Su búsqueda

In this chapter, we review research related to the practices within the field of gifted education. Talent and giftedness is a phenomenon that greatly interests our society. However, educators have a somewhat ambivalent attitude toward giftedness and gifted children. There is no agreed-on definition of giftedness to guide practice and programs, as there is with other special categories of children; and there is no federal mandate to serve gifted children. As a result, the kinds of services available to gifted children in schools vary widely. We try to capture that variability and the issues that frame practice and theory within this emerging field of psychology and education. We also provide some perspectives on how this developing area of research and practice fits more broadly into the field of educational psychology and identify critical areas of future research and educational policy reform. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The accusations in Gagné's (this volume) chapter are addressed and discussed. More importantly, this chapter describes the detailed differences between our two theoretical frameworks. Our theoretical framework is based on deliberate practice and focus on evidence that practice can dramatically influence the development of children, adolescents, and adults when the individuals engage in the designed practice for hours on a daily basis for months, years, and decades. In contrast, Gagné emphasizes the role of innate genetic differences and informal exercise. Once we accept the overwhelming evidence for genetic control of individual differences in height and body size, our empirical review has not uncovered rigorous scientific evidence that meets our standards and demonstrates conclusively that innate talent (gifts) are necessary for attaining expert performance. Based on the same standards, Gagné's anecdotal evidence from laypersons is rejected. The chapter concludes with an outline for how giftedness can be studied with the same rigorous scientific methods used for studying expert performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter pursues two main goals: (a) demonstrate that natural abilities—and their outstanding expression as gifts—really exist (the mainstream Pronat position), and that recent attacks by a few researchers who deny their existence (the Antinat position) can be easily parried empirically; (b) expose improper scholarly behavior by some Antinat researchers. Part I surveys the author's Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) and analyzes the concept of natural ability, pointing out its main defining characteristics. Then, it demonstrates with extensive empirical evidence that general intelligence meets all defining criteria of a natural ability. Part II illustrates how some influent Antinat researchers systematically exclude relevant evidence, accumulate irrelevant information, ignore crucial objections, and select from published studies only the results that support their position. These repeated instances of ethically improper scientific behavior show their lack of openness to an objective examination of all the available evidence and reassessment of their entrenched beliefs (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Giftedness models published in the last two decades are characterized, almost without exception, by multidimensional and/or typological ability constructs. Two such examples are presented below: the Munich Model of Giftedness (MMG) and the Munich Dynamic Ability-Achievement Model (MDAAM). In the MMG, Heller and Hany (1986) and Heller (1992/2001) conceptualized giftedness or talent as a multifactorized ability construct within a network of noncognitive personality (motivations, learning emotions, control expectations, self-concepts, etc.) and social moderators as well as performance-related (criterion) variables. Diagnosis and intervention examine the difference among predictor, criterion, and moderator variables. In an attempt to forge a bridge between the psychometrically based research into giftedness and the process-oriented expertise research, Perieth (2001) extended the MMG to the MDAAM. An increase degree of expertise influences active learning processes, which in turn influence expansions of knowledge and the acquisition of domain specific competencies. This implies that noncognitive personality characteristics such as interest and task commitment or achievement motivation are to be accorded increased significance regarding talent potential. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter of epilogue, authors shall reflect upon the intent of a book on creativity, talent, and excellence. Do the contents of the book chapters represent the contemporary understanding of creativity, talent, and excellence? Does it represent a new direction of knowledge innovation in the fields of creativity, talent, and excellence? Leading researchers in psychology of creativity (Beth Hennessey) and in talent development and excellence (Jiannong Shi) write two forewords with a converging view that emphasizes intercultural exchanges and systemic approaches to conceptualization and the study of creativity. This book collects 18 chapters contributed by colleagues of the fields of psychology and education specialized in the constructs of creativity, talent, and excellence. In the first part, authors present broadening views of conceptions of creativity in the mainstream, gifted, and organization settings (Chaps. 