudo objetivou investigar as evidências de validade da estrutura interna de uma escala de autorrelato para identificação de características associadas ao tema. A amostra constituiu-se de 276 estudantes de ensino fundamental, com idades entre 9 e 12 anos, sendo 60,0% do sexo feminino. O instrumento respondido foi a primeira versão desta escala composta por 44 afirmações relacionadas ao tema. O procedimento de Análise Fatorial Exploratória apresentou uma solução de dois fatores, os quais explicariam 40,4% da variância total. O primeiro fator foi chamado de Características Socioemocionais e o segundo, Características Cognitivas. Os resultados corroboram a literatura científica, a qual compreende o construto como multidimensional, incluindo atributos que vão além do âmbito intelectual. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This article provides a brief review of some of the salient factors affecting giftedness, such as the origins of giftedness and creativity, nature vs. nurture as responsible for giftedness, characteristics of the gifted and possible emotional and social difficulties that may be correlated, or even caused, by high intelligence and talent, and the role of their family of origin and the educational system in enhancing their talents and assisting them to address disorders that they may develop. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This special issue of High Ability Studies is devoted to contexts that support talent development. While numerous conceptions of giftedness consider the role played by the environment for talent development, most of these conceptions nevertheless viewed giftedness itself as an individual attribute. Newer approaches have, however, begun to fundamentally alter this view: The environment and learning contexts are not only important for talent development, but they also make up an integral part of what giftedness actually is. Plucker and Barab (2005), for example, have called for investigating “gifted transactions” (p. 210) rather than gifted individuals. In a similar vein, Ziegler (2005) defined giftedness as the property of a system made up of the individual and his or her environment. The articles assembled in this special issue emphasize different perspectives of the relevance of learning environments. The first three contributions present empirical studies on the relevance of learning contexts in general and in different cultural settings. The following two articles discuss important implications of current research for the establishment of supportive learning contexts at school. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Reviews the book, Giftedness 101 by L. K. Silverman (see record 2012-34354-000). In this somewhat scattershot but well-meaning short book, Linda Kreger Silverman is on a consciousness-raising mission, attempting to improve awareness of the experience of gifted children, who she contends have often been left out in the cold by educators and research psychologists. She argues that, if psychologists are committed to social justice for those with intellectual disabilities, they should be similarly supportive of those with particularly high abilities, who are also subject to discrimination, misunderstanding, and bullying. Perhaps unintentionally, the part of the book that is most convincing that something is amiss in psychology's treatment of the intellectually gifted is the reference section. A further purpose of the book is 'mythbusting'. Intelligence researchers will appreciate Silverman's debunking of several of the stultifying untruths that surround our discipline along with her forceful defense, and detailed explication, of the use of IQ testing to identify and assess giftedness. Finally, Silverman's assertion that "giftedness is not elitist" does not chime with the reality that societal and cultural elites are highly likely to score well above average on IQ tests—that is, in meritocratic systems the gifted already tend to rise to the top. Whether or not giftedness currently "cuts across all socioeconomic, ethnic, and national groups", if we followed Silverman's advice and gave gifted children from all backgrounds the support and resources they deserve, we might expect even more 'elitist' results in the future, as more of the elevated positions in society become occupied by those with high ability and their children, to whom they will pass on their high-ability genes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

In this paper we suggest that instruments of neuro-cognitive research enable the evaluation of giftedness in mathematics. We start with a literature review on the related topics presented so as to situate our suggestions within the existing research on giftedness and excellence in mathematics. This literature review allows us later to discuss our findings, which are based on neurocognitive data collected in a large-scale multidimensional examination of mathematical giftedness. Sampling procedure in the study was performed based on two orthogonal (in our view) characteristics: general giftedness (G) and excellence in mathematics (EM). In this paper we present findings that lead to a definition of the mathematically gifted population. We present selected results to provide evidence for our findings. In this paper we demonstrate three major findings: A. Effects of G and EM factors are task-dependent both in behavioral and neurophysiological measures' the EM factor has significant main effects on tasks that require implementation of knowledge familiar to students from school mathematics. By contrast, the G factor has a significant main effect on insight-based problems which are not part of the school mathematical curriculum and, thus, require original mathematical reasoning. B. Mathematical performance in gifted students who excel in mathematics (G-EM students) on insight-based tasks has specific characteristics in