2012
DOI: 10.1080/13598139.2012.679085
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards a systemic theory of gifted education

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
76
0
8

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
76
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…In our viewpoint, this perspective represents an important advancement in the understanding of the underlying processes of self-regulatory learning. On the other hand, this interplay between individual and contextual factors that operate since earlier stages, strengthens the recent theory presented by Ziegler and Phillipson (2012) about gifted education, which conceive the development of an action repertoire capable of producing excellence as a very successful adaptation to specific environments (Araújo & Davids, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…In our viewpoint, this perspective represents an important advancement in the understanding of the underlying processes of self-regulatory learning. On the other hand, this interplay between individual and contextual factors that operate since earlier stages, strengthens the recent theory presented by Ziegler and Phillipson (2012) about gifted education, which conceive the development of an action repertoire capable of producing excellence as a very successful adaptation to specific environments (Araújo & Davids, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…The debate about whether provision for the gifted should be offered as a separate program or through the regular classroom is ongoing. There are (a) those who advocate for a separate program for academic talent development (Gagné, 2011) for students who meet the selective identification criteria; (b) those who advocate for an integrated program for gifted learners (programming model) that involves the whole school and requires changes to the normal curriculum (e.g., Renzulli, 2012;Renzulli & Reis, 1985;Tomlinson et al, 2009;VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2009); (c) those who advocate for a systemic approach (Ziegler & Phillipson, 2012) that is applied within the regular classrooms, without selective processes, through the provision of opportunities for individualized learning pathways, and the provision of "individually tailored learning environments" (Ziegler & Phillipson, 2012, p. 24); and (d) those who oppose practices that involve special measures for gifted students and to the use of the term "gifted" (e.g., Borland, 2009).…”
Section: Perceptions Of Gifted Educationmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Modern models of gifted education with a strong theoretical base (e.g., Gagné, 2004Gagné, , 2010Gagné, , 2011Gardner, 2006Gardner, , 2010 Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 13:39 04 June 2016 Renzulli, 2012;Sternberg, 2003;Ziegler & Phillipson, 2012) emphasize the importance of intelligence and cognition in talent development but also the role of affect and motivation and the role of environment and the interaction within it. They all agree on the importance of education and suggest the establishment of an environment in which gifted individuals will have suitable opportunities to extend their ability.…”
Section: Perceptions Of Gifted Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…category system, the placement of specific models in a particular category (e.g., placing the DMGT in a category where 'the sequence [of components] is not framed specifically as a developmental process'! ), or the omission of some well-publicized talent development models, like Ericsson's development of expertise through deliberate practice (Ericsson 2006), the level of service (LoS) approach (Schroth 2013;Treffinger andSelby 2009), or Ziegler andPhilipson's (2012) actiotope model. In fact, most chapters in two recent compendiums of models or conceptions Sternberg and Davidson 2005) would warrant a close examination as potential ATD models.…”
Section: Critical Survey Of Existing Modelsmentioning
confidence: 98%