Social and emotional needs of gifted elementary students: understanding the development of self-concept identification

Abstract

The current research sought to understand the social and emotional development of identified gifted and talented (G/T) elementary students through a mixed-methods concurrent design study. Researchers collected data from G/T students, parents, and teachers in five school districts in the southern USA to better understand G/T students’ self-concept in different grade levels during elementary school. Students were interviewed one on one using both open and closed interview questions by trained researchers. In addition, parents and teachers responded to surveys and open-ended questions regarding their G/T students. A convergent parallel mixed methods design was used to best create an overall interpretation of G/T students’ self-concept development. Interview transcripts were analyzed and cross-validated among researchers. Themes were developed from codes from student interviews, and themes were also created from parent and teacher surveys to closed-questions. Follow up analyses were conducted to determine correlations between students’ self-concept scores and age. An ANOVA was also conducted to determine differences between self-concept scores and grade level. Results suggest that G/T students’ self-concept declined as grade level increased and was strongly related to the type of gifted program and method of notification for entrance into the gifted program. In addition, parent and teacher perceptions of G/T students related to student self-concept. The results and findings of this study suggest that a lack of understanding regarding the definition and implications of being identified as gifted exists not only for gifted children but also for their parents. Schools may work to better inform parents and students of what it means to be gifted and what challenges may exist in self-concept development.

Keywords

• gifted education
• elementary school student
• self-concept

References

1. Ablard, K. E. (1997). Self‐perceptions and needs as a function of type of academic ability and gender. Roeper Review, 20(2), 110-115.
2. Ames, C. (1990). Motivation: What teachers need to know. Teachers College Record, 91(3), 409-421.
3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory and the organization. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5. Carspecken, F. P. (1996). Critical Ethnography in Educational Research: A Theoretical and Practical Guide. New York: Routledge.
6. Chan, D. W. (2011). Perfectionism among Chinese gifted and nongifted students in Hong Kong: The use of the Revised Almost Perfect Scale. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(1), 68-98.
7. Colucci, A. (2015). Gifted ed. students are more than just really smart kids. Education Week Teacher.
8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

9. Cross, J. R., Bugaj, S. J., & Mammadov, S. (2016). Accepting a scholarly identity: Gifted students, academic crowd membership, and identification with school. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(1), 23-48.
10. Harter, S. (2012). Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents: Manual and Questionnaires, Denver, Col.: University of Denver; 31-34.
11. Hollingsworth, L. S. (1931). The child of very superior intelligence as a special problem in social adjustment. Mental Hygiene, 15(1), 3-16.
12. Kim, B. (2019). Parental predictors of Asian gifted students’ achievement emotions. Journal of Information Technologies and Lifelong Learning, 2(1), 51-55.
13. Košir, K., Horvat, M., Aram, U., & Jurinec, N. (2016). Is being gifted always an advantage? Peer relations and self-concept of gifted students. High Ability Studies, 27(2), 129-148.
14. Lee, S. Y., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Thomson, D. T. (2012). Academically gifted students’ perceived interpersonal competence and peer relationships. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(2), 90-104.
15. McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2003). The school attitude assessment survey-revised: A new instrument to identify academically able students who underachieve. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(3), 414-429.
16. Morris, N. (2013). Facing challenge: A phenomenological investigation into the educational experiences of academically gifted pupils. Educational & Child Psychology, 30(2), 18-28.
17. Neihart, M. (1999). The impact of giftedness on psychological well‐being: What does the empirical literature say? Roeper review, 22(1), 10-17.
18. Olszewski‐Kubilius, P., Subotnik, R. F., & Worrell, F. C. (2015). Conceptualizations of giftedness and the development of talent: Implications for counselors. Journal of counseling & development, 93(2), 143-152.
19. Pfeiffer, S. I. (2009). The gifted: Clinical challenges for child psychiatry. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(8), 787-790.
20. Reis, S. M. (2002). Gifted females in elementary and secondary school. The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know, 125-135.
21. Rinn, A. N., & Majority, K. L. (2018). The social and emotional world of the gifted. In Pfeiffer S. (eds). Handbook of Giftedness in Children, Springer, Cham, 49-63.
22. Schraw, G., Wadkins, T., & Olafson, L. (2007). Doing the things we do: A grounded theory of academic procrastination. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 12-25.
23. Shavelson, R.J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G.C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
24. Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children's achievement: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of educational psychology, 73(1), 93.
25. Schunk, D. H. (1984). Self‐efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist, 19(1), 48-58.
26. Terman, L. M. (1927). Genetic studies of genius. In L. M. Terman (ed.) Mental and Physical Traits of a Thousand Gifted Children, vol. 1. Stanford University Press.
27. Terman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1959). Genetic studies of genius. In L. M. Terman (ed.) The Gifted Group at Mid-Life, vol. 1. Stanford University Press.
28. Terman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1947). The Gifted Child Grows Up: Twenty-Five Years' Follow-Up of a Superior Group. Stanford University Press.
29. Vogl, K., & Preckel, F. (2014). Full-time ability grouping of gifted students: Impacts on social self-concept and school-related attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 51-68.
30. Wirthwein, L., Bergold, S., Preckel, F., & Steinmayr, R. (2019). Personality and school functioning of intellectually gifted and nongifted adolescents: Self-perceptions and parents' assessments. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 16-29.