Identifying gifted and talented students in Design and Technology Adrian Twissell MA 2010 A Twissell 2010 Identification of gifted and talented students Aims Background to the study definitions amp models ID: 766969
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Identifying gifted and talented student..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Identifying gifted and talented students in Design and Technology Adrian Twissell MA2010 A Twissell 2010
Identification of gifted and talented students Aims Background to the study- definitions & models Overview of study- methods & participants Results of studyConclusionUsing subject specific identification criteria A Twissell 2010
Aim of the study “Can teachers use the results of cognitive ability tests to identify giftedness in D&T?” A Twissell 2010
Current Whole School Approach Identifies top 30% in each Year group as gifted (unpublished)Based on top 30% of MidYIS, YELLIS or GCSE average point score in Sixth FormCriticismsAssumes giftedness is fixedNot related to subject specific abilityIs not ‘peer’ relatedDoes not take account of qualitative methods A Twissell 2010
What is Giftedness and Talent? ‘Children and young people with one or more abilities developed to a level significantly ahead of their year group (or with the potential to develop those abilities)’DfES (2006) Giftedness - possession and use of outstanding natural abilities in at least one domain that places an individual at least among the top 10% of age peers. Talent - outstanding mastery of systematically developed abilities/skills/knowledge in at least one field of human activity to a degree that places the individual at least among the top 10% of age peers who are/have been active in that field or fields. Gagn é ( 2004) A Twissell 2010
Who is Gifted and Talented? QCDA definition ‘‘Gifted’ learners are those who have abilities in one or more subjects in the statutory school curriculum other than art and design, music and PE’ ‘’Talented learners are those who have abilities in art and design, music, PE or performing arts such as dance and drama’QCDA (2009) A Twissell 2010
Who is Gifted and Talented? (CEM Centre)CEM Centre definition ‘Gifted’ refers to those considered to be ‘mentally gifted’.CEM Centre believe that these students should be identified using aptitude measures.‘Talented’ refers to those students who ‘perform’ at a high level. CEM Centre believe that these students should be identified using achievement measures.Mentally Gifted based on MidYIS/YELLIS Scores Above 130 = top 2% nationally Above 126 = top 5% nationally Above 120 = top 10% nationally A Twissell 2010
Alternative ConceptionsRenzulli’s Three-Ringed Conception of Giftedness Above-AverageAbility Task Commitment Creativity Specific Performance Areas Cartooning Electronics Astronomy Musical Composition Public Opinion Polling Landscape Jewellery Design Architecture Map Making Chemistry Choreography Microphotography Biography City Planning Film Making Poetry Statistics Local History General Performance Areas Mathematics Visual Arts Physical Sciences Philosophy Social Sciences Law Religion Language Arts Music Life Sciences Movement Arts Source: Renzulli (1978) ‘The Three-Ringed Conception of Giftedness’ A Twissell 2010
Gagné’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent Giftedness = top 10%NATURAL ABILITIESDOMAINS Intellectual Creative SocioaffectiveSensorimotor INTRAPERSONAL Physical/Mental characteristics Self Management Talent = top 10% SYSTEMATICALLY DEVELOPED SKILLS FIELDS Academics : language, science, humanities Arts : visual, drama, music Business : sales, entrepreneurship, management Leisure : chess, video games, puzzles Social Action : media, public office Sports : individual & team Technology : trades & craft, electronics, computers CHANCE ENVIRONMENTAL Milleu Persons Provisions Events DEVELOPMENTAL PROCESS Informal/formal learning & practicing CATALYSTS Source: Gagn é ( 2004) A Twissell 2010
Outline of Study/Method GCSE raw score data Gifted in Art, D&T, Drama, History & PE D&T Design Question Scores Teacher’s Survey in Art, D&T, Drama & PE Data Collection Verification of D&T G&T with NC Levels Mean Score Comparison Percentrank/ Decile Comparison Pearson’s ‘r’ Correlation with MidYIS/YELLIS Mean analysis between D&T Strands Pearson’s ‘r’ Correlation Qualitative Analysis Discussion & Conclusions A Twissell 2010
