Affective Interventions for High-Ability Students From 1984-2015: A Review of Published Studies

Abstract

A search of the literature, from 1984 to 2015, revealed that only 17 empirical studies of direct affective intervention with high-ability students exist in the field of gifted education. These selective 17 studies, with the justifiable data published alongside them, were analyzed. Five major findings included. First, there is a need for more empirical studies of the direct affective interventions in the field. Second, there is a call for more studies with similar research interests to examine the previous findings because almost no two studies have a similar research focus. Third, the contents of direct affective interventions need to be clearly defined so that the similar intervention could be replicated. Fourth, boys and girls preferred same-gender group and group leaders. Fifth, a variety of methods were used. It is a positive finding that researchers used a variety of methods to measure the outcomes of the direct affective interventions.

High-Ability Students’ Perspectives on an Affective Curriculum in a Diverse, University-Based Summer Residential Enrichment Program

“…They have suggested that when educators provide educational services to address these needs, they should have a rationale for the curriculum they provide and be creative in designing the components (Mendaglio & Peterson, 2007; VanTassel-Baska, Cross, & Olenchak, 2009). However, a search of the literature found only limited empirical studies examining outcomes when school professionals provided a well-designed, affective intervention to help high-ability students develop social and emotional well-being (Jen, 2017). Among the published articles on the social and emotional development of gifted students, some were grounded in theory and introduced a model (e.g., Frank & McBee, 2003).…”

The Effects of Academic Giftedness and Gender on Developmental Trajectories of Hopelessness Among Students Living in Economically Disadvantaged Neighborhoods

“…Thus, for hopelessness among boys identified as gifted to increase during later adolescence is troubling, and the possibility that this trend could continue into early adulthood is also concerning. These findings, taken together, suggest that targeted interventions during high school may be most important for boys, reflecting evidence suggesting that affective and psychosocial issues are different for boys and girls (e.g., Jen, 2017).…”

“I Have Removed My Ceiling”: Qualitative Experiences of Teachers on Their Professional Development

“…Research has shown that educating teachers about the psychosocial characteristics is crucial in identifying the most appropriate instructional strategy, and in recognizing critical periods for intervention (NAGC, 2014; Subotnik et al, 2011). An examination of empirical literature conducted by Jen (2017) revealed that there were only 17 studies from 1984 through 2015 that directly investigated affective interventions which is sobering, as it is indicative of the lack of attention to the social and emotional concerns of gifted and talented students—and definitely worth exploring in greater depth in future runs of the teacher training.…”