Gifted Education Research and Theory

Gifted Education Research and Theory

According to Dimitriadis (2016), research on gifted education is becoming increasingly necessary, with acknowledgment coming from all around the world. Numerous studies have consistently highlighted a substantial gap between existing classroom methodologies and the wealth of insights available in the field of gifted education despite endeavors to provide gifted students with the necessary resources, programs, and instructional materials to nurture their abilities (Dimitriadis, 2016). Assessment techniques must have a scientific foundation and trustworthy standards to bridge the gap between theory, research, and practice (Dimitriadis, 2016, p. 222). By employing these scientifically grounded techniques, gifted programs can support and defend their practices with efficacy and help children meet their needs.

The gap between theory and practice was also mentioned in earlier research by Dai and Chen (2013), who noted that the field lacks a cohesive foundation of agreement on the characteristics of giftedness and how it should be approached, as well as a coherent conceptual structure in theory and research (p. 151). The examination of over 1,000 empirical studies revealed a glaring absence of norms and canons—that is, guidelines directing, arranging, and coordinating research endeavors—which further supported this lack of precision (Dai & Chen, 2013, p. 151). In addition, teachers tasked with educating pupils whose exceptionality can be perceived and is viewed differently from culture to culture employ a disorganized and cohesive collection of methods due to this lack of structure and cohesiveness.

Sternberg (2010), referenced in Dai and Chen (2013), introduced the concept of giftedness as a social construct, stating that an individual gifted in one culture would not be considered gifted in another, primarily because different cultures tend to emphasize and value different attributes while downplaying others (p. 152). Scholars like Dai and Chen (2013) have noted that for students to succeed in gifted education, there needs to be a paradigm linked with giftedness due to the concept of giftedness being a social construct. The paradigm of giftedness is made up of four main components. It is defined as a way of thinking or doing that permeates thinking, feeling, and doing in a field to the point where divergence from it is quickly and easily discovered (Dai & Chen, 2013, p. 152).

The what, why, who, and how of this giftedness paradigm ensures that gifted education and giftedness are understood clearly; the research underscores the essential role of services in laying the foundation for success, delineating a clear distinction among the components outlined in the paradigm and ensuring the credibility and dependability of practices. Lastly, gifted paradigms ensure that assessment procedures not only track progress within gifted programs but also implement measures, adjustments, or interventions to attain desired goals (Dai & Chen, 2013, p. 152). The giftedness paradigm not only clarifies the differences between what, why, who, and how, but it also emphasizes that for educational and practitioner tools to be truly effective, they must be conceptualized and applied with faithfulness, integrity, and originality (Dai & Chen, 2013, p. 164).

Like Dai and Chen (2013), Dimitriadis (2016) found that paradigms designed to assist gifted education students were ineffective due to their reliance on subject-specific models or frameworks. This approach stemmed from the need for content-specific accommodations for gifted students in educational settings, as well as the necessity for highly skilled teachers for successful implementation (Dimitriadis, 2016, p. 225). In addition to lacking the kind of rigor and systematic quality that justifies the term paradigmatic, gifted education hinders students from continuing to develop the skills that served as indicators of their giftedness because it lacks a clear understanding of how to approach the population of students its programs are intended for (Dai & Chen, 2013, p. 164).

Research is essential to close the performance gap between existing gifted education practices and program potential. Teachers need to acquire the requisite skills to ensure that gifted education programs are robust and tailored to meet the needs of learners, akin to the differentiation seen in special education programs catering to students with disabilities. This will increase gifted education programs’ effectiveness, defensibility, and sustainability.

There are different ways an education leader can use evidence to help overcome the gap and improve a gifted program’s effectiveness, defensibility, and sustainability. These ways include conducting a thorough program assessment, aligning the curriculum, enhancing the instructions, providing professional development, involving families and parents, and collaborating with other stakeholders. The multidimensional paradigms that underpin the concept of giftedness and direct its identification assume a relationship between intrinsic factors and environmental stimuli. The theoretical underpinnings of psychological research on the diverse array of individual intelligences, emphasizing varied learning profiles and domains of exceptional achievement, can be traced back to its foundational roots. As a result, identifying gifted students becomes a mediation of case-specific procedures selected based on individual characteristics. These methods can vary from employing accredited tools in a professional setting to guidelines for observation conducted by family and school personnel, as well as checklists for self-assessment or nomination by peers.

The field of gifted teaching is demanding and fulfilling, requiring ongoing development and adjustment. When it comes to gifted education, educators, administrators, and parents all consider ways to improve the curriculum and accommodate their children’s wide range of demands. Research gaps include the examination of the causes of weak peer connection as well as the creation of prosocial educational intervention approaches that target the entire class. This is because improved socializing opportunities and peer acknowledgment rank among the fundamental demands of the talented population, as the review makes clear. To concentrate educational intervention on the entire class community and the exceptional student, examining how the peer group represents and views the gifted student would be crucial. This would support gifted children’s emotional and academic needs, encouraging prosocial conduct and reducing the frequent dangers of alienation and isolation. A key objective for individual growth and well-being, and eventually for worldwide societal innovation and flourishing, is fully utilizing each student’s talents.

Dimitriadis (2016) made several recommendations for enhancing gifted education, noting that the success of talented children depends on systematic initial training followed by continual in-service training for gifted educators and practitioners (p. 233). Research by Dai and Chen (2013) and Dimitriadis (2016) agree that well-articulated programs provide knowledge related to the circumstances in which particular approaches can and should be used, in addition to educating professionals about best practices. As supported by Dimitriadis (2016), besides creating situations where there’s a lack of customization to adequately cater to the needs of students who require ample chances for advanced learning, a deficiency in comprehension or groundwork for establishing gifted education initiatives results in educating students who are not adequately stimulated to achieve their utmost potential.

References

Dai, D. Y., & Chen, F. (2013). Three paradigms of gifted education: In search of conceptual clarity in research and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(3), 151-168.

Dimitriadis, C. (2016). Gifted programs cannot be successful without gifted research and theory: Evidence from practice with gifted students of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(3), 221-236.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Review the article in the Learn section.

Research consistently highlights the gap between the practice in schools and the developments in gifted theory and research. How can you, as an education leader, use evidence to help overcome this gap to improve the effectiveness, defensibility, and sustainability of a gifted program at your organization (or desired professional role upon completing your doctorate) to meet the needs of gifted students?

Gifted Education Research and Theory

Use evidence to support your assertions. Include personal and practical applications for practice. After reading the above-required article, locate 1 additional journal article pertaining to gifted education research and theory. This 3-4-page paper should be written in the current APA format, contain a title page and reference page (not included in the page count), and include a minimum of 2 citations (1 from each of the 2 journal articles). Only paraphrasing and summarizing may be used for citations.