QCDA’s subject specific identification criteria demonstrate high levels of technological understanding and application display high-quality making and precise practical skills have flashes of inspiration and highly original or innovative ideas demonstrate different ways of working or different approaches to issues be sensitive to aesthetic, social and cultural issues when designing and evaluating be capable of rigorous analysis and interpretation of products get frustrated when a teacher demands that they follow a rigid design-and-make process work comfortably in contexts beyond their own experience and empathise with users' and clients' needs and wantsperformance at an unusually advanced national curriculum level for their age group the outcomes of specific tasks evidence of particular aptitudes the way pupils respond to questions the questions that pupils ask themselves QCDA (2009) Subject specific criteria was given to Art, Drama and PE History used their existing register A Twissell 2010
Comparing GCSE raw scores with MidYIS scores in D&T Comparison between GCSE (2008) Raw score and MidYIS score (n=170, r=0.31, p<0.01, 100 degrees of freedom) A Twissell 2010
Comparing GCSE raw scores with YELLIS scores in D&T Comparison between GCSE (2008) raw score and YELLIS score (n=183, r=0.37, p<0.001, 100 degrees of freedom) A Twissell 2010
Comparing mean YELLIS scores and subtest scores within D&T strands Graphics n=42 Resistant Materials n=103 Systems n=38 YELLIS Score Group (Standard Deviation) 123.40 (8.56) 124.43 (9.56) 125.97 (10.98) Rest of Year 11 (Standard Deviation) 124.84 (9.97) 124.63 (9.85) 124.13 (9.27) Maths Group (Standard Deviation) 124.26 (12.22) 125.17 (10.74) 125.95 (12.21) Rest of Year 11 (Standard Deviation) 125.38 (11.12) 125.06 (12.17) 124.90 (11.15) Vocabulary Group (Standard Deviation) 118.02 (7.30) 118.95 (9.97) 120.95 (10.61) Rest of Year 11 (Standard Deviation) 119.49 (10.15) 119.41 (9.08) 118.68 (9.26) Patterns Group (Standard Deviation) 110.12 (10.91) 107.50 (13.68) 111.19 (13.03) Rest of Year 11 (Standard Deviation) 108.48 (13.56) 110.62 (11.88) 108.26 (12.95) A Twissell 2010
Comparing mean MidYIS scores and subtest scores with students identified gifted in D&T, Art, Drama, PE & History Total Year 8 Population n=180 Vocab Maths NonVerbal Skills MidYIS Score Gifted in D&T n=29 (16%) 121 (8.87) 130 (10.19) 125 (11.54) 123 (13.98) 128 (7.37) Rest of Year 8 122 (9.60) 127 (11.37) 120 (12.02) 118 (11.10) 126 (9.42) Gifted in ART n=14 (8%) 123 (7.49) 129 (12.41) 128 (13.10) 119 (13.36) 128 (8.36) Rest of Year 8 121 (9.62) 127 (11.14) 120 (11.82) 118 (11.68) 126 (9.18) Gifted in DRAMA n=37 (21%) 125 (10.41) 132 (10.97) 124 (12.76) 122 (13.30) 131 (9.23) Rest of Year 8 121 (9.02) 126 (11.03) 120 (11.80) 118 (11.28) 125 (8.76) Gifted in PE n=9 (5%) 122 (11.75) 128 (12.23) 127 (12.31) 121 (13.06) 127 (9.50) Rest of Year 8 122 (9.37) 127 (11.21) 120 (12.00) 118 (11.74) 127 (9.13) Gifted in History n=17 (9%) 126 (8.53) 131 (10.30) 124 (12.34) 123 (10.60) 132(9.54) Rest of Year 8 121 (9.41) 126 (11.25) 120 (12.02) 118 (11.81) 126(8.91) A Twissell 2010
Decile comparison method Score % Rank G&T?140 100138 99 G&T136 97132 95 G&T128 89124 78122 72 G&T121 71 G&T120 70 % Rank G&T 99 95 72 71 1st decile 3rd decile A Twissell 2010
Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8 population based on MidYIS score Comparison of deciles between Year 8 gifted in D&T (n=29) and rest of Year 8 (n=151) A Twissell 2010
Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8 population based on MidYIS non-verbal score Comparison of deciles between Year 8 gifted in D&T (n=29) and rest of Year 8 (n=151) on nonverbal score A Twissell 2010
Comparing gifted in Year 8 Art Student’s with rest of Year 8 on MidYIS Non-verbal Score Comparison between gifted in Art on Nonverbal score and Year 8 population A Twissell 2010
Comparing Year 8 end of year exam design question with MidYIS score End of Year 8 exam design question mark and MidYIS score correlation (n=170, r=0.21, p<0.05, 100 degrees of freedom) A Twissell 2010
Comparing gifted in Year 8 with rest of Year 8 on MidYIS Maths Score Gifted sample’s maths score decile comparison with rest of Year 8 A Twissell 2010
Comparing Coursework, Written Paper & YELLIS Scores Using Pearson’s ‘r’ correlation coeficient D&T GCSE (n=181) Combined GCSE Raw Score Coursework Exam Overall YELLIS Score 0.37 0.30 0.36 Maths 0.38 0.33 0.32 Vocab 0.21 0.15 0.28 Patterns 0.20 0.20 0.11 CWK/EXAM Correlation All Groups 0.36 >0.19=5% (5 in 100 may occur by chance) >0.25=1% (1 in 100 may occur by chance) >0.32=.1% (1 in 1000 may occur by chance) A Twissell 2010
