Su búsqueda
Resultados 67 recursos
-
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)
-
Reply by the current authors to the comments made on the original article (see record 2012-16824-002). The commentaries to our target article Towards a systemic theory of gifted education differed in their assessments of the various arguments we put forward. Of the more than 40 responses to our target article, 27 responses were chosen as being representative of all commentaries. We grouped the responses according to the main points in our target article, including our claims that current approaches to gifted education are ineffective, current models of giftedness are generally flawed, and systemic models of giftedness represent an advancement in the way that giftedness can be understood. Next, we outlined a systems approach to gifted education, based on the actiotope model of giftedness as its theoretical foundation. Finally, we argued that the systemic theory of gifted education represents a paradigm shift in the way we view the development of exceptionality. (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 and Phillipson provide a timely, thought-provoking critique of traditional approaches to gifted education. For a long time, the field has searched in vain for the Holy Grail of giftedness. Alas, the essentialist assumption fails because giftedness does not have a single essence that holds its identity, unity, and continuity. Reification of the construct as an entity sitting in the head significantly narrows our vision of what constitutes human potential for excellence. To maximally realize human potential, it is important to reconceptualize giftedness as contextually and dynamically shaped through learning and development in a complex, reciprocal interaction of the person and the environment. Ziegler and Phillipson show us how it might be done. Although much is yet to be spelled out, some principles can be laid out. Too much time and resources are expended on futile attempts to figure out a gold standard or a litmus test for an unfailing determination of who are “gifted”. We should look at the current performance and proximal behavior of a child in deciding what kinds of education provisions are appropriate for the child instead of seeking the Holy Grail of giftedness and using the abstract notion of aptitude such as general intelligence or generic giftedness to guide policy and practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
-
Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). As an alternative to the current paradigm of gifted education, Ziegler and Phillipson proposed a systemic approach and argued that factors in the current mechanistic model of giftedness are not good predictors for exceptionality. They pinpointed that a single factor identified as an indicator of giftedness, ineffective measures, inappropriate context, and over-reliance on products make it futile to maneuver appropriate educational practices for gifted population. Their perspectives have raised some important issues in understanding the theoretical framework of gifted education. First, Ziegler and Phillipson assert that the systemic approach deals with the wholeness of giftedness without scrutinizing its components and that its main feature is in interactions between individuals and environments. However, crucial roles of environments have not been dismissed in the mechanistic perspective, either. Nonetheless, individuals’ active involvement in developing giftedness and recognition of various modes of outstanding behaviors within the system are the noticeable features of this proposed model. It is also promising that persons within the system are committed to their gifted actions, which would be changeable via interactions with environments.Hopefully, the systemic approach would be instrumental in stimulating diverse forms of giftedness, often unrecognized by traditional approaches, and producing gifted behaviors conducive to the society as well. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
-
This article reviews seven different theories of giftedness that include creativity as a component, comparing and contrasting how each one conceptualizes creativity as a part of giftedness. The functions of creativity vary across the models, suggesting that while the field of gifted education often cites the importance of creativity, the conceptualizations of creativity differ depending on the particular theory. The various models of giftedness can be interpreted from the context of current creativity research because certain elements of these conceptualizations can be found in social models, the evolving systems approach, and the domain-generality debate. An integrative perspective of creativity research reveals that some models of giftedness are more comprehensive and consistent in terms of the creativity literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
Explorar
Tipo de recurso
- Book (4)
- Book Section (7)
- Journal Article (46)
- Thesis (10)