Possibility of Identifying the Logical-Mathematical Giftedness with Students of Lower Primary School Grades through Evaluations

Abstract

The objective of this work is examination of co-ordinance amongst assessments of logicalmathematical giftedness with young primary school students, made by four groups of evaluators: teachers, parents, coevals and self-evaluators. Teachers of 11 primary schools selected at the area of Republic Srpska were assigned to follow Instructions for Nomination and select most capable students of Years Three and Four, who would be directly involved in the research. An evaluation of logical-mathematical giftedness was performed on a sample of 151 named students, using an instrument created for the needs of this research. The results have shown a high level coordinance in evaluation of logical-mathematical giftedness between teachers and students and between parents and coevals, which leads to a conclusion that there is a scientific justification to innovate the teaching process while working with gifted students at primary schools, by applying a questionnaire developed for evaluation of logical-mathematical giftedness to be done by teachers, parents, students and coevals. This work allows a space for forming data bases on evaluations of students' abilities, in order to plan the next step which would be creating a predictive model based upon likelihood and expectations as to the possibility of identifying giftedness.

A Conceptual Analysis of the Semantic Use of Multiple Intelligences Theory and Implications for Teacher Education

“…Multiple studies have provided evidence of MI theory’s semantic effectiveness in inspiring differentiated teaching and learning in the classroom (e.g., Modirkhamene and Azhiri, 2012 ; Milić and Simeunović, 2017 ; Koçak Altundağ, 2018 ; Ghaznavi et al, 2021 ; Shahzada et al, 2021 ). Semantic effectiveness here means that MI theory’s use of the word intelligences seemed to be interpreted as nearly synonymous or at least overlapping with preferences; therefore, its conceptual framing interfaced readily with learning styles theory.…”

“…The issue, again, seems to be predicated on the semantics of MI theory in its use of the word intelligences. Other studies have emphasized contextual interpretation with statistical data analysis involving in-service teachers or preservice teachers to provide evidence of MI theory’s qualitative effectiveness in the multiple-subject curriculum of elementary school to secondary school science and mathematics (e.g., Baş and Beyhan, 2010 ; Modirkhamene and Azhiri, 2012 ; Milić and Simeunović, 2017 ; Koçak Altundağ, 2018 ; Ghaznavi et al, 2021 ; Shahzada et al, 2021 ). These case studies further support the efficacy of MI theory in classroom practice.…”

“…The importance of teaching about MI theory from a student engagement perspective has been debated with some scholars suggesting that granular technicalities of quantitative validity studies in the learning styles theories are not always more important than the qualitative influence of such theories in improving instruction ( Shearer, 2004 ). As suggested by some scholars, MI theory has benefits when implemented intentionally and systematically across learner groups from those below grade level to those above grade level ( Milić and Simeunović, 2017 ; Shearer, 2020 ). Gardner (1983) essentially changed the meaning of the word intelligence in the way it was used in his book.…”