Good day everyone, I’m teacher Giselle. Your teacher for today.

Before we start our discussion I will showing to you a different pictures. All you need
to do is to anlayzed and guess what the pictures shows.

Picture 1.

Many children are endowed with being gifted and talented. One of the famous gifted
children prodigies is Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart he was par excellence, playing
songs on the harpsichord at four years old and composing simple music at five. To
be a talented and gifted children, how can we define if that children are being gifted
and talented? In this lesson I will discuss to you the definitions of giftedness in
different stated. The definitions of giftedness, formal federal definitions of gifted and
talented and the five categories of definitions. Also, in this video we will tackle the
Renzulli’s three-ring model.

There are four reasons why defining gifted and talented is both an important and a
complicated matter.

First, the particular definition adopted by a school district will guide the identification
process and thus determine who is selected for the special services of a gifted
program.- the school district they the one to identify or select children who are
belong to the special service of a gifted program.

Second,there is danger that one’s definition and consequent identification methods

will discriminate against such special populations as poor, minority, disabled, and
underachieving students.

Third, one’s definition of gifts and talents is also tied to programming practices;
opportunities should be available for different types of gifts and talents.

Fourth, the labeling effect of defining a student as “gifted” can have both positive and
adverse effects—for example, raising self-esteem and self-expectations on one
hand, but sometimes alienating peers, peers’ parents, and siblings,or otherwise
causing stress on others.
There is no one definition of“gifted,”“talented,” or “giftedness” that is universally
accepted. Common usage of the terms even by experts is ambiguous and
inconsistent. For example, it is acceptable to use the terms interchangeably, as
when we describe the same person as either a “gifted artist” or a “talented artist.”

For convenience,the authors and others use the single word gifted to abbreviate
gifted and talented.

Some writers and the general public see talent and giftedness on a continuum,with
giftedness at the upper end.

Noted Cox (1986), we speak of talented musicians, writers, and scientists, and the
few who are truly gifted; but no one reverses this usage. Related to this continuum
definition, many programs include students who barely meet the established criteria,
along with one or two others who are extraordinarily brilliant or astonishingly talented
in a particular area. No accepted label distinguishes between these two visible
groups, although “highly gifted,”“extremely gifted,” or “exceptionally gifted” are used,
along with the tongue-in-cheek “severely gifted,”“profoundly gifted,”or “exotically
gifted.

Also, June Cox avoids the term gifted, preferring able learners (Cox, Daniel, &
Boston, 1985). Renzulli (1994; Renzulli & Reis, 1997) prefers the phrase “gifted
behaviors,”which can be developed in certain students at certain times and in certain
circumstances. They argue that the title of “gifted” should not be bestowed on
children as a result of the identification process. For the same reason, many prefer
the phrase “potentially gifted.”

Next we proceed to the formal federal definitions of gifted and talented.

Any discussion of definitions of gifted and talented must begin with the original
U.S.Office of Education (now the Department of Education) definition of gifted and
talented (Marland,1972):
Gifted and talented children are those identified by professionally qualified
persons who by virtue ofoutstanding abilities are capable of high performance.
These are children who require differentiated educational programs and
services beyond those normally provided by the regular school program in
order to realize their contribution to self and society.

Children capable of high performance include those with demonstrated achievement

and/or potential in any of the following areas:
1. General intellectual ability
2. Specific academic aptitude
3. Creative or productive thinking
4. Leadership ability
5. Visual and performing arts
6. Psychomotor ability

The federal definition is thoughtful and appealing. It recognizes not only high general
intelligence, but gifts in specific academic areas and in the arts. It further calls
attention to creative, leadership, and psychomotor gifts and talents. It recognizes that
gifted and talented students require “differentiated educational programs and
services beyond those normally provided,”thus justifying the development of gifted
programs. It recognizes the two fundamental aims of gifted programs: to help
individual gifted and talented students develop their high potential
and to provide society with educated professionals who are creative leaders and
problem solvers. By including “demonstrated achievement and/or potential ability,”
this definition takes underachieving students into consideration. As we will see in
Chapter 3, many specific identification strategies are based on the categories in the
federal definition.

In 1978 the U.S. Congress revised Maryland’s definition to read as follows:The gifted
and talented are
children and, whenever applicable, youth who are identified at the preschool,
elementary, or secondary level as possessing demonstrated or potential
abilities that give evidence of high performance capability in areas such as
intellectual, creative, specific academic or leadership ability or in the
performing and visual arts,and who by reason thereof require services or
activities not ordinarily provided by the school (U.S. Congress, Educational
Amendment of 1978 [P.L.95–561,IX (A)]).

In 1988 an even shorter version reads,

The term “gifted and talented students” means children and youth who give
evidence of high performance capability in areas such as intellectual, creative,
artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who require
services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully
develop such capabilities (P.L. 100–297, Sec. 4103.Definitions).

The 1993 “quiet crisis” report presented this definition, which in the new
millennium still “reflect[s] today’s knowledge and thinking”(p.3):
Children and youth with outstanding talent perform or show the
potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment
when compared with others of their age,experience,or environment.
These children and youth exhibit high performance capability in
 intellectual,creative,and/or artistic areas,possess an unusual leadership
capacity, or excel in specific academic fields.They require services or
activities not ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are
present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all
economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor.

