Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Identifying gifted and talented students inDesign and TechnologyAdrian Twissell MA2010A Twissell 2010
Identification of gifted and talented studentsAims•Background to the study- definitions & models•Overview of study- method...
Aim of the study“Can teachers use the results of cognitive ability tests toidentify 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Current Whole School Approach• Identifies top 30% in each Year group as gifted (unpublished)• Based on top 30% of MidYIS, ...
What is Giftedness and Talent?„Children and young people with one or more abilities developed to a levelsignificantly ahea...
Who is Gifted and Talented?• QCDA definition„„Gifted‟ learners are those who have abilities in one or moresubjects in the ...
Who is Gifted and Talented? (CEM Centre)• CEM Centre definition„Gifted‟ refers to those considered to be „mentally gifted‟...
Alternative Conceptions• Renzulli‟s Three-Ringed Conception of GiftednessAbove-AverageAbilityTaskCommitmentCreativitySpeci...
Gagné‟s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and TalentGiftedness = top 10%NATURALABILITIESDOMAINSIntellectualCreativeSocioa...
Outline of Study/MethodGCSE raw scoredataGifted in Art, D&T,Drama, History &PED&T DesignQuestion ScoresTeacher‟s Surveyin ...
QCDA‟s subject specific identification criteria• demonstrate high levels of technological understanding and application• d...
Comparing GCSE raw scores with MidYIS scoresin D&T02040608010095 115 135 155MidYIS ScoreGCSERawScoreGCSE Raw ScoreComparis...
Comparing GCSE raw scores with YELLIS scoresin D&T02040608010095 115 135 155YELLIS ScoreGCSERawScoreGCSE Raw ScoreComparis...
Comparing mean YELLIS scores and subtestscores within D&T strandsGraphicsn=42Resistant Materialsn=103Systemsn=38YELLIS Sco...
Comparing mean MidYIS scores and subtest scores withstudents identified gifted in D&T, Art, Drama, PE & HistoryTotal Year ...
Decile comparison methodScore % Rank G&T?140 100138 99 G&T136 97132 95 G&T128 89124 78122 72 G&T121 71 G&T120 70% Rank G&T...
Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8population based on MidYIS score05101520251 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Percentrank ...
Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8population based on MidYIS non-verbal score05101520251 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10P...
Comparing gifted in Year 8 Art Student‟s with restof Year 8 on MidYIS Non-verbal ScoreComparison between gifted in Art on ...
Comparing Year 8 end of year exam designquestion with MidYIS score02468101214161890 110 130 150MidYIS ScoreDesignQuestionM...
Comparing gifted in Year 8 with rest of Year 8 onMidYIS Maths ScoreD&T Gifted and Rest of Year 8 Comparison on MidYISMaths...
Comparing Coursework, Written Paper & YELLIS ScoresUsing Pearson‟s „r‟ correlation coeficientD&T GCSE (n=181) Combined GCS...
ConclusionEvidence from the study’s data• MidYIS/YELLIS useful indication of students‟ general intellectual ability• There...
ConclusionEvidence from the literature• Aptitude measures (IQ, CAT etc) are extremely reliable (Gagné, 2005)• General inte...
Using the QCDA (2009) Identification CriteriaA Twissell 2010
E.P. Torrance‟s FactorsGifted, successful individuals:• Have a love for the work they do• Are persistent in their work• Ha...
Tilsley‟s DIP ModelDefinition identification Provision (DIP)Source: Tilsley (1995)A Twissell 2010
Tilsley‟s PEP ModelProvision Evaluation Provision (PEP)Source: Tilsley (1995)A Twissell 2010
ReferencesDfES (2006) Identifying Gifted and Talented Pupils-Getting Started, retrieved from the World Wide Web:http://www...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Identifying gifted and talented students in design and technology

1,850 views

Published on

Presentation

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Identifying gifted and talented students in design and technology