1, 2, 3,4, and 5). Eleven chapters report empirical studies conducted in schools, higher educational institutions, and organizations. Three chapters are devoted to practices such as strategies to facilitate divergent thinking, future directions of gifted education, and constraints faced in creativity studies in giftedness. The main contents of this chapter are related to the constructs creativity (ten chapters), talent (two chapters), and excellence (six chapters). The target audience of die chapters includes students in the mainstream educational institutes (school, vocational college, and university), gifted students, and working adults. This book has a broad content coverage and target audience. Some chapters reflect upon new conceptions of creativity by broadening its conceptions (e.g., self regulation. Chap. 2), synthesizing main processes of creativity (e.g.. Chap. 4), and refining frameworks of creativity for teaching and learning (e.g., for the use of classroom, Chap. 1, and problem-based learning, Chap. 5). Some chapters on organizational excellence and educational excellence address socially critical issues such as goal setting at work (Chap. 14) or in learning (Chap. 12), developing strategies to manage social emotions (Chap. 15), regulating curricular and learning difficulties (Chap. 17), and designing enrichment programs for the gifted students (Chap. 14) and team diversity (Chap. 11). The construct of creativity self-efficacy was developed with reference to components of creative processes and domain-relevant processes and self-efficacy theory (Chap. 8). The construct of entrepreneur creativity (Chap. 10) was developed. The relationship between creativity and personal epistemology (Chap. 9) was established. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

When it comes to theories for educating gifted and talented students two additional and related caveats must be taken into account. The first caveat is that there should be a logical relationship between the theory-guided services provided to students and the conception of giftedness that serves as a rationale for the development of that theory. An acceleration-based theory that recommends the use of advanced mathematics courses, for example, should obviously be related to a conception of gifted that targets students with high aptitudes in math. The second caveat is derivative of the first and pertains to the enrichment-based theory presented in this chapter. This theory argues that services should be provided for both advanced cognitive development and what are referred to below to as "intelligences outside the normal curve." A rationale for this conception of giftedness is provided in the various subsections that follow. This chapter is an overview of a theory that has been developed over the past 3 decades to guide the implementation of school programs designed to develop giftedness and talents in young people. The overall theory is composed of four interrelated subtheories and is based on the belief that when one is reexamining the role of theory in gifted education we should always begin the why question—why should a society devote special resources to the development of giftedness in young people? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Intelligence has been conceptualized as both a general ability ( g) and as multiple abilities. These two views have been the basis for several theories of cognitive abilities. Derived from those theories, models of cognitive functioning have formed the basis of recent tests of Intelligence and component abilities. This chapter maps the CHC theory, Luria theory and Cross-Battery approaches and models of cognitive abilities onto the most recent tests of cognitive ability. By understanding the abilities measured by cognitive tests, practitioners can better appraise the strengths and needs of the clients' they assess. Reviews of recent tests guide practitioners In choosing the most appropriate tests and subtests to measure their client's abilities as they relate to learning disabilities, giftedness, and intellectual disability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

"She's been here before," my mother would exclaim after my daughter would say or do something extraordinary for a child at that particular age. And although I would never say it aloud, I would always ponder, "She does that all of the time, but what makes that special?" Now that I have my own grandbabies, I realize that everything they do is special and extraordinary. That's what makes them grand! But I still find myself asking the question, "When do I know that it's a gift? When do I know that it really is special?Over the years, I have heard that exclamation so many times by my own relatives about the children of our family tree by people in passing, and by parents of my students. And I've come to understand that often this statement is made when children respond with uncommon understanding or knowledge about something. They offer explanations and ask questions about things that appeal to those who are far more advanced in years. I have observed many times during a lesson or read-aloud that some students may exhibit unconcern or disinterest, but during discussion, they demonstrate uncanny understanding—understanding that generated from engagement and making relationships along the way. Obviously, had I reacted on my misperception or misinterpretation, the effects could have had long-standing negative implications. I learned a lot about my daughter from asking the gifted instructor at my school about characteristics of gifted children and from my own reading and investigation. But I believe this knowledge should be readily available to teachers and parents alike. Specifically, all teachers should be educated about giftedness, if not certified, at least to the point of recognizing gifted attributes of students based on unbiased objective data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In this chapter, counselors tell the story of Tianna, a gifted Black female who struggles with sibling and family responsibilities and has difficulty connecting with peers because of established cliques. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: introduction)

