Buscar

Robert Sternberg’s (see record 2018-07419-003) Active Concerned Citizenship and Ethical Leadership (ACCEL) framework provides a helpful way to align gifted education with the complexities of 21st-century socioeconomic and cultural environments. The recommendation that we shift away from pseudoquantitative precision in conceptions of giftedness aligns with similar recommendations in other fields including political science, economics, and mathematics. The emphases on ethics and wisdom are reinforced by analyses of the need for more ethical awareness in societies. These analyses arise from research and theory in other fields, including ethical philosophy, political science, economics, history, sociology, and journalism. These transdisciplinary similarities are interpreted to be conceptual triangulation supporting the importance of Sternberg’s model as a catalyst for the development of more holistic conceptions of giftedness and talent. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

In this article, we provide a response to the Active Concerned Citizenship and Ethical Leadership (ACCEL) model put forward by Sternberg (see record 2018-07419-003). Our commentary focuses on four critical areas that do not receive sufficient attention in Sternberg’s proposed model: (a) the developmental nature of giftedness; (b) that giftedness is domain specific, particularly at later stages in the talent development process; (c) the challenge in applying ACCEL in the real world of schools; and (d) whether the arts and other performance areas are compelled to have an ethical theme in order to be valuable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

The relationships between low competency teasing, academic self-concept, and academic outcomes (i.e., GPA and academic psychological engagement) were analyzed using data from approximately 200 artistically and academically gifted students (62.2% female) recruited from two high schools. Results demonstrated two significant models for academic outcomes: the negative relationship between low academic competency teasing and GPA was mediated by academic self-concept, and the negative relationship between low academic competency teasing and academic psychological engagement was mediated by academic self-concept. When the sample was split based on giftedness domain, the mediation using GPA was significant only for academically gifted students, whereas the mediation using academic psychological engagement was significant only for artistically gifted students. All mediations were confirmed using Sobel's test (1982). Results suggest that academic self-concept is a significant variable partially mediating the effects of teasing on gifted students' academic outcomes. Furthermore, giftedness domain should be emphasized because academic outcomes may vary by domain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Regional comparisons (cortical surface area and thickness) were performed on a well described sample of adults with reading disability alone (RD), nonverbal giftedness alone (G), and reading disability and nonverbal giftedness combined (GRD). These anatomical results are considered in relation to behavioral and functional work previously reported on this sample. GRD-RD regional differences were found in both hemispheres and were more common than GRD-G differences. Regional differences were found in the temporal, parietal, occipital and frontal lobes. While these data are preliminary given the small sample sizes, they suggest future avenues of research on the neurodevelopment of atypical samples. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Teachers’ beliefs about students influence many of the decisions they make in the classroom. While much work has been done exploring teachers’ beliefs as they relate to the nomination of students for gifted programs, little work has yet explored the ways in which teachers’ beliefs about student giftedness possibly affect instructional decisions. In this article, within the context of specialized STEM schools, the beliefs of teachers as related to their students’ giftedness and ability are explored. Findings indicated that teachers believe their students to be gifted regardless of designation. Teachers articulated beliefs around the type of learning opportunities gifted students need as well as the amount of work required to stimulate these students. Specifically, teachers stated that gifted students flourish under heavy workloads with intense amounts of independent and inquiry-based learning. Students were also queried to determine their own perceptions of these instructional practices on their learning and daily lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Many current theories and models include creativity as a component of giftedness, conceptualizing the construct in numerous ways that complement giftedness. Variations in creativity have also been studied among different academic disciplines, suggesting that although there may be higher levels of creativity for some, major choice is a complex concept. The current study explores differences in several aspects of creativity based on academic major for a high-ability young adult population. Using data from 399 Honors College students at a Midwestern university in the United States, a MANOVA and series of 1-way ANOVAs suggest significant differences by academic major for creative engagement, creative cognitive style, and fantasy, but not for tolerance or spontaneity. The pattern of results generally indicates higher creativity among arts and humanities majors, compared with other disciplines such as education and pre-professional training, although these fields can also benefit from creative input. Potential curricular and experiential reasons for these differences are discussed, along with some implications for educational programming and interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Current textbooks, websites, research articles, and popular resources have stated that gifted individuals have longer and more pronounced responses to stimuli than the general population. This overexcitable nature of gifted persons has provided a commonly used lens to conceptualize, identify, and understand giftedness and gifted persons’ behaviors. Yet there are reasons to be skeptical about the evidence demonstrating that the gifted population is more overexcitable than the nongifted population. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the existence and strength of the giftedness–overexcitability (OE) relationship as presented in a number of studies comparing the OE scores of intellectually gifted and nongifted samples. Gifted samples were found to have higher mean OE scores than nongifted samples. However, the effect size for psychomotor OE was not statistically significant, while the effect sizes for the emotional and sensual OEs were small. Calculated effect sizes for intellectual and imaginational OEs were medium. A number of important limitations and implications exist. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Presents an interview with Todd Lubart. Lubart is Professor of psychology and received his PhD from Yale University and was an invited professor at the Paris School of Management. His research focuses on creativity; its identification and development within the multivariate, investment approach; creative potential and creative giftedness; the creative process and the effect of context on creative work. The focus of the interview is on giftedness and creativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The education of students identified as ‘gifted’ has had a highly problematic history, having been judged as conceptually confused, socially and ethnically discriminatory, and educationally exclusive. Despite this, it is argued that contemporary research and scholarship critiquing the concepts of giftedness and gifted education programmes may provide a base for teacher education and development generally, rather than only for those interested in giftedness. It has particular potential for altering teachers’ thinking about students’ ability. Such research has emphasised the developmental nature of intelligence, its multidimensional character and the sociopolitical role of the concept of ability in school systems. It is argued that the appropriate use of this research could contribute to a more equitable and inclusive model for teachers’ thinking and for practice in schooling. Five implications for teacher development are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The Actiotope Model of Giftedness regards giftedness as a product of the interaction between the individual and the environment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity of the Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital (QELC) on 187 primary school students from Israel and to examine whether the educational and learning capitals of the students are associated with general intelligence and academic achievement. In the study correlations were found between social, infrastructural, didactic, organismic, actional, episodic and attentional capitals. No correlations were found, however, between general intelligence and other subscales of the QELC. The results of reliabilities and the two-factor CFA model affirmed the validity of the educational and learning capital using the Hebrew version of QELC. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