  1. 1. Identifying gifted and talented students inDesign and TechnologyAdrian Twissell MA2010A Twissell 2010
  2. 2. Identification of gifted and talented studentsAims•Background to the study- definitions & models•Overview of study- methods & participants•Results of study•Conclusion•Using subject specific identification criteriaA Twissell 2010
  3. 3. Aim of the study“Can teachers use the results of cognitive ability tests toidentify giftedness in D&T?”A Twissell 2010
  4. 4. 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 scorein Sixth FormCriticisms• Assumes giftedness is fixed• Not related to subject specific ability• Is not ‘peer’ related• Does not take account of qualitative methodsA Twissell 2010
  5. 5. What is Giftedness and Talent?„Children and young people with one or more abilities developed to a levelsignificantly ahead of their year group (or with the potential to develop thoseabilities)‟DfES (2006)Giftedness - possession and use of outstanding natural abilities in at leastone domain that places an individual at least among the top 10% of agepeers.Talent - outstanding mastery of systematically developedabilities/skills/knowledge in at least one field of human activity to a degreethat places the individual at least among the top 10% of age peers whoare/have been active in that field or fields.Gagné (2004)A Twissell 2010
  6. 6. Who is Gifted and Talented?• QCDA definition„„Gifted‟ learners are those who have abilities in one or moresubjects 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
  7. 7. 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 aptitudemeasures.„Talented‟ refers to those students who „perform‟ at a high level.CEM Centre believe that these students should be identified usingachievement measures.Mentally Gifted based on MidYIS/YELLIS ScoresAbove 130 = top 2% nationallyAbove 126 = top 5% nationallyAbove 120 = top 10% nationallyA Twissell 2010
  8. 8. Alternative Conceptions• Renzulli‟s Three-Ringed Conception of GiftednessAbove-AverageAbilityTaskCommitmentCreativitySpecific Performance AreasCartooning ElectronicsAstronomy Musical CompositionPublic Opinion Polling LandscapeJewellery Design ArchitectureMap Making ChemistryChoreography MicrophotographyBiography City PlanningFilm Making PoetryStatisticsLocal HistoryGeneral Performance AreasMathematics Visual Arts Physical SciencesPhilosophy Social Sciences LawReligion Language Arts MusicLife Sciences Movement ArtsSource: Renzulli (1978) „The Three-Ringed Conception of Giftedness‟A Twissell 2010
  9. 9. Gagné‟s Differentiated Model of Giftedness and TalentGiftedness = top 10%NATURALABILITIESDOMAINSIntellectualCreativeSocioaffectiveSensorimotorINTRAPERSONALPhysical/MentalcharacteristicsSelf ManagementTalent = top 10%SYSTEMATICALLYDEVELOPEDSKILLSFIELDSAcademics: language,science, humanitiesArts: visual, drama,musicBusiness: sales,entrepreneurship,managementLeisure: chess, videogames, puzzlesSocial Action: media,public officeSports: individual &teamTechnology: trades &craft, electronics,computersCHANCEENVIRONMENTALMilleuPersonsProvisionsEventsDEVELOPMENTALPROCESSInformal/formal learning &practicingCATALYSTSSource: Gagné (2004)A Twissell 2010
  10. 10. Outline of Study/MethodGCSE raw scoredataGifted in Art, D&T,Drama, History &PED&T DesignQuestion ScoresTeacher‟s Surveyin Art, D&T,Drama & PEData CollectionVerification ofD&T G&T with NCLevelsMean ScoreComparisonPercentrank/DecileComparisonPearson‟s „r‟Correlation withMidYIS/YELLISMean analysisbetween D&TStrandsPearson‟s „r‟CorrelationQualitativeAnalysisDiscussion &ConclusionsA Twissell 2010
  11. 11. 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-makeprocess• work comfortably in contexts beyond their own experience and empathise with usersand clients needs and wants• performance 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 themselvesQCDA (2009)Subject specific criteria was given to Art, Drama and PEHistory used their existing registerA Twissell 2010
  12. 12. Comparing GCSE raw scores with MidYIS scoresin D&T02040608010095 115 135 155MidYIS ScoreGCSERawScoreGCSE Raw ScoreComparison between GCSE (2008) Raw score and MidYISscore (n=170, r=0.31, p<0.01, 100 degrees of freedom)A Twissell 2010
  13. 13. Comparing GCSE raw scores with YELLIS scoresin D&T02040608010095 115 135 155YELLIS ScoreGCSERawScoreGCSE Raw ScoreComparison between GCSE (2008) raw score and YELLIS score(n=183, r=0.37, p<0.001, 100 degrees of freedom)A Twissell 2010
  14. 14. Comparing mean YELLIS scores and subtestscores within D&T strandsGraphicsn=42Resistant Materialsn=103Systemsn=38YELLIS ScoreGroup(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)MathsGroup(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)VocabularyGroup(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)PatternsGroup(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
  15. 15. Comparing mean MidYIS scores and subtest scores withstudents identified gifted in D&T, Art, Drama, PE & HistoryTotal Year 8 Population n=180 Vocab Maths NonVerbal Skills MidYIS ScoreGifted 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 8122 (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