I teach United States history in a rural high school. In our school, the student population is not very diverse, with 20% identified as African American, 70% as Caucasian, and 10% as Hispanic. In my 6 years of teaching in this setting, I have worked with gifted students in my social studies classes. Teaching these students is a joyful experience; however, I have observed a critical problem. The underrepresentation of gifted Black males within my classes is overwhelming. In my years of teaching within this school district, I can count the number of Black males who have received gifted education services, totaling about three. Although the state of Georgia has adopted a multiple-criteria approach to identification in order to identify and serve more minority students, I have not seen an increase in the number of culturally diverse students receiving gifted education services at my high school. At the current time, there is not a single Black male enrolled in the gifted program. Ford and Grantham (2003) explored the issue of the underrepresentation of culturally diverse students in gifted programs. These scholars called for a change from deficit to dynamic thinking where negative views of culturally diverse students were replaced with high expectations for success. With this change in thinking, schools would expand their views on giftedness, use instruments that are culturally sensitive, identify and serve gifted underachievers, and develop stronger relationships with parents. These efforts would lead to more culturally diverse students being identified and served. As an African American educator of gifted students, I have a personal connection to this issue, and I share my story to help shed some light on the problems facing gifted Black males in schools. My story takes place in Georgia public schools from 1992 to 2002. My father was in the military so my family moved often. Due to his assignments, we lived in Georgia before the change in Georgia's law for gifted identification took place and again, later, following the change in Georgia law. These are my experiences as a student. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Any attempt to synthesize Dabrowski's theories, much less in 25 pages, is almost inherently doomed to a certain level of failure, given the sheer scope, volume, and complexity of the work done by Dabrowski and others to refine and expand his work over the years. Yet by the same token, no serious text on giftedness would be complete without reference to it. As such, the author has taken the liberty of providing a basic overview, and then (in the hope that the theory can be more readily grasped through a concrete, albeit fictitious example) offering an overview of a work of fiction that can serve as an exemplar both for teachers trying to understand Dabrowski's work themselves and those wishing to introduce it to their students. For the purposes of a simplified, and especially an introductory, explanation, it is often easiest to divide Dabrowski's work into two parts: overexcitability theory, and positive disintegration. The former is more often discussed in gifted-education circles than the latter, possibly because on a practical level, issues of positive disintegration are more likely to be seen as the purview of psychologists, while overexcitabilities not only manifest themselves in the classroom setting (and elsewhere) but also dovetail easily with other multi-modal theories with which teachers are already familiar. However, overexcitabilities should be understood as a component of the broader theory of positive disintegration, in which it serves as a subset of the developmental potential that enables it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter will attempt to provide an overview of current findings in relation to how giftedness is perceived from the perspective of the neurosciences. A historical account of conceptions of giftedness as being either innate or environmentally-driven will be explored to provide a framework as to how such models have evolved (and may be interpreted now) in light of advances in technology and brain-based research. The implications of brain imaging studies on educational practices are likewise discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Interest in gifted women has continued in the three decades since Carolyn Callahan published one of the first articles about this topic in the context of gifted education in 1979. Indeed, during the last three decades, books and multiple articles have been published about gifted girls and women by Karnes, Kerr, Rimm, Reis, and others. This chapter probes the reflections of gifted women in the field of gifted education in an effort to identify their perceptions of their contributions, challenges, and beliefs about giftedness and talents in girls and women. Reis (1998) defined talent development in women as occurring when women with high intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership ability or potential achieve at in an area of choice and make what they define as personally meaningful contributions to society. Reis identified several factors that contribute to this conception of giftedness and talent in women including: abilities (intelligence and special talents), personality traits, environmental factors, and personal perceptions, such as the social importance of the use of one's talents to make a positive difference in the world. Each of these factors contributes to what Gruber called "self-mobilization", characterized in some talented women by the development of belief in self, a desire to develop one's talents, and a sense of destiny enabling one to make conscious decisions to develop talents, often with little support and against many obstacles. Each of the women profiled in this chapter displayed these characteristics, working many hours over years of sheer effort as they successfully used their talents to make a difference in this field. This chapter highlights both their stories and their personal reflections on their journeys. