Snowflake-giftedness present for LRND 6820
Please answer these questions for this weeks discussion on giftedness….
1.Do you agree that giftedness is made, not born? Why, please explain.
2.Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research.? Please support your response.
Posted by greenm on October 29th, 2010 at 4:51 pm
1)
I do agree with the authors that our environment and how we were raised is a very large determining factor in giftedness. However, I do not think we can completely deny the genetic aspect of question. They claim, “Instead of considering nature and nurture as separate, independent forces, the CED model considers relatively endogenous and exogenous forces jointly produce specific developmental outcomes, which feed into further development (see Dai & Coleman, 2005).”
Which seems like a neat way to dodge around the question, but for the sake of playing Devil’s Advocate how would they solve this problem: Alcoholic mother has two identical twins. Both are raised equally, given the same amount of attention, abilities to excel, and opportunities. One of the two is perfectly normal in every way, but his sibling is just a little bit slower due to very minor brain damage caused by the mother’s drinking. One is deemed “gifted” and excels in school and the other takes remedial courses.
2)
I would agree that more research is probably needed to determine true giftedness. There is already a push to lower the standards towards determining who is gifted by dropping the required IQ level, as seen in this article:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08079/866179-298.stm
Granted, the authors take the view that giftedness is quite varied, but it seems that by lowering the bar even more we will lose sight of what it really means to be gifted. The meaning will become eroded and sooner or later anyone who is of normal ability will be considered gifted in some way.
-Aaron
November 2, 2010 @ 1:16 pmAaron, I do like a Devil’s Advocate :). I totally get your point with the twins scenario, and do think that giftedness is a combination of both natural ability and fostered opportunity. Unfortunately, we could play the “what if” game for an eternity, which admittedly sometimes I torture myself in doing! I would agree this is why continued research is needed to progress.
November 3, 2010 @ 8:52 amThe scenario that you provided gives an interesting example of how natural ability does have a great impact on giftedness.
November 3, 2010 @ 8:14 pm[…] please view Misty’s overview presentation and respond to her discussion questions via her blog. Don’t forget to write and share your summary blog posts by Sunday night synthesizing […]
November 2, 2010 @ 10:26 pmDo you believe that giftedness is made not born?
For the most part I agree with Dai and Rezulli that certain facets determine our giftedness while our giftedness must be nurtured. As was described in selective affinity, humans often have a strong or obsessive interest in something due to either exogenous or endogenous factors. However, those interests need to be enhanced and developed to master the competency of that knowledge, skill or disposition. In addition once we develop a high level of expertise we must continue to maintain an innovative spirit. I believe giftedness is both nature and nurture.
Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research?
November 3, 2010 @ 8:35 amAbsolutely: As was described often times giftedness is often determined in conventional ways with standardized achievement and aptitude tests. These types of conventional and biased tests limit the recognition of other forms of giftedness. There are as many types of giftedness as there are students and it is impossible to identify each. As each person evolves through life, matures and has different experiences different interests and gifts emerge, change and grow. Identifying a child’s strengths and weakness and helping to improve their weaknesses, while develop their strengths is most important in facilitating learning.
Melissa, I agree with you giftedness is a connection of natural ability and what is supported throughout our life environment. I kind of think of the movie the “Blind Side” as an example…..the football star had obvious gifted talent, however it was not realized until his environment changed. It makes me wonder how many others never get the chance to achieve their potentional.
November 3, 2010 @ 8:57 am1.Do you agree that giftedness is made, not born? Why, please explain.
Yes, giftedness is made. I believe that this topic is much like similar topics such as leaders, born or made? Everyone has the capacity to learn, the key is the delivery method and the ambition or motivation of the leaner.
2.Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research.? Please support your response.
I suppose that we have to define exactly what does gifted mean? Gifted academically or gifted according to the abilities of the person? There needs to be more research into the topic, particularly what is gifted? For example, people who are autistic are vey intelligent people but they are unable to communicate in the same way ‘typical’ people do. Does this make them gifted in relation to their peers or everyone?
November 3, 2010 @ 2:01 pmYou bring up a great point inquiring as to how we are going to define gifted. Is it relational to like peers or in general to entire whole…. That is a tough question. I think our views vary, research is important to help clarify.
November 4, 2010 @ 9:30 amGinnette, I like what you say here about how to identify giftedness. It could be identified academically, but there are so many other gifts. I used to provide art enrichment therapy for disabled adults and it was amazing to observe a few who could not do for themselves, but who had an artistic gift. One I remember specifically could hardly speak, but could draw and paint amazingly.