  16. 16. Decile comparison methodScore % Rank G&T?140 100138 99 G&T136 97132 95 G&T128 89124 78122 72 G&T121 71 G&T120 70% Rank G&T999572711st decile3rd decileA Twissell 2010
  17. 17. Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8population based on MidYIS score05101520251 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Percentrank (Band 1=Top Decile 90-100%on MidYIS Score)PercentageofStudentsGifted in D&T %Rest of Y8 %Comparison of deciles between Year 8 gifted in D&T (n=29)and rest of Year 8 (n=151)A Twissell 2010
  18. 18. Comparing gifted Year 8 D&T students with Year 8population based on MidYIS non-verbal score05101520251 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Percentrank (Band 1=Top 90%)PercentageofStudentsGifted in D&T %Rest of Y8 %Comparison of deciles between Year 8 gifted in D&T (n=29)and rest of Year 8 (n=151) on nonverbal scoreA Twissell 2010
  19. 19. Comparing gifted in Year 8 Art Student‟s with restof Year 8 on MidYIS Non-verbal ScoreComparison between gifted in Art on Nonverbal score andYear 8 populationComparison Between Gifted in Art & Year 8Population on Nonverbal Score0510152025301 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Percentrank (Band 1=Top Decile 90-100%on Nonverbal Score)PercentageofStudents% Gifted in Art% of Y8 populationA Twissell 2010
  20. 20. Comparing Year 8 end of year exam designquestion with MidYIS score02468101214161890 110 130 150MidYIS ScoreDesignQuestionMarkDesign QuestionEnd of Year 8 exam design question mark and MidYIS scorecorrelation (n=170, r=0.21, p<0.05, 100 degrees of freedom)A Twissell 2010
  21. 21. Comparing gifted in Year 8 with rest of Year 8 onMidYIS Maths ScoreD&T Gifted and Rest of Year 8 Comparison on MidYISMaths Score051015201 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Percentrank (Band 1=Top Decile 90-100%on MidYIS Maths ScorePercentageofStudents% Gifted D&T% Rest of Y8Gifted sample’s maths score decile comparison with rest of Year 8A Twissell 2010
  22. 22. Comparing Coursework, Written Paper & YELLIS ScoresUsing Pearson‟s „r‟ correlation coeficientD&T GCSE (n=181) Combined GCSERaw ScoreCoursework ExamOverall YELLIS Score 0.37 0.30 0.36Maths 0.38 0.33 0.32Vocab 0.21 0.15 0.28Patterns 0.20 0.20 0.11CWK/EXAM Correlation AllGroups0.36>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
  23. 23. ConclusionEvidence from the study’s data• MidYIS/YELLIS useful indication of students‟ general intellectual ability• There is a good correlation between achieving well on CATs and achievingwell at GCSE in D&T• There are indications that this applies to both coursework and written exams• Use of MidYIS/YELLIS for identification of gifted not supported in D&T, Artor PE• D&T, Art and PE generally score well on MidYIS non-verbal measureA Twissell 2010
  24. 24. ConclusionEvidence from the literature• Aptitude measures (IQ, CAT etc) are extremely reliable (Gagné, 2005)• General intellectual ability (‘g’) is a concept overwhelmingly accepted asbeing central to an individuals ability (Jensen, 1981; Lubinski, 2009)• Multidimensional measures increase the likelihood of identifying specificaptitudes (Gardner, 1997; Heller, 2004)• Persistence or „task commitment‟ may be central to an individual‟s giftedprofile (Ericsson et al., 2009; Mayer, 2005; Renzulli, 1978)• Creative thinking may be central to an individual‟s giftedness (Sternberg etal., 2006)A Twissell 2010
  25. 25. Using the QCDA (2009) Identification CriteriaA Twissell 2010
  26. 26. E.P. Torrance‟s FactorsGifted, successful individuals:• Have a love for the work they do• Are persistent in their work• Have a clear purpose in life• Have diverse experiences• Have high energy levels• Are open to change„Over the long haul these factors become more important than traditionalmeasures of intelligence and academic ability‟ (Torrance, 2004)Source: Torrance (2004) Great Expectations: Creative Achievements of the SociometricStars in a 30-Year StudyA Twissell 2010
  27. 27. Tilsley‟s DIP ModelDefinition identification Provision (DIP)Source: Tilsley (1995)A Twissell 2010
  28. 28. Tilsley‟s PEP ModelProvision Evaluation Provision (PEP)Source: Tilsley (1995)A Twissell 2010
  29. 29. ReferencesDfES (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 Performancethrough 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 ofGiftedness (2nd Edition), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp98-119.Gardner, H. (1997) Extraordinary Minds: Portraits Of Exceptional Individuals And An Examination of Our Extraordinariness, London: Weidenfeldand 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 andfor 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 13th July 2009.Torrance (2004) Great Expectations: Creative Achievements of the Sociometric Stars in a 30-Year Study, The Journal of Secondary GiftedEducation, 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 16thDecember 2009.A Twissell 2010

×