Su búsqueda

The researcher uses a postmodernist-influenced framework of open-ended questions, interactive discussion of responses, and other general interview guidelines from Seidman (1991), and additional gay-specific interview suggestions from Kong, Mahoney, and Plummer (2002), in his inquiry with four artistically-gifted, high-school-aged, gay and bisexual adolescent males. He investigates the applicability of the social and emotional needs previously affirmed in Friedrichs and Etheridge's three other research groups (1991, 1992, 1993.) Similar to his previous, more traditional research stages, the investigator implements frequently-used definitions of "giftedness" and "gay and bisexual youth," and draws on many pre-set interview questions as the focus of the research. He uses traditional data coding guidelines from Neuendorf (2002) to find summary themes in student responses. Again, similar to the past, current subjects' answers are described in terms of whether the majority of respondents affirm each hypothesized socially-constructed need and each proposed helpful approach. Differently from the three earlier stages, however, the present study uses postmodernist principles to dig deeper into the content themes evident in the youths' responses, reporting the contextual whos, whats, whens, wheres, and hows associated with their needs and the fulfillment of those needs. The current investigation also adds a postmodern analysis on the overall content themes derived from the students, using the framework of Foucault (1977)-when the subjects' responses illustrate mostly disenchantment and unmet social and emotional needs-and the lens of Kumoshiro (2000)-when the youths' answers reveal general student engagement and fulfilled needs. The summary of content themes reveals that the previous stages' needs and approaches are affirmed by the present subjects for some, if not all, secondary grade levels. The postmodern analysis shows six particularly common themes in the subjects' comments, including behavioral priorities placed over time on identity development, resistance, construction of needs, dialoguing, resilience, and fluidity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

This study sought to determine preservice teachers' beliefs regarding the role of "giftedness" in writing achievement. Specifically it sought to reveal whether preservice teachers believed writing a skill that could be taught and learned or a "gift," akin to natural talent or genius, that certain students are simply born with. The 192 preservice teachers who participated in the study included all students enrolled in eight sections of an introductory language arts course offered at a public university in upstate New York. The majority of the participants were full-time students in their junior or senior year of college. The research took place in two phases. The first phase involved an administration of Palmquist and Young's (1992) Writing Questionnaire. Items in the questionnaire determined the extent to which respondents believed writing to be dependent on "giftedness" versus the extent to which they believed writing a skill that can be taught and learned. Additional items required respondents to make self-assessments of their own writing skills. Four "extreme" subgroups, representing 66 participants, were formed based on the questionnaire scores: (a) Preservice teachers making high self-assessments of their writing ability, (b) Preservice teachers making low self-assessments of their writing ability, (c) Preservice teachers with high levels of belief in the notion of "giftedness" in writing, and (d) Preservice teachers with low levels of belief in the notion of "giftedness" in writing. A content analysis of these participants' Literacy Histories (Judy & Judy, 1983) made up the second phase of the research. References were coded according to three attributional categories: (a) ability/"giftedness," (b) effort/"learnability," and (c) influential others. Results indicated that preservice teachers emphasized the role of "effort" in writing achievement over that of "giftedness." However, some preservice teachers viewed "effort" in negative terms and admitted that they consciously chose not to expend great amounts of it in their writing. Results also indicated that preservice teachers believed "influential others"-teachers, parents, and siblings-to have had a substantial impact on their level of writing achievement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