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The character of John Galt in Ayn Rand's book Atlas Shrugged (1957) was faced with his professor who had forgotten, in his thrust for political gain, an important statement made to John as his student. The statement was "The only sacred value in the world, John, is the human mind, the inviolate human mind...". As a brilliant scientist and philosopher, the character Galt thought that the mind needs freedom to think and create. He believed that the mind is the power that moves the world. It was in this role that he led several gifted people to strike against a society that envied instead of saluted their ability to make the world a better place. Is there a message in Galt's activities and philosophy that speak to the present status of minority and other exceptionalities in the field of education of the gifted? Perhaps there is a need to find him because the present processes for addressing the needs of gifted minorities for inclusion in programs for the gifted lack the qualities that are necessary to achieve the goal proposed in Galt's statement regarding the mind and its power. The future where there will be a consensus of philosophies regarding the approach toward identifying and developing programs for students who have historically been left out of organized programs for the gifted is promising. There are many ideas and questions to be resolved, and in coming to a consensus there will be many pros and cons regarding any suggestions that are made. It is important that the process of finding some answers to questions posed in this chapter not be used as a political football by those who seek recognition. Funds are being provided by the government to develop programs for the gifted. There are many children of difference cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds that bring untapped exceptional abilities. Their opportunity to develop these abilities is important in our new technology society. It is probably time for us to consider that one type of educational arrangement will not be able to fit the many abilities that do not fall within the category of the usual "school house" requirements. Perhaps there is a "John Galt" among us trying very hard to get us to understand. We need to seek him and his ideas. Perhaps geniuses such as those that Galt embraced are among us as we pursue ideas for a more enhanced understanding of giftedness. Let's find them! (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter provides a practitioner's focus on why Cal Taylor matters, as contextualized within other multi-modal systems of understanding giftedness. While there are many psychologists who worked on a theory of intellect, the focus here is on the work that served as a base for other researchers and not to account for what Taylor himself might call the many, varied, and sometimes unusual models that have been developed from those initial efforts. Unlike many other researchers, Calvin Taylor interpreted gifted students as those at the very top of any talent area, and talented students as those who are above average. As a result of this interpretation, he has suggested that nearly all students are talented in al least one way and that if a program was developed to cater for a wide range of talent areas, greater numbers of students would benefit. Taylor argued for a complete reformation of the education system to allow for the development of this diversity of talents displayed by students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

There is no doubt that the Cold War, and specifically America's emphasis on defeating the "red menace," had a significant effect on Western gifted education. And, while it's tempting to think of this period as something of a "golden age" for gifted education—when programs were funded and gifted students were valued—it's more appropriate to think of it as "the best of times... the worst of times." On the one hand, during the Sputnik era, gifted students were indeed valued—for "values" of "gifted" that equaled "productive," or in Renzulli's somewhat-deliberately inflammatory term, "schoolhouse gifted." This was a great time to be gifted—if you were a high-performing, high-achieving student, preferably from a family that valued education and possessed enough of it themselves to support your efforts. But was it enough simply to be brilliant? Yes—and no. Even within the intellectually liberating, and seemingly liberated, environment, culturally imposed taboos still existed. Even a suspicion of homosexuality was enough to get a man exiled from this Eden—and women were unlikely to be invited in at all. The range of tolerable deviation from the norm in the gifted stretched only so far, even among the gifted. Indeed, the very individuality of the highly gifted scientists who were lionized at the time supported and validated a larger-scale cultural belief in individualism; at the same time, the individualistic nature even of the scientific wunderkinder was only permitted its scope so long as it validated, or at least did not conflict with, other broad cultural values. Paradoxically, and sadly, it was precisely these cultural conditions that brought about the end of the "golden age of giftedness" and paved the way for the civil rights movement—a political and social shift from excellence to equity in education, which in turn ultimately paved the way for an examination of the gifted, not merely as culturally-conforming high-producers, but as individuals whose unique intellectual and creative capacities affect every aspect of their lives. But the Sputnik era nonetheless left its mark, for better and for worse, on the American approach to giftedness studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