both behavioral and electrophysiological results. C. G-EM participants exhibited superior performance in all the tests, showing a constant neuroefficiency effect. Based on these observations we suggest that mathematically gifted students are those who are both generally gifted and excel in mathematics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This editorial discusses, the papers on the theme of new approaches to conceptualizing and assessing giftedness. The current issue adds an additional five papers to this special focus. The first paper of this issue, explores the domain of mathematics. The second paper, analyses the highest levels of performance (top positions) through the lens of mathematics. The third paper also targets mathematical giftedness. The fourth paper, details the development and validation of a self-report instrument to measure the intelligence. The final paper also reports on the validation of an instrument for the measurement of giftedness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Reviews the book, The development of giftedness and talent across the life span edited by F. D. Horowitz et al. (see record 2009-00231-001). The book is organized logically by developmental period and divided into five sections: 'Infancy and Early Childhood,' 'Childhood,' 'Adolescence,' 'Adulthood and Later Years,' and 'Life-Span Perspectives: Understandings and Implications.' The book is best suited for researchers and educators and would not necessarily be accessible to the lay reader or parent of a gifted child. The book addresses the specificity of talent and individual differences, that a person's giftedness may be specific to one or more areas rather than a consistent trait across domains. The book also suggests that giftedness flows like ebbs and tides across the lifespan, and a gifted child may not necessarily become a gifted adult. The book places a stronger emphasis on the cultivation and development of talent and the critical need for positive interventions at key points in a gifted person's development. Though the book makes a noble effort toward recognizing giftedness across the lifespan, it does not completely succeed. The preface acknowledges the gaps in the literature and expresses a hope that the book 'will inspire developmental psychologists and others to move the field forward'. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). Models of giftedness are aimed at creating a picture of aspects which are important for developing a special talent. Approved models of giftedness are based on influencing factors like genetic, environmental and individual orientated variables. But the described models do not focus on the interdependencies of the mentioned variables. Therefore, for Ziegler and Phillipson these approaches are insufficient. They favor a broader view, taking into account interactions between the components of previous models and more, pointing on a variety of possible influences and their interdependencies. The systemic theory offers a perspective on a way of working with one child,honoring her or his special needs, adapting pedagogical actions on a special situation fitting at a certain moment on an individual. The systemic theory of gifted education is closer to reality of gifted education and its multidimensional aspects. At the moment, the actiotope model poses open questions and therefore inspires discussions about the process of development of giftedness. Especially due to the necessity to deal with complex and dynamic systems, the question of controlling the procedures comes up again. It is to credit the authors that they do not exclude influencing factors but encourage the scientific community to take them into account.So it is time to start a discussion about a change of perspective on giftedness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). Ziegler & Phillipson (Z&P) have provided a valuable discussion of the identification and development of giftedness under a systemic umbrella, including issues of differing theoretical approaches and efficacy. This commentary considers their discussion within a novel systemic framework that links also individuals and environment,but in terms of interacting information processing systems. Gifted education,in this framework, involves developing interacting systems that give rise to culturally-valuable performances (actions). In this framework, information is all of the matter and energy that makes up the universe. All discrete entities are information processing systems, with processing referring to changes in information. Within this framework, the mechanism that Z&P attribute to Descartes can be utilized in examining component systems and their interactions, with no separation of structure and system (p. 11), or separation of biological and social interactions. This framework may allow comparison of differing approaches to cognition and, as a result to giftedness, through consideration of differing theories, at least where these can be paraphrased in terms of matter and energy interactions, or related emergent properties, and it may be useful for Z&P to consider how their systemic view can be applied to cognition more generally and then to specific results of cognition,such as seen in giftedness. The broad framework here, however, suggests an emphasis on the identification and improvement of culturally-valuable performance,rather than trying to identify giftedness per se. