MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W357447630

Making Great Kids Greater: Easing the Burden of Being Gifted

2009· article· en· W357447630 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janice M. Novello

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œDelta Kappa Gamma bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGifted educationAgency (philosophy)PsychologyPopulationSpecial educationMathematics educationMedical educationPedagogySociologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AN INTERVIEW WITH DR. DOROTHY SISK CONDUCTED This interview is the third in a new series initiated by the members of the Bulletin 's 2008-2010 Editorial Board. The goal of the series is to feature interviews conducted with Delta Kappa Gamma members or other educational leaders on a topic related to the theme of the issue. Gifted Education The National Association for Gifted Children (2009) defines children as who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, and who need services and activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities, while the Elementary and Secondary Education Act defines children as children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services and activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities (U. S Department of Education, 2002). Although no federal agency or organization collects statistics on the number of students in the United States, the National Association for Gifted Students (NAGC) estimates that there are more than 3 million school aged academically children which translates to approximately 6% of the population. No single program has been implemented to serve the special needs of these children, and each state and in some cases each school district designs and implements a program for its own students. Services may be provided in a number of ways, including, but not limited to: * Part time class with like ability students, regular schedule the remainder of the time. * Accommodations in the regular classroom * Full time class with students of like ability * Acceleration of content * Grade advancement Dr. Sisk's Background in Gifted Education Dorothy Sisk is currently the Program Director for the Texas Governor's Program for Gifted Children. She holds the Lamar University's Conn Chair for Gifted Education in the College of Education and Human Development, a position she has held since 1989. In 2009, she was honored as the Distinguished Faculty Lecturer. She served in Washington, D.C. as Director of the Office of Gifted and Talented Education and was previously a professor of Special Education and Gifted Education at the University of South Florida. She has authored a number of books about children and has lectured all over the world on their behalf. In August, 2009, she lectured at the World Council for the Gifted and Talented in Vancouver, Canada on the unique perceptions of kids and the discrepancies between their mental age and their chronological age, which could lead to feelings of inadequacy. A Career Devoted to Children Who Are Gifted Dr. Sisk, what led to your involvement in Gifted Education? I became interested in education in my very first year of teaching third grade in Garden Grove, California, in which I taught a cluster group of students, above average students and average students. Across the hall, my colleague had a class of above average students, average students, and students below average. She was an accomplished musician and would give impromptu concerts for all of us before or after school, and there was a constant flow of students back-and-forth from our classrooms, as we shared our talents. My students were studying famous authors and were eager to share their findings with our companion class. This experience taught me that gifted are enabling strategies for all kids. The pace and product may be very different, but the active, responsive classroom works for all abilities. I was very fortunate to be selected as part of a team of ten teachers who participated in a special project in the district that replicated the Cleveland Major Work Class. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œDelta Kappa Gamma bulletinSame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207