This study examined the relationship between types of overexcitability (OEs), Big Five dimensions, and giftedness. A sample of intellectually gifted adolescents ( N = 132) and controls (N = 103) completed the OEQ-II and the NEO-FFI. As hypothesized, the gifted scored higher than controls on intellectual OE, imaginational OE, and openness to experience but lower on neuroticism. Contrary to expectations, group-related differences were found for sensual OE, but not for emotional OE. Moreover, SEM analysis showed that giftedness moderated the relation of OEs with openness and extraversion. The relations between sensual OE and openness as well as between psychomotor OE and extraversion were stronger in the gifted than in controls. Relationships between sensual, intellectual, imaginational OEs and extraversion turned out to be significant only in the controls. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The greater male variability hypothesis posits that males exhibit greater variability than females in both mental and physical characteristics. The hypothesis has been supported in various giftedness-related constructs (e.g., intelligence, talents, creativity). This study extended this line of research to another giftedness-related psychological construct: overexcitability (OE). The Overexcitability Questionnaire-Two was administered to 836 (51% girls) 7–9th graders in Hong Kong to assess the five domains of OE (i.e., psychomotor, sensual, intellectual, imaginational, and emotional). The results suggested a domain-specific pattern of gender differences in the variability of OE scores. Greater male variability was found in the sensual, imaginational, and intellectual OE domains; male superiority was found in the psychomotor domain; and female superiority was found in the emotional domain. These domain-specific findings enrich the discourse surrounding the greater male variability hypothesis. Theoretical and educational implications regarding the findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

It has become increasingly evident that schools need to develop a pedagogy and didactics of giftedness'. Recent debates on heterogeneity and inclusion in 'Schools of Plurality' have brought up a multitude of theoretical didactic concepts and models. How teachers are to realise these concepts in practice is, as of yet, an unanswered question. The main reason for this seems to be that education is not only expected to transfer factual knowledge and skills, but also to encompass development of personality, reflection on the self and the ability to educate oneself while considering one's own talents and social responsibilities. This article takes the issue of the schools' role in developing talents as a vantage point from which to discuss what form the furthering of giftedness usually takes in schools, and what this could look like when modern concepts are taken into account. These two positions will be exemplified through two teaching types. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