What is the difference between the 1972 version and the three later statement?
The difference between them is the psychomotor ability was excluded.

The reason for this change is that artistic psychomotor ability talents (for example,
dancing, mime) could be included under performing arts, and athletically gifted
students typically are well provided for outside of G/T programs.In fact,athletic
programs may be seen as almost ideal gifted programs: Special teachers (coaches)
are hired; expensive equipment and space are provided; training is partly
individualized; students meet with others like themselves; they encourage and
reward each other for doing their best; and students even travel to other schools to
meet and compete with other talented individuals and teams. Not much was lost by
dropping “psychomotor ability”from Congress’s definition.

Figure 2 shows A 2008–2009 NAGC survey showed that most states had adopted
an exact or modified version of a federal definition, usually the well-known 1972 one
(Cassidy & Hossler, 1992), and only 5 states had no definitions. the areas of
giftedness address in state statute definition. Ten states include culturally diverse
groups in their definition (CA, OH). Most states include either intellectually or
academically gifted individuals, but only 25 include those gifted in the performing or
visual arts, 26 include creatively gifted youths, 17 those with leadership abilities, 4
the highly or profoundly gifted, and only 3 specifically include underachieving gifted
students.

Apart from the formal federal definitions, there are many other conceptions,
explanations, interpretations,and definitions of giftedness and intelligence.

Stankowski (1978) outlined five categories of definitions of gifts and talents. The
after-the-fact, IQ, percentage, talent and creativity definitions.All but the first category
continue to guide the identification process.
First, after-the-fact definitions emphasize prominence in one of the professions—
consistent and outstanding achievements in a valuable area.
Second, IQ definitions set a point on the IQ scale,and persons scoring above that
point are classed as gifted. Terman’s Stanford–Binet cutoff of 135 is a classic
example.The practice remains popular despite its glaring shortcomings of (1)
ignoring creative and artistic gifts,(2) ignoring gifts in particular areas, (3)
discriminating against disadvantaged students, and (4) branding motivated and
creative students who score 1 point below the cutoff as “not gifted.”
Third, percentage definitions set a fixed proportion of the school (or district) as
“gifted,” based on ability scores or grades. The percentage may be a restrictive 1%
to 5% or a generous 15% to 20%. A misguided assumption is that “five percent of
our children are gifted!” Nature is not so helpful. Like most human characteristics,
abilities are distributed according to a bell-shaped curve, and any cutoff point is
arbitrary.
Fourth, talent definitions focus on students who are outstanding in art, music, math,
science, or other specific aesthetic or academic areas.
Fifth, creativity definitions stress the significance of superior creative abilities. It is
curious that, although every G/T program seeks to increase creative growth, some
states do not consider creativity to be an acceptable selection criteria (Torrance,
1984).

Renzulli’s Three-Ring Model On the basis of descriptions of creatively productive

persons, primarily adults who have made valuable contributions to society, Renzulli
(1986; Renzulli & Reis,2003) argues that:

Gifted behavior . . .reflects an interaction among three basic clusters of

human traits—these clusters being above average (but not necessarily high)
general and/or specific ability, high levels of task commitment (motivation),
and high levels of creativity.Gifted and talented children are those possessing
or capable of developing this composite set of traits and applying them to any
potentially valuable area of human performance (Renzulli & Reis, 2003,p.75).

The combination of the three is brought to bear on general and specific

performance areas, resulting in gifted behaviors (see Figure 1.3). Some gifted
program coordinators or teachers mistakenly use Renzulli’s three-ring model
as a guide for selecting only children who are high in all three
characteristics.As we will see in Chapter 3 on identification,Renzulli outlines a
reasonable identification plan that is not tied strictly to possessing a strong
combination of all three traits. For example, a teacher may nominate a student
on the basis of a high IQ score, despite the student’s record of unmotivated
underachievement; or a teacher may nominate a student on the basis of
observed creativity or strong motivation,but without IQ information.

General Gifts and Specific Talents: Gagné’s DMTG Model

Gagné’s (2000, 2003) Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) makes
a definite distinction between gifts and talents.Here,
gifts (general aptitudes) are untrained natural abilities.
Talents (specific skills) are learned capabilities.

Four types of innate gifts are:

1. intellectual (e.g., reasoning, judgment)
2. creative (e.g.,inventiveness,imagination),
3. socioaffective (e.g., perceptiveness, empathy, tact), and
4. sensorimotor (e.g., auditory, coordination). He also identifies seven categories
(fields) of talents:academics, arts, business, leisure (e.g., games), social
action (e.g., public office), sports, and technology.

Personal factors that influence talent development are physical characteristics,

motivation (e.g., needs, values), volition (e.g., willpower, effort), self-management
(e.g., work habits), and personality (e.g., temperament, adaptability).
Environment influences include one’s milieu (e.g.,physical,cultural),persons
(teachers, parents, peers), provisions (e.g., services, activities), and events
(encounters,awards).Talent development also is affected by chance factors,such as
one’s family environment, a school gifted program, or a bad athletic accident.