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Contemporary thinking challenges the view that giftedness and high IQ are synonymous. Contemporary thinking also challenges the view that being gifted is something real. A number of authorities in the gifted field advocate a paradigm shift; moving away from emphasizing categorical definitions of giftedness and adopting a talent development perspective. This shift to a developmental perspective advocates that we consider giftedness as the unfolding and transforming of uncanny potential among young children into actual outstanding performance and accomplishments in adulthood. The early identification and ongoing assessment of individuals of uncommon ability takes on a more complex, nuanced, and rich perspective when viewed from a developmental model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This issue of High Ability Studies pertains to sex differences and implicit theories among gifted students. The issue particularly focuses on the misconceptions, dogmas and popular views regarding giftedness commonly found among layperson as well as perceptions of giftedness held by parents and implicit theories of creativity held by educational researchers. To conclude, multi-method research studies in particular can contribute a great deal—both to our understanding of the individual constructs and of the differences between gifted students and students of average giftedness as well as to the optimal improvement of educational and gifted-support efforts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Reports an error in "Communicating love or fear: The role of attachment styles in pathways to giftedness" by Mimi Wellisch ( Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 2010[Apr-Jun], Vol 32[2], 116-126). In the original article there was an error in the section "Attachment" on page 117, line 10. The correction is given in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2010-08278-004). Although both giftedness and secure attachment are associated with advanced language and good socioemotional adjustment, not all gifted children are well adjusted. This article explores the consequences of attachment style on gifted development and examines whether early trauma can be rectified. The dearth of research on giftedness and attachment has necessitated the review of less direct evidence, including brain research and maternal depression. A partly empirical, partly conceptual picture is drawn to demonstrate that attachment styles can support, reduce, and even prevent giftedness. This is further illustrated by an experiment involving IQ scores that mimics the expected effects of early trauma and insecure attachment on test performance. The article concludes by suggesting that attachment style may contribute to a gifted spectrum. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Reviews the book, The natural musician—On abilities, giftedness and talent by Dina Kirnarskaya (2009). The author of this book explores the concept of musical talent. The book effectively combines findings from neurological and scientific studies with psychological theories and considers the historical development of humans and music from a sociological perspective. In essence, the book discusses specific psychological components that are significant for the development of musical talent and proposes a theoretical model on this basis. Ideas for pedagogy are provided on the basis of the model. Throughout the book, arguments and theorizing are supported by a wealth of studies, highlighting the phenomenal knowledge that the author holds on the topic from evolutionary, historical, psychological, musical and scientific perspectives. The book is divided into six parts. Each part focuses on a concept that the author considers to be an essential ingredient in facilitating talent. The book offers an impressive amount of research data and references on ability, giftedness and talent from different perspectives and opens up discussions on the topic from an alternative theoretical viewpoint. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The purpose of this paper is to present the results of research in which the Finnish public discussion of giftedness and gifted children, and conceptions of giftedness and gifted children presented in it, were examined. The research was conducted by analyzing articles from the Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat and the teachers' periodical Opettaja, using the content analysis method. The results show that giftedness is seen as multidimensional, and both intrapersonal and environmental contributions are recognized as essential in talent development. The conceptions of gifted children were quite diverse, and gifted children's possible problems were frequently discussed. Moreover, misunderstandings were revealed as well as areas that have not been adequately addressed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

What is “productive giftedness” and why does it matter in talent development? Using the Productive Giftedness Model, the current study examines key environmental and psychosocial factors that influence productive outcomes (e.g., achievements, accomplishments, leadership, eminence). Defined as mastery and excellence, the “productive giftedness” of ten notable artists, athletes, innovators, scientists, and writers was systematically studied. Findings highlight both commonalities and differences across three developmental stages identified in this study: early exposure and support, talent cultivation, and continuous cultivation. The article focuses on home and school learning environments, key relationships, motivation, and time factors. In particular, parents (or caregivers), teachers, and mentors played a key role in their talent development. The model also highlights the role of alterable and contextual factors, which enhance or hinder access to opportunities, support, and resources. The overall findings confirm the greater importance of supportive conditions rather than innate talent alone. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