For more than 100 years, intelligence tests have had a significant role in determining the appropriateness of special programs and classes for certain children. Intelligence is generally accepted to be an important element of giftedness. The research-based models for developing programs and services for gifted and talented students include multiple components for identification, instruction, and curriculum. Several types of assessment are used in each of these components, including intelligence or aptitude tests, observation, interview, portfolio, and check lists for parents, teachers, peers, and the students themselves. This chapter examines the significant characteristics of standardized tests, including intelligence tests, that are used in gifted education, their historical development and contribution to the development of gifted education, and the pros and cons of their continued use in the field today. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The main goal of this chapter is to present general treatment aspects of children suffering both a pain disorder and a mental disorder. We pinpoint the specifics for paediatric pain therapy in children with a pain disorder and concomitant depressive symptomatology, anxiety disorder, trauma disorder, or adjustment disorder. We furthermore discuss the specific therapeutic needs of children who are accused of school truancy or who actually have learning disabilities or intellectual giftedness. Finally, we discuss children with chronic pain also suffering a severe somatic disease or living in highly burdening family systems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Educational programming, clinical practice, and even parenting decisions are shaped and driven by beliefs and philosophies. They may not be overt or articulated, but they underlie actions from everyday behaviors to high-level policy decisions. Because the field of gifted education is characterized by not one, but many belief systems, there is a considerable variation from state to state and school to school in definitions of giftedness, identification of students for special services, programming delivery models, curriculum and instructional practices, and guidance and counseling practices. One can argue the merits of one belief system or philosophy over another, but the key to providing high-quality services to gifted children is to examine carefully the current theory and research in the field; come to a consensus on underlying principles to guide programming, based on sound reflections of what the theory and research indicate is best practice; and then create the components of a program consistent with a set of beliefs derived from careful reflection and decision making based on current knowledge. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

A traditional identification procedure using primarily quantitative assessments is the most widely used approach in the United States. Implementation of this approach, however, is quite diverse and is influenced by federal and state definitions, standards-based practices, state rules and regulations, program characteristics, and implicit or explicit conceptions of giftedness. For the most part, educators who use traditional approaches believe that gifted students exist and form a distinct group, that they can be identified with technically adequate assessments, and that they need to be served to develop their gifts and talents. To implement this approach, all who are involved in the identification process need to receive professional development, including administrators, parents, special educators, and general educators. Without this development, the quality of the overall process is in jeopardy. Moreover, technically adequate assessments need to be selected to ensure adequate ceilings, alignment with-the program, and recognition of all groups, particularly those from special populations. Since traditional assessment approaches do not generally provide sufficient diagnostic information for programming, a diverse group of gifted students is often served within a common program. To meet each student's interests, abilities, and skills more effectively, teachers need to gather more information to tailor the curriculum to each student. Even when well implemented, the traditional approach presents challenges including under-representation of minority students and inability to consider the dynamic nature of giftedness. Therefore, decisions are made on what is assessed, what the student has acquired, rather than what the student might develop. Politically, the process raises important issues; however, even though traditional approaches have serious challenges, they do recognize that gifted and talented students exist. Without the recognition that some students have distinct characteristics, is there a need for professional development, for services, or for resource support? (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)