While there is a growing awareness of the co-occurrence of giftedness and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), little is known about the clinical presentation of ADHD in intellectually gifted children. Current diagnostic decisions with this subpopulation are made employing procedures and norms developed using a nonexceptional population. However, it is unknown whether this common practice is appropriate. This study explored how intellectually gifted children perform on three commonly used measures of ADHD, specifically: (a) the Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA); (b) the Conners' Teacher Rating Scale, Revised-Long Form (CTS); and (c) the Conners' Parent Rating Scale, Revised-Long Form (CPS). Children who met traditional criteria for giftedness (N = 90) were obtained from nearby public schools. Each was administered the TOVA and their parents and teachers completed a Conners' rating scale. The performance of these children was compared to normative data. It was hypothesized that: (a) gifted children would perform significantly better on the TOVA than normative children, and (b) no differences would be found between the performance of gifted children and the normative sample on both the CTS and CPS. The hypotheses were partially supported by the findings. Gifted children performed better on three of the five TOVA variables, but only for the younger children in the sample. In addition, no evidence of differences in scores was found between the gifted children and the normative sample on the CTS and CPS. The findings do, however, address the underlying clinical question regarding the appropriateness of using the normative data provided for the TOVA, CTS and CPS to assess ADHD in intellectually gifted children. Ultimately, the performance differences found for gifted children on the TOVA suggest that alternate TOVA norms are likely needed for younger ages. A rationale for adjusting the TOVA norms is proposed, and a few simple "rules of thumb" for transforming the age-based are summarized in an Adjustment Matrix. The differences on the CTS and CPS were found mostly for variables unrelated to ADHD and suggest that the normative data for the Conners' Scales can be used when assessing ADHD in gifted children. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Views of giftedness have evolved from unilateral notions to multilateral conceptions. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the psychological validity of the three-mathematical minds model (M3) developed by the author. The M3 is based on multilateral conceptions of giftedness to identify mathematically gifted students. Teachings of Poincare and Polya about mathematical ability as well as the theory of successful intelligence proposed by Sternberg (1997) provided the initial framework in the development of the M3. A secondary purpose was to examine the psychological validity of the three-level cognitive complexity model (C3) developed by the author. The C3 is based on studies about expertise to differentiate among gifted, above-average and average-below-average students at three levels. The author developed a test of mathematical ability based on the M 3 and C3 with the collaboration of mathematicians. The test was administered to 291 middle school students from four different schools. The reliability analysis indicated that the M3 had a .72 coefficient as a consistency of scores. Exploratory factor analysis yielded three separate components explaining 55% of the total variance. The convergent validity analysis showed that the M3 had medium to high-medium correlations with teachers' ratings of students' mathematical ability (r = .45) and students' ratings of their own ability (r = .36) and their liking of mathematics (r = .35). Item-subtest-total score correlations ranged from low to high. Some M3 items were found to be homogenous measuring only one aspect of mathematical ability, such as creative mathematical ability, whereas some items were found to be good measures of more than one facet of mathematical ability. The C3 accounted for 41% of variance in item difficulty (R square = .408, p < .001). Item difficulty ranged from .02 to .93 with a mean of .29. The analysis of the discrimination power of the three levels of the C3 revealed that level-two and level-three problems differentiated significantly among three ability levels, but level-one problems did not differentiate between gifted and above average students. The findings provide partial evidence for the psychological validity of both the M3 and C3 for the identification of mathematically gifted students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

At various times throughout history men of genius have been viewed either as mad or as sane and superior to the general population. This Project Demonstrating Excellence suggests that neither of these extreme views is correct and presents the view that giftedness is the product of a developmental process which involves the synergistic interaction of biological, psychological, and social/environmental forces. While this process may be facilitated by environmental stimulation and support, it may also be inhibited or arrested by oppressive socialization practices which stress conformity to average norms and promote a competitive quest for goods and power. Results of a survey of the life experiences and psychotherapeutic needs of 254 intellectually gifted adults and supplementary data derived from a small pilot survey of 18 psychotherapists suggest that many members of the gifted minority experience painful problems, including feelings of difference, interpersonal difficulties, and social isolation during adulthood as well as during childhood and adolescence. The survey results also suggest that gifted women experience difficulties as a result of their deviance from traditional sex-role norms and expectations. The survey data pertaining to psychotherapy are consistent with other research data demonstrating that positive therapeutic outcomes tend to be associated with therapist variables which include empathy, genuineness, positive regard for patients, nonpossessive warmth, and therapists' intensity and intimacy in therapeutic relationships with patients of all levels of intelligence. At the same time, the data suggest that psychotherapists must be highly intelligent and self-accepting enough not to experience feelings of threat, intimidation, awe, envy, competitiveness, and inadequacy when working with gifted patients and clients. Further analysis of the survey results suggests that therapists also need to be aware of the differing perceptions, experiences, problems, and needs of gifted adults in order to be optimally effective in working with them. These findings are placed within a biopsychosocial context, and recommendations are offered which call for further research and multimodal, integrative interventions on behalf of members of the gifted minority both in psychotherapy and elsewhere. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Gifted adults with learning disabilities (GALD) are a population that is often overlooked, undiagnosed, or misdiagnosed by educators. Because of their often "hidden" condition, these individuals are frequently troubled with a host of psychosocial problems. This study sought to identify unique characteristics of the GALD population with the hope of developing criteria to aid in diagnoses. A thorough search was conducted for relevant literature that examines characteristics of GALD as well as characteristics of the learning disabled (LD)-only and gifted-only populations (among others). The researcher developed an instrument that looked at how the characteristics clustered or grouped into various categories and how they discriminated among the three populations studied. The instrument was sent to an expert in the field to examine content validity. A pilot study was conducted to look at face validity. A field test was conducted at three major universities which supplied subjects for the three population groups of interest (GALD, LD-only, and gifted-only). The research question that guided this study was: "Can discriminations be made among college students who are GALD, LD-only, and gifted-only?" Parametric and nonparametric analyses were conducted. The results showed a clear distinction between the gifted group and both the GALD and LD groups. Some of the statements used in this instrument may help in the identification and characterization of certain individuals who are GALD. Analysis of the composite variables revealed that there were statistically significant differences between the students with a learning disability only and GALD when compared on a few items that characterized giftedness. Discriminant analysis was useful in understanding the distinctions. Results from a discriminant analysis led to the ability to predict group membership at significantly better-than-chance rates. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)