A critique of evidence-based

approaches in gifted and talented

education
Summary
• Research question
• A paradigmatic approach
• Models of giftedness
• Françoys Gagné’s definitions
• Australian policies
• The Maker Model
• Implications
• Impact on student learning
• Personal insights

University of Adelaide
About me

 Bachelor of Science (Molecular Biology)

 Diploma in Languages (German)

University of Adelaide
 Research Question

 To what degree are Australian educators’ equipped to

provide evidence-based learning experiences to gifted
students?

University of Adelaide
 Context for the Question

• The development of gifted students is essential for future society.

• Many gifted students are underachieving in schools.
• There are many barriers preventing this development.

“Standard 1.5: Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning

needs of students across the full range of abilities”
(Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2014).

University of Adelaide
 A Paradigmatic Approach

Figure 1. A paradigmatic approach to gifted education through interactions of key components

(Dai & Chen, 2013).

University of Adelaide
A History of Giftedness
• Intelligence testing.
– Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale
– Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale
• Twice-exceptional learners.
• Domain specific abilities.
– Renzulli’s Three-Ring Conception
– Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences
• Talent development.
– Gagné’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent
– Tannenbaum’s Sea Star Model of Giftedness

University of Adelaide
Models of Giftedness
Over 15 different models of giftedness were
examined from the literature!

• Gagné’s DMGT is adopted by every Australian state

and territory

University of Adelaide
Françoys Gagné’s Definition
“GIFTEDNESS designates the possession and use of outstanding
natural abilities, called aptitudes, in at least one ability domain,
to a degree that places an individual at least among the top 10%
of age peers” (Gagné, 2018).

“TALENT designates the outstanding mastery of systematically

developed abilities, called competencies (knowledge and skills),
in at least one field of human activity to a degree that places an
individual at least among the top 10% of age peers who are or
have been active in that field” (Gagné, 2018).

University of Adelaide
 Gagné’s DMGT 2.0

Figure 2. Gagné’s revised Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent 2.0 (Gagné, 2015).
University of Adelaide
 Gagné’s IMTD

Figure 3. Gagne’s most recent Integrative Model of Talent Development (Gagné, 2018).
University of Adelaide
Policies
• There is no national Australian policy.
• There is no national funding towards gifted education.
• Each Australian state and territory have their own policy or
guidelines.
• There have been no significant changes to the field since the
last senate inquiry in 2001 (Jarvis & Henderson, 2015).

University of Adelaide
 Latest policy or
State Model(s) adopted Teaching gifted students as per the policy or statement
statement
 Teachers design ILPs.
Australian Capital (ACT Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT
 Principals are responsible for professional development of the staff.
Territory Education, 2014) 2.0
 No direct instruction for how to differentiate.

 Teachers are to select and implement a wide variety of strategies for

(NSW Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT inclusion of a range of gifted and talented students in their classrooms.
New South Wales
Education, 2004) 2.0
 No direct instruction for how to differentiate.

Gagné’s (2007) DMGT  Teachers design EAPs.

(NT Department of
Northern Territory 2.0 and Renzulli’s Three-  Provision of Blooms Taxonomy, The William’s Model and The Maker
Education, 2017)
Ring Conception Model as advice for instructional differentiation.

 Teachers are to differentiate the curriculum by delivering it at a level,

(QLD Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT pace and degree of complexity suitable for the gifted learner.
Queensland
Education, 2018) 2.0
 No direct instruction for how to differentiate.

 Teachers are to work collaboratively to develop ILPs.

(SA Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT  The TfEL Framework guide supports teachers in differentiating the
South Australia
Education, 2016) 2.0 curriculum by pace, level and grouping. It also provides guidelines for
enrichment and extension.

 Teachers are to differentiate the curriculum by delivering it at a level,

(TAS Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT pace and degree of complexity suitable for the gifted learner.
Tasmania
Education, 2017) 2.0
 No direct instruction for how to differentiate.
Gagné’s (2007) DMGT
Victoria NA  No direct instruction for how to differentiate.
2.0

 Teachers are to identify students using a provided checklist.

(WA Department of Gagné’s (2007) DMGT
Western Australia  Teachers are to differentiate by enrichment, extension and acceleration.
Education, 2011) 2.0
University of Adelaide  No direct instruction for how to differentiate. 13
 The Maker Model for Differentiation

Figure 4. An adaptation of the Maker model for differentiating pedagogy in gifted and
talented education (NT Department of Education, 2017).
University of Adelaide 14
Gaps in the Literature - Implications
• Lack of government guidelines
– No national policy
• Ethical implications in stating who is “gifted”
– Ways to measure gifted students
• Practice
– Differentiation strategies
– Teacher bias/attitudes
• No definitive model
• No consensus
• Gifted education is distasteful to the Australian culture
– Tall Poppy Syndrome etc.

University of Adelaide
Questions for Further Research
• How and in what ways can the multiple perspectives towards
gifted and talented education be refined to a universal
consensus for a more consistent approach to identification?

• To what extent can international gifted and talented policies

assist Australia in creating a national policy to provide reliable
identifying and practical approaches?

• To what degree can educating the educators, through

professional and pre-service development, influence gifted
and talented practices?

University of Adelaide
Impact on Student Learning
• Aligns with APST, Standard 1.5:
“Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of
students across the full range of abilities”
• Highlighted the importance of gifted student development.
• Acknowledged barriers to success in gifted education.
• Recognised the large literature gap regarding pedagogical
strategies for meeting the learning needs of the gifted.
• The Maker Model provides guidance for differentiation of the
curriculum.

University of Adelaide
Personal Insights

Figure 5. Distribution of gifted vs. non-gifted students within the Australian education
system.
University of Adelaide
Personal Insights
• There is confusion within gifted and talented education.
• Major barrier to gifted success is tall poppy syndrome and the
Australian culture in general.

Australian educators are probably not equipped well

enough to provide appropriate learning experiences
to gifted students.

University of Adelaide
Personal Insights

Sometimes there is too much focus on achievement,

rather than on the process to getting there.

University of Adelaide
Questions

Feel free to email any questions to:

luke.day@student.adelaide.edu.au

University of Adelaide
Acknowledgment

I would like to thank Associate Professor Mathew White for

supervising me throughout this study.

University of Adelaide 22
Bibliography
• Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2014). Australian
Professional Standards for Teachers.
• Dai, D. Y., & Chen, F. (2013). Three Paradigms of Gifted Education: In
Search of Conceptual Clarity in Research and Practice. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 57(3), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213490020
• Gagné, F. (2015). Academic talent development programs: a best practices
model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(2), 281–295.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9366-9
• Gagné, F. (2018). Academic talent development- theory and best practices.
APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0000038-011
• Jarvis, J. M., & Henderson, L. (2015). Current practices in the education of
gifted and advanced learners in South Australian schools. Australasian
Journal of Gifted Education, 24(2), 70–86.
• NT Department of Education. (2017a). Guidelines and Procedures, 1–16