Preservice Teachers’ Perceptions of Giftedness

Amy Morgan Schmidt, M.Ed.Young Eun Son, M.A.Ed.

“The path the person takes to become a teacher of gifted learners is significant: personal background, preservice training, and professional reflections all help prepare the teacher for her task” (Graffam, 2006, p. 119).

Purpose The purpose of our study was to

investigate factors related to the perceptions and values of preservice teachers towards gifted education, in terms of understanding giftedness and the teaching of gifted students.

What is Giftedness? Gifted individuals are those who demonstrate

outstanding levels of aptitude (defined as an exceptional ability to reason and learn) or competence (documented performance or achievement in top 10% or rarer) in one or more domains.  Domains include any structured area of activity with its own symbol system (e.g., mathematics, music, language) and/or set of sensorimotor skills (e.g., painting, dance, sports) (NAGC, 2008).

What is Giftedness? Gifted students have unique and

varied educational and emotional needs that are exhibited during their lives and ideally recognized, developed, and supported by parents, teachers, and mentors (Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011).

What the Research Says… Myths and Misperceptions Lack of understanding differences among gifted minorities and

low-SES Lack of preparation in teacher training. Lack of awareness going into the classroom. Directly affects students’ experiences in gifted programming Affects nomination for services

What the Research Says Not emphasized in teacher preparation

programs Professional development and

coursework is positive- pedagogy and teacher effectiveness

Perceptions and values may not change

Methodology Social constructivist or interpretivism

(Creswell, 2013).

Theoretical framework based on Gagné and Nadeau’s 1985 attitudes instrument, Opinions about the Gifted and Their Education

Case Study Multi-case study

› 3 participants› Compare the perceptions, beliefs, and

values of the participants Interview and observe 3 preservice

teachers Participants also served as teachers

assistants at an enrichment program

Participants 3 undergraduate or graduate

preservice teachers 2 began their student teacher 1 in her senior year All three gifted or high achieving (not a

requirement, just a coincidence).

Interviews Pre- and post-interviews Participants participated in these

interviews at least twice, 6 hours. Participants were interviewed before

and after the program.

Observations Participants were observed at least two

hours while working as teachers assistants› One hour the first time› One hour the second time

We used an observation protocol based on the William and Mary Classroom Observation Scales.

Results Gagné and Nadeau’s instrument:

› Needs and support Resistance to objections Rejection Ability grouping School acceleration

Historical context› Social value

Main Themes Historical context and self-concept

as a gifted student. Awareness of needs of gifted

students Values and beliefs toward gifted

students and gifted education. Changes to Values and Challenges

to Perceptions and Beliefs

Historical Context and Self Concept

Background and experiences influenced by and reflected in their views of giftedness.

All academically oriented, successful All influenced by family to do well 2 of 3 formally identified as gifted 2 of the 3 had little interaction with

non-gifted students

Awareness of Needs of Gifted Students

Consistent with literature Some awareness of intellectual and socio-

emotional needs Some misconceptions Preconceived notion of how to teach students Believe in differentiation Believe gifted students’ needs can be met in

an inclusion classroom 2 expected good behavior from gifted

students.

Values and Beliefs Agreed gifted or accelerated studies

beneficial to them All take issue with the label “gifted” Family value and perception influential

to academic success 2 noted differences between gifted and

non-gifted 2 believe gifted programs provides

better education

Changes to Values and Beliefs

Based on observations and interviews There was little change in gifted

teaching behaviors 2 were surprised at negative behaviors

of gifted students Rose improved teaching behavior

Implications Teacher preparation classes inadequate Novice teachers are not prepared to

meet the diverse needs of their future students

Suggestions Advocates at all levels need to be

aware of the limited training Implement incoming teachers

professional development Work with teacher education programs

Limitations Diversity Short time frame Small sample

ReferencesArchambault, F. X.,Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Zhang, W., & Emmons, C. L. (1993). Classroom practices used with gifted third and fourth grade students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 103-119.Bangel, N. (2004). Growth as a professional through teaching in Super Saturday (Unpublished master’s thesis). Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.Bangel, N. J., Moon, S. M., & Capobianco, B. M. (2010). Preservice teachers’ perceptions and experiences in a gifted education training model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 209-221. doi:10.1177/0016986210369257Berman, K. M., Schultz, R. A., & Weber, C. L. (2012). A lack of awareness and emphasis in preservice teacher training: Preconceived beliefs about the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 18–26. doi:10.1177/1076217511428307Cho, G., & DeCastro-Ambrosetti, D. (2005/2006). Is ignorance bliss? Preservice teachers’ attitudes toward multicultural education. The High School Journal, 89(2), 24-28.Copenhaver, R.W., & McIntyre, D. (1992). Teachers’ perception of gifted students. Roeper Review. 92(3).

Council for Exceptional Children. (2011). Exceptional learners (report). Retrieved from Council for Exceptional Children website: http://www.cec.sped.org/Special-Ed-Topics/Exceptional-Learners.

Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cross, T. L. (2002). Competing with myths about the social and emotional development of gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 25(3), 44.

Davidson Institute. (2006). State mandates for gifted programs as of 2006 [Website]. Retrieved from http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/StatePolicy.aspx

Davis, G. A. & Rimm. S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented. Boston, MA: Pearson.

DeLeon, J., Argus-Calvo, B., & Medina, C. (1997). A model for identifying rural gifted and talented students in the visual arts. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 16(4), 16-23.

Eisner, E.W. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Ford, D. Y. (2010). Underrepresentation of culturally different students in gifted education: Reflections about current problems and recommendations for the future. Gifted Child Today, 33(3), 31-35.

ReferencesFord, D. Y. (2012) Ensuring equity in gifted education: Suggestions for change, again. Gifted Child Today. 31(1), 74-75.Ford, D. Y., & Whiting, G. W. (2007). A mind is a terrible thing to erase: Black students' underrepresentation in gifted education. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 10(1/2), 28-44. Retrieved from http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/StatePolicy.aspxGall, M.D., Gall, J.P., & Borg, W.R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Gagné, F. & Nadeau, L. (1985). Dimensions of attitudes towards giftedness. In A.H. Roldan (Ed.). Gifted and Talented children, youth, and adults: Their social perspectives and culture (pp.148-170). Monroe.NJ: Trillium.Graffam, B. (2006). A case study of teachers of gifted learners: Moving from prescribed practice to described practitioners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(2), 119–131. doi:10.1177/001698620605000204.Hansen, J. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(3), 115-121.Hong, E., Greene, M., & Hartzell, S. (2011). Cognitive and motivational characteristics of elementary teachers in general education classrooms and in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 250–264. doi:10.1177/0016986211418107.Karp, A. (2006). Teachers of the mathematically gifted tell about themselves and their profession. Roeper Review, 32(4), 272–280. doi:10.1080/02783193.2010.485306.Matsuda, P.K. (2006). The myth of linguistic homogeneity in U.S. college composition. College English, 68(6), 637-651. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.wm.edu/stable/25472180McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2007). What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 246-254. doi:10.1177/0016986207302719.McCoach, D.B., & Siegle, D. (2005, April). Personal and contextualized predictors of teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted. Paper presented at the meeting of American Education Research Association, Montreal, Canada.Megay-Nespoli, K. (2001). Beliefs and attitudes of novice teachers regarding instruction of academically talented learners. Roeper Review, 23(3), 178-182. doi.10.1080/02783190109554092Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

ReferencesMoon, S. M. (2009). Myth 15: High-ability students don't face problems and challenges. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 474-476.Moon, T. R., Callahan, C. M., & Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The effects of mentoring relationships on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward academically diverse students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(2), 56–62. doi:10.1177/001698629904300202National Association of Gifted Children (2008). What is giftedness? Retrieved from National Association of Gifted Children Website: http://www.nagc.org/WhatisGiftedness.aspxNewman, J. L., Gregg, M., & Dantzler, J. (2009). Summer enrichment workshop (SEW): A quality component of the University of Alabama’s gifted education preservice training program. Roeper Review, 31, 170-184. doi:10.1080/02783190902993995Reis, S. M., & Westberg, K. L. (1994). The impact of staff development on teachers’ ability to modify curriculum for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 127-135.Ribich, F., Barone, W., & Agostino, R. (1998). Semantically different: Preservice teachers’ reactions to the gifted student concept. The Journal of Educational Research. 91(5).Rinn, A. N., & Nelson, J. M. (2009). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of behaviors characteristic of ADHD and giftedness. Roeper Review, 31(1), 18–26. doi:10.1080/Siegle, D., Moore, M., Mann, R. L., Wilson, H. E., & Austin, S. F. (2010). Factors that influence in-service and preservice teachers’ nominations of students for gifted and talented programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(3), 337-360.Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Adams, C. M., Pierce, R. L., Cassady, J. C., & Dixon, F. A. (2007). Fourth-grade teachers' perceptions of giftedness: Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. Journal For The Education Of The Gifted, 30(4), 479-499.Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Stake, R.E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Subotnik, R.F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction for-ward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1) 3-54. doi: 10.1177/152910061141805602783190802527349

ReferencesTomlinson, C. A., Tomchin, E. M., Callahan, C. M., Adams, C. M., Puzzat-Tinnin, P., Cunningham, C. M., . . . Imbeau, M. (1994). Practices of preservice teachers related to gifted and other academically diverse learners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 106-114.

Trochim, W. M. (2006, October 20). The research methods knowledge base [Web Page]. Retrieved from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/

VanTassel-Baska, J., & Johnsen, S. K. (2007). Teacher education standards for the field of gifted education: A vision of coherence for personnel preparation in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(2), 182–205. doi:10.1177/0016986207299880.

Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Peterson, J. S. (2009). Myth 17: Gifted and talented individuals do not have unique social and emotional needs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 280-282.