A relatively pervasive “silence” exists concerning giftedness in Australian preservice early childhood teacher courses. There is also a lack of research about educator attitudes to giftedness and programming in Australian early childhood services. This study, consisting of a survey and interviews, is intended to help to fill the research gap. A total of 184 early childhood educators were surveyed in relation to their knowledge and attitudes about giftedness, and 10 of those respondents were also interviewed. A purposive sample of eight parents whose gifted preschoolers had been recommended for early entry by a psychologist were also interviewed. Findings indicate that early childhood educators are at a loss in relation to gifted children’s intellectual, social, and emotional needs that are neither understood nor met according to their parents. Compulsory preservice coursework about giftedness is recommended. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The article presents an overview of important knowledge regarding metacognition and its relation to exceptional giftedness. Basic aspects of metacognition are defined and briefly described in accordance with the historical development and current notions of this construct. The following text deals with how much gifted children differ from typical population in particular aspects of metacognition (declarative, procedural, etc.). Part of the article is dedicated to a concise delimitation of exceptional giftedness, mainly in view of the shift in expert opinions concerning the nature of this construct: from the classic Terman's conception, in which giftedness was defined solely as based on exceptional results in standardized IQ tests, to more modern approaches, which take into account also other cognitive achievements, and to a certain extent even non-intellectual factors such as motivation or creativity. The next part of the study therefore focuses on the significance of metacognition for giftedness viewed as “developing expertise”, which is the conception associated mainly with R. Sternberg. Finally, there is an outline of some implications for assessment and for psycho-educational practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract) Resumen en idioma originalČlánek přináší přehled významných poznatků týkajících se metakognice a jejího vztahu k mimořádnému nadání. Vymezeny a stručně popsány jsou základní aspekty metakognice, v souladu s historickým vývojem i s aktuálním pojetím tohoto konstruktu. Následně se text zabývá tím, nakolik se podle reprezentativních zahraničních empirických výzkumů v jednotlivých aspektech metakognice (deklarativních, procedurálních aj.) odlišují nadané děti od běžné populace. Část článku je věnována i stručnému vymeze ní mimořádného nadání, zejména s ohledem na posun v odborných názorech na povahu tohoto konstruktu: od klasického Termanova pojetí, v němž bylo nadání definováno výhradně na základě mimořádných výsledků dosažených ve standardizovaných inteligenčních testech, k modernějším přístupům, které zohledňují i jiné kognitivní výkony a do jisté míry i mimointelektové faktory, jakými jsou motivace či tvořivost. Další část studie je proto zaměřena na význam metakognice pro nadání chápané jako „rozvíjející se expertnost“, což je pojetí spojené zejména se jménem R. Sternberga. Na závěr jsou shrnuty některé implikace pro diagnostiku a pedagogicko- psychologickou praxi. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 40(3) of Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education (see record 2018-38625-011). In the original article, there was an error on page 80, left column, in a sentence beginning on the fourth line of the first paragraph under the heading “OUR TESTS OF SCIENTIFIC REASONING AND REASONING ABOUT TEACHING.” The correct text should read as follows: Instead of measuring general cognitive skills, we focused on the particular cognitive and scientific skills needed by scientists. (The descriptions below also provided the basis for analyses in Sternberg & Sternberg, 2017; Sternberg et al., 2017.) In addition, on page 79, left column, the heading “THEORY UNDERLYING OUR TESTS OF SCIENTIFIC REASONING AND REASONING ABOUT TEACHING” should have included the following footnote: The theory described in this section also has been used in prior analyses (Sternberg, 2017; Sternberg et al., 2017).] Giftedness in science today is largely measured by various kinds of standardized tests—IQ tests, SATs, ACTs, GREs, and so forth. For example, many STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) gifted programs rely at least in part on IQ tests or the SAT for identifying students as gifted. It might be useful to supplement such standard measures with measures that directly measure the skills involved in actual scientific work, such as (a) generating hypotheses, (b) generating experiments, (c) drawing conclusions, (d) reviewing (i.e., analyzing scientific work), (e) editing (i.e., evaluating reviews of scientific work), and (f) evaluating teaching. This article discusses the status of the measurement of scientific giftedness and also describes assessments designed to measure scientific giftedness as well as giftedness in evaluating teaching (an important component of scientific success). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

There is ample evidence that families are important in supporting the development of giftedness in children. Although there has been a great deal of research addressing individual and school factors in promoting giftedness, the role of parents and caregivers is comparatively underresearched, particularly in Australia. This study investigated the ways in which parents supported their children’s development, drawing on the educational and learning capital framework within the Actiotope Model of Giftedness. A qualitative design was adopted and semistructured interviews were conducted with 32 parents and caregivers. The data demonstrated that parents draw on all 10 educational and learning resources in creating favorable environments to support their children’s development. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)