Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education最新文献

{"title":"Psychological Well-Being of Students With High Abilities and Their School’s Ecology: Is There a Relationship?","authors":"Susan Burkett-McKee, B. Knight, Michelle A. Vanderburg","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1923593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923593","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There is a growing acknowledgment of the relationship between students’ psychological well-being and educational success. However, relatively few studies have focused on a connection between the psychological well-being of students who have high abilities and their school ecology. School-based experiences associated with interactions involving students, individual characteristics, contextual aspects and time-related factors are explored as they relate to the psychological well-being of students with high abilities. Psychological well-being in this article refers to students’ motivation, ability to cope with stressors, their expectations for the future, their involvement in the community, and their sense of life satisfaction. This position paper invites researchers, educators, and other school-based stakeholders to consider the importance of the interplay between students’ psychological well-being and the ecology in which they work.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923593","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47030750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ethical Leader Promoting Human Rights: An Interview With Nonlinear Funding Innovator Richard Murray","authors":"Don Ambrose","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1923108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923108","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923108","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59620399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A 4W Model of Wisdom and Giftedness in Wisdom","authors":"R. Sternberg, Sareh Karami","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1923596","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923596","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We propose that wisdom should be considered in understanding, identifying, and developing skills of thought translated into action in gifted children and adults. First, we review some of the history of the gifted field and conclude that ideas about understanding, identification, and instruction are largely obsolete and based on assumptions that might have seemed valid in the early 20th century but that now are known not to be. Second, we discuss wisdom—what it is and how it is structured. Third, we discuss different kinds of wisdom and why they matter. We further discuss “4W’s” of wisdom. Fourth, we discuss the role of wisdom in the identification of gifted individuals. Fifth and finally, we conclude that our emphasis in the understanding, identification, and development of gifted individuals needs to be expanded to include wisdom, and certainly not just IQ.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923596","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45207885","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Curriculum and Creative Leadership: An Interview With Bronwyn MacFarlane","authors":"Bronwyn Macfarlane, Suzanna E. Henshon","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1930233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1930233","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1930233","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45574724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Teacher Perceptions of the Primary Education Thinking Skills Program","authors":"Julia Hujar, M. Matthews","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1923594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923594","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Primary Education Thinking Skills program (PETS) was implemented in three third grade classes and two kindergarten classes in a Title I school. The PETS program is a Talent Development program designed to teach students critical thinking skills and other gifted behaviors with the expressed goal of the program’s creators that the regular education teacher could then use the student behaviors elicited by the PETS curriculum to recommend them for the gifted screening process. Thus, our focus was to determine teacher attitudes regarding the ease of implementation, effectiveness of the program, and potential changes in their perceptions of high-ability students. These data were collected via semistructured interviews and analyzed qualitatively using content analysis. Results indicated that most teachers found the program easy to implement and perceived it as effective for a diverse group of learners.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1923594","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44745886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Openness to Experience and Overexcitabilities, a Jangle Fallacy With Ethical Implications: A Response to Barry Grant","authors":"M. A. Vuyk, B. Kerr","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881749","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881749","url":null,"abstract":"A jangle fallacy is the assumption that measures are different by having different names, although they assess the same underlying construct (Gonzalez et al., in press). This is the case of openness to experience and overexcitabilities, which we affirmed before (Vuyk et al., 2016a, 2016b) and Grant (2021) critiqued. We respond to his claims, insisting that gifted education ought to embrace openness to experience and the Five-Factor Model (FFM) when referring to personality. Studying construct overlap is less common than developing new measures, yet they should be equally common; assessments of potential jangle fallacies include a close study of measure content, factor analysis, multitraitmultimethod matrices, incremental prediction on chosen outcomes, and replications (Gonzalez et al., in press). A multitrait-multimethod matrix was impossible as the Overexcitability Questionnaire-II was the only available instrument. We examined the content of measures, recommended future replications, and focused on factor analysis to determine dimensionality. Grant (2021) incorrectly insisted that in our study, only the model with separate openness facets and OEs could support our hypothesis of openness and OEs representing the same latent constructs. However, the model where each openness and OE pairs loaded as one dimension also represents the equivalence of constructs in factor analysis. We had to operationalize openness and OEs using available instruments, even with the OEQ-II flaws. Grant (2021) regards their common variance of 58% to 75% as supposedly low and highlights the 3% of psychomotor OE after we had already mentioned the overlap was not as expected. A nonpeer-reviewed technical report on IQ tests explains that variances, which are group scores, mean that individual scores on one measure might differ from scores on the other measure. Grant cited this as evidence that “OEs and OtE facet pairs are different constructs sharing common variance” (p. 12; italics added) which does not logically follow. All we can conclude from McGraw’s statement is that measures, even measures of the same construct might differ among individuals even with high correlations; McGraw did not state this is evidence that constructs differ. Openness studies present many forms of organizing the construct; one is the NEO which aligns seamlessly with the five OEs. Other Openness models would have less facetlevel alignment; for example, Woo et al. (2014) with facets of intellectual efficiency, ingenuity, curiosity, esthetics, tolerance, and depth, which do not match directly with every OE yet have a parallel to some and to the general concept. As such, the argument that our study is without merit because two facets and one OE do not directly correspond is flawed; it still seems to be a jangle fallacy. Note a recent example in a meta-analytic correlation of .84 among the disputed construct of grit and the FFM factor of conscientiousness; even though measures did not “perfectly” over","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881749","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46903239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Innovative Leadership: An Interview With Steven I. Pfeiffer","authors":"Steven I. Pfeiffer, Suzanna E. Henshon","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881748","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881748","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43284517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From the Editor’s Desk","authors":"Don Ambrose","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881753","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881753","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881753","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49082656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Twice-Exceptional Students of Mathematics in England: What Do the Teachers Know?","authors":"Christos Dimitriadis, J. Georgeson, Paty Paliokosta, J. Van Herwegen","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881851","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although they have the potential to excel, twice-exceptional (2e) students of mathematics do not usually have this opportunity as their special educational abilities, and special needs, are often misdiagnosed or “missed” diagnosed in schools due to the teachers’ lack of knowledge. The study explored this issue using an electronic survey for primary school teachers in four local authorities in England. It was planned as a pilot study to gather insights from a small number of schools aiming to identify areas for further study and larger-scale research. When comparing responses from teachers with gifted-related training and those without, the study found some knowledge of specific types of 2e students among both groups of teachers, but no significant difference between them. This raised concerns about the effectiveness of the training, as well as identifying areas that need further and more systematic research.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881851","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45306659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Overexcitabilities and Openness to Experience Are Not the Same: A Critique of a Study and Reflections on Theory, Ethics, and Truth","authors":"B. Grant","doi":"10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A recent study claiming to provide a basis for gifted education to drop the construct of overexcitabilities in favor of the construct of openness to experience and align itself with the Five Factor Model and a talent development perspective on gifted education is shown to be without merit. An analysis shows that the study supports the conclusion that the constructs are less similar than they appear to be from descriptions in the literature. This raises questions about the evidence needed for a field to drop constructs and the role of theory and research in guiding practice. It is argued that proposals for a field to change direction must be very strong and that gifted education should pay increased attention to justifying ethical claims.","PeriodicalId":46979,"journal":{"name":"Roeper Review-A Journal on Gifted Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02783193.2021.1881852","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41697174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}