November 4, 2010 @ 10:12 amI think that Ginnette brings up a great point about non-academic types of giftedness. Ones that most likely cannot be identified through the use of standardized tests. This brought up the following question….Should the education world be concerned with non-academic forms of giftedness? Or is it only their concern to deal with traditional analytical giftedness?
Ian
November 4, 2010 @ 2:38 pmWhy would non academic giftedness be included? I believe the non academic things also influence the academic portions of things. For example, I know someone who has a non verbal learning disorder, but she is an amazing artist. The giftedness of her artistry enables her to tap into more academic skills…she uses math and science to mix paints or colors and measure to get the correct sizes or formats of what she sees in her head to what everyone else gets to see.
As learnign designers, we have to take all of it into account in order to ensure we can tap into every possible scenario to motivate and culture success in the other areas.
November 5, 2010 @ 11:43 amDo you believe that giftedness is made, not born?
While I do agree with many of the points of the article, that external or environmental factors have an effect, and that drive and practice help develop mastery of a skill set, I do believe that giftedness is a combination of our natural ability and our environment.
Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research?
Yes. Like Melissa mentioned, most of the time standardized testing is the primary way that giftedness is determined. While they can provide some accuracy, other methods should be used as well in order to provide more accurate results and capture unconventional forms of giftedness.
November 3, 2010 @ 8:12 pmRachel,
I agree with your thoughts that other forms of testing for giftedness ought to be implemented in our educational systems. To me standardized tests are for testing giftedness in analytical test takers. These types of tests will not show more creative types of giftedness, such as music and other artistic types of giftedness. I think that the other non-traditional forms of testing should be used in unison with standardized tests in hopes of acknowledging multiple types of giftedness/talent.
Ian
November 4, 2010 @ 2:34 pmDo you agree that giftedness is made, not born? Why, please explain.
The attempts to define giftedness refer to “inborn” attributes, lacking a better term, is intelligence. Using this definition, we can equate intelligence with a heritage lineage. A liken exists toward a leader – Is one born or learned. Hence, the answer is yes to a gifted person. Giftedness can be inborn or acquired.
Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research? Please support your response.
A question exist, can one ever have enough research on a given subject matter? It is important to study the characteristics of gifted children with an open mind. Joseph Renzulli (1986) stated that gifted behavior reflects an interaction among three basic clusters of human traits: above-average general and/or specific abilities, high levels of task commitment (motivation), and high levels of creativity. According to Renzulli, gifted and talented children are those who possess or are capable of developing this composite of traits and applying them to any potentially valuable area of human performance. Barbara Clark’s book, Growing Up Gifted (1988), explores the characteristics of giftedness in depth. Clark presents an exhaustive list of characteristics under five major headings: “Cognitive (thinking), Affective (feeling), Physical, Intuitive, and Societal.” In addition, the latest research from Susan K. Johnsen, Baylor University, Clara Hemphill, founder, Insideschools.org, Joseph S. Renzulli, University of Connecticut, Tonya R. Moon University of Virginia,, and Bige Doruk, founder, Bright Kids NYC provide significant data to collaborate Dai and Renxulli’s theory. Specifically, the presence or absence of a gift/talent is dynamic, not static. If as Renzulli states, “giftedness” is developed, students may not necessarily demonstrate their abilities on a test that is administered at one point in time. Specific interventions need to be made available for talents to emerge, which is particularly true for children from poverty and may not have had learning resources at home or been involved in out-of-school enrichment activities.
November 3, 2010 @ 9:20 pmA need for serving young gifted students and intelligence issues is essential. An identification procedure that include nonbiased instruments for universal screening incorporating quantitative (standardized intelligence and achievement tests) and qualitative assessments (portfolios of work) and use early intervention strategies, which develop talents and gifts.
1.Do you agree that giftedness is made, not born? Why, please explain.
For the most part, I agree that giftedness is made, not born. I agree with some of the other classmates in the sense that some aspects are genetic, but I think the “potential” for giftedness is a large portion of the genetic aspect. I think in the long run, it is utilizing both what you were born with, the skills that you acquire and how you put everything to use.
2.Are Dai and Renzulli onto something with their theory and indication that gifted development and delivery needs further research.? Please support your response.
Again, I agree with my classmates that “giftedness” can be situational unless specifically defined. Further research is definitely needed, but this may be a worthwhile topic.
November 5, 2010 @ 1:55 am