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.

Lynda garrett


Published on

2013 WCGTC Presentation: Reading Between the Lines

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Lynda garrett

  1. 1. Reading  between  the  lines:  Comparisons   between  teacher  expecta7ons  for  young  gi;ed   and  talented  readers,  and  self-­‐percep7ons.   Lynda  Garre+,  Chris1ne  Rubie-­‐Davies,  Annaline  Flint,   Penny  Watson  &  Lyn  McDonald,   The  University  of  Auckland,   New  Zealand   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  2. 2. Teacher  expecta1ons                        Student  learning  opportuni1es                                                                    are  at  the                          of  the  teacher  expecta1on  issue   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  3. 3. Appropriate  teacher  expecta1ons  and   learning  opportuni1es  for  giTed  and   talented  students   A  recognised  need  for…    -­‐  teacher  accuