MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4407187303 · doi:10.1111/aeq.70000

Giftedness and talent: What educators and psychologists need to know By FranzisPreckel, MiriamVock, PaulaOlszewski‐Kubilius. Newburyport: Hogrefe Publishing GmbH. 2024. pp. 242. $57.00 (paperback). ISBN: 9780889376274

2025· article· en· W4407187303 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jesus Villa

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnthropology & Education Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiquePsychology of Development and Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPublishingSociologyPsychologySocial scienceMedia studiesPolitical scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The book Giftedness and Talent: What Educators and Psychologists Need to Know, written by Franzis Preckel, Miriam Vock, and Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, provides a comprehensive examination of giftedness, emphasizing both the theoretical frameworks and research methodologies that intersect within the domains of education and psychology. This review synthesizes the central themes of the book while analyzing its contributions, strengths, and weaknesses from an educator's perspective. Chapter One introduces various theoretical frameworks for understanding giftedness, including unidimensional, multidimensional, and systemic models. The authors argue that giftedness should be viewed as a multifaceted construct, encompassing cognitive, social, and emotional aspects, rather than just a measure of intelligence. This perspective influences both the conceptualization of giftedness and the research methodologies used in the field, setting the stage for later discussions on the identification of gifted students. Chapter Two deepens this theoretical analysis by exploring the methodologies employed in three landmark longitudinal studies of giftedness: the Marburg Giftedness Project, the Terman Study of Giftedness, and the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY). This chapter is crucial for understanding the methodological strengths and challenges of each study, providing insights into how these challenges can be addressed by further advance research in the field. The Terman Study, conducted from 1921 to 1999, employed interviews, questionnaires, and standardized tests to track participants over their lifetimes. While the Terman Study included informal support interventions, it lacked a formal control group. In contrast, the SMPY pioneered the talent search model by identifying top-performing students through above-grade-level testing. This study offered extensive multi-year support, tracking participants' academic and career progress over several decades. The Marburg Giftedness Project, initiated in the 1970s in Germany, included a control group for comparison and utilized teacher nominations as well as IQ tests to identify gifted students. It focused on observational data across cognitive, academic, and psychological domains without direct intervention. Each of the three studies employed a longitudinal approach along with various data collection methods to explore different aspects of giftedness and its outcomes, making significant contributions to the field of gifted education. The book's second half is more oriented to educators; it focuses on how they can recognize and support gifted children. Chapter Three talks about teachers' implicit theories about gifted students, or teachers' beliefs about gifted students' abilities, personality traits, and development. Then, families with gifted children were put in the spotlight—especially the gifted children from lower-income families and ethnic minority groups. Chapter Four presented assessment strategies for the identification of minoritized gifted students as well as strategies for the identification of gifted underachievers. Finally, Chapter Five examines how teachers can support gifted children at schools, describing the four pillars of school-based support for gifted students: (1) differentiation within the classroom, (2) acceleration, (3) enrichment, and (4) special classes and schools. It serves as an essential evidence-based information for novice and veteran teachers serving gifted students across grade levels. Overall, the book's strengths significantly outweigh its weaknesses. One of the strengths is the extensive recompilation of empirical studies in various countries such as the United States, Canada, Austria, and Germany. This comprehensive coverage provides readers with a wealth of knowledge and insights. Another strength of the book is that it fully covers the topics of gifted underachievers, underachievement recognition, and ways to support them, creating a guide for teachers to support these students properly. In addition, while teachers often receive general examples and broad strategies for supporting gifted students, this book stands out by presenting concrete approaches specially designed for gifted learners in all levels of education. For instance, the book describes the adequate formation of groups to challenge gifted students and the proper implementation of differentiation within the classroom as a response to individual characteristics. From an educator's perspective, giftedness can be expressed in different areas or domains, displaying extraordinary capabilities in athletics and visual or performing arts. Therefore, a weakness of the book is that it focuses only on intellectual giftedness, ignoring giftedness in other areas, such as music or sports, which are also important for students in the current public school system. Including sections on these areas could provide a more holistic view of giftedness and address the diverse needs of students in the public-school system. The book contributes to the field of gifted education by highlighting the underrepresentation of gifted students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and ethnic minority groups. This focus on underrepresented students fosters a sense of empathy and inclusivity among the readers, encouraging them to consider the needs of all gifted students. The book generates awareness about the propensity of teachers to overlook gifted underachievers based on the child's age, gender, and social background. As expressed by the authors, “In the US, there is ample research to indicate that students from low-income backgrounds and some ethnic-racial subgroups … are underrepresented in gifted programs” (p. 110). Therefore, the book also suggests methods to help teachers identify underachievement as early as possible by utilizing statistical and nomination methods. As argued in the book, good teachers are essential for the diagnosis and support of gifted students, especially gifted girls, children from low socioeconomic backgrounds, or minority groups who often suffer from false stereotypes. Therefore, the book Giftedness and Talent: What Educators and Psychologists Need to Know is vital for educators since it calls for reflection on teaching practices and analysis of prejudices that impede the recognition of giftedness for specific student groups, including minorities. Jesus Villa is a Lecturer II in Science Education at the University of New Mexico (UNM) and a current student in the STEM Education strand of the Teaching Learning and Culture (TLC) program at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). With 8 years of experience teaching Science and Math across various grade levels, he brings a unique perspective to his work, especially in understanding the needs of gifted and talented students. Jesus combines his passion for education with a love for literature, offering thoughtful and insightful book reviews that bridge the worlds of teaching, reading, and the development of exceptional learners.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,200
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,339
Écart entre enseignants0,328 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnthropology & Education QuarterlyMême sujetPsychology of Development and EducationTravaux en français237 207