Conclusion Evidence from the study’s data MidYIS/YELLIS useful indication of students’ general intellectual abilityThere is a good correlation between achieving well on CATs and achieving well at GCSE in D&TThere are indications that this applies to both coursework and written examsUse of MidYIS /YELLIS for identification of gifted not supported in D&T, Art or PE D&T, Art and PE generally score well on MidYIS non-verbal measure A Twissell 2010
ConclusionEvidence from the literature Aptitude measures (IQ, CAT etc) are extremely reliable (Gagné, 2005)General intellectual ability (‘g’) is a concept overwhelmingly accepted as being central to an individuals ability (Jensen, 1981; Lubinski , 2009) Multidimensional measures increase the likelihood of identifying specific aptitudes (Gardner, 1997; Heller, 2004)Persistence or ‘task commitment’ may be central to an individual’s gifted profile (Ericsson et al., 2009; Mayer, 2005; Renzulli , 1978) Creative thinking may be central to an individual’s giftedness (Sternberg et al., 2006) A Twissell 2010
Using the QCDA (2009) Identification Criteria A Twissell 2010
E.P. Torrance’s Factors Gifted, successful individuals:Have a love for the work they doAre persistent in their workHave a clear purpose in lifeHave diverse experiencesHave high energy levelsAre open to change ‘Over the long haul these factors become more important than traditional measures of intelligence and academic ability’ (Torrance, 2004 ) Source: Torrance (2004) Great Expectations: Creative Achievements of the Sociometric Stars in a 30-Year Study A Twissell 2010
Tilsley’s DIP Model Definition identification Provision (DIP) Source: Tilsley (1995) A Twissell 2010
Tilsley’s PEP Model Provision Evaluation Provision (PEP) Source: Tilsley (1995) A Twissell 2010
References DfES (2006) Identifying Gifted and Talented Pupils-Getting Started, retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/giftedand&talented on 16th November 2009 . Ericsson , K.A., Nandagopal , K. and Roring , R.W. (2009) Toward a Science of Exceptional Achievement: Attaining Superior Performance through Deliberate Practice, Longevity, Regeneration, and Optimal Health, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1172: 199-217 . Gagne , F. (2004) Transforming gifts into talents: the DMGT as a developmental theory, High Ability Studies, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp119-147. Gagne , F. (2005) From Gifts to Talents: The DMGT as a Developmental Model. In Sternberg, R.J. and Davidson (Eds.) Conceptions of Giftedness (2 nd Edition), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp98-119. Gardner , H. (1997) Extraordinary Minds: Portraits Of Exceptional Individuals And An Examination of Our Extraordinariness, London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. Heller, K.A. (2004) Identification of Gifted and Talented Students, Psychology Science, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp302-323.Jensen, A. R. (1981) Straight Talk About Mental Tests, London: Methuen.Lubinski, D. (2009) Exceptional Cognitive Ability: The Phenotype, Behaviour Genetics, 39: pp350-358.Mayer , R.E. (2005) The Scientific Study of Giftedness. In Sternberg, R.J. and Davidson (Eds.) Conceptions of Giftedness (2nd Edition), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp437-447.Renzulli (1978) What Makes Giftedness: Reexamining a Definition, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp180-184. Sternberg , R.J., Grigorenko , E. L. and Jarvin , L. (2006) Identification of the gifted in the new millennium: Two assessments for ability testing and for the broad identification of gifted students , Korean Journal of Educational Policy, 3:2, pp7-27. Tilsley , P. (1995), ‘The Use Of Tests And Test Data In Identification Or Recognition Of High Ability’ , Flying High, 2, 43-50. Retrieved from ‘http://scs.une.edu.au/ TalentEd / gate_pip /index.html’ on 13 th July 2009 . Torrance (2004) Great Expectations: Creative Achievements of the Sociometric Stars in a 30-Year Study, The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, Vol. 16, No.1, pp5-13 . QCDA (2009) Identifying gifted pupils in design and technology , retrieved from the world wide web: http://www.qcda.gov.uk/2206.aspx on 16th December 2009 . A Twissell 2010