As neuroimaging technologies increase their sensitivity to assess the function of the human brain and results from these studies draw the attention of educators, it becomes paramount to identify misconceptions about what these data illustrate and how these findings might be applied to educational contexts. Some of these neuromyths have influenced our understanding of giftedness and visuospatial ability. One common neuromyth regarding visuospatial talent (VST) is that of hemispheric lateralization, the idea that the discrete abilities of VST are associated with activations identified primarily in the right hemisphere of the brain. This article reviews the behavioral and neuroimaging literature to trace and untangle the origins of this misconception, parsing our current understanding of brain functions associated with VST and giftedness in order to dispel the myth of hemispheric lateralization and offer a more comprehensive account for the observed functional asymmetries. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Neuroscience has advanced our understanding of the neurological basis of reading disability (RD). Yet, no functional imaging work has been reported on the twice-exceptional dyslexic: individuals exhibiting both non-verbal-giftedness and RD. We compared groups of reading-disabled (RD), non-verbally-gifted (G), non-verbally-gifted-RD (GRD), and control (C) adults on validated word-rhyming and spatial visualization fMRI tasks, and standardized psychometric tests, to ascertain if the neurological functioning of GRD subjects was similar to that of typical RD or G subjects, or perhaps some unique RD subtype. Results demonstrate that GRD adults resemble non-gifted RD adults in performance on paper-and-pencil reading, math and spatial tests, and in patterns of functional activation during rhyming and spatial processing. Data are consistent with what may be a shared etiology of RD and giftedness in GRD individuals that yields a lifespan interaction with reading compensation effects, modifying how their adult brain processes text and spatial stimuli. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Although the support by others of gifted and/or creative individuals has been well documented, what has been overlooked are supportive persons as creative forces in their own right, with the “object” of creation being the development of others for the greater good: engendering. No literature on engendering as a form of giftedness and creativity has been found that focuses on helping others to become great. This article addresses definitions of engendering, creativity as a social construction, issues of gender, and the tension between traditional and nontraditional models of achievement. It then explores engendering across three realms: the self as creative object; the home and family; and the greater society. It concludes with a call for defining, developing, and encouraging conceptions of giftedness and creativity that include engendering. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

Comments on an article by Albert Zieglera & Shane N. Phillipson (see record 2012-16824-002). In their introduction to the idea of a systems approach to understanding talent and giftedness, Ziegler & Phillipson broach the larger issue of the positivistic or mechanistic mind set to knowing and understanding that pervades much of what is called educational research. This worthy tactic brings to light the need to move away from the status quo of accepted research approaches toward something a bit different. No argument from me on this point. I do feel Ziegler and Phillipson begin a complicated conversation that might lead to a more ecologic view of giftedness and talent development; but, the approach is not paradigmatic in any of the myriad ways Kuhn (1970) defined the term. Keeping the conversation going is one approach; yet, not quite enough from my perspective. Ziegler & Phillipson leave out an important component of the entire system—the gifted themselves. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Gifted children who do not achieve often have problems with motivation and socioemotional adjustment and may also have learning disabilities. This article examines factors such as attachment difficulties and maternal depression as these may contribute to underachievement. The article reviews past and current practices of gifted identification and argues that schools have an important role in the early identification of socioemotional problems and learning difficulties, as these can create barriers to learning and achievement. Although Gagné did include underachievers in his Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent, he has also argued that only achieving children should be included in academic talent development programs, and he supports a separate pathway for gifted underachievers. This article demonstrates that such a pathway can be achieved through an inclusive model for gifted achievers and underachievers. A model involves the early triaging of children through identification of giftedness, socioemotional problems, and learning difficulties. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

In reviewing literature on culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) parental inclusion and disproportionality, Cam Cobb, assistant professor at the University of Windsor, Ontario, illustrates how CLD giftedness—and especially CLD giftedness in Canadian settings—represents an area in need of further research. In part, this article begins to address that need. Drawing from a larger critical qualitative inquiry, he details the stories of two CLD Canadian mothers as they sought to become involved in gifted identification and decision‐making processes. Knowledge and language arose in the data as two core themes of robust parental inclusion. These core themes, along with associated recommendations for policy, practice and research, are outlined in a discussion of the findings. While this article focuses on the gifted domain of special education in Ontario, the findings have wider implications for robust CLD parental inclusion in special education in general. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)

The article presents results of a multiple-case study that examined the ways in which parents perceived and influenced the development of five children who showed extraordinary potential in various domains, such as school, sports or music. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect information about the children’s development and were subsequently processed by thematic analysis. The analysis showed that parents based their nurturing practices on their constructions of children’s giftedness. In most cases they constructed giftedness as an inborn and stable trait which predisposed children to future extraordinary achievements. This construction was related to supportive nurturing practices but also to excessive expectations and pressures to maintain peak performance which seemed to have a hindering effect on children’s motivation and on the long-term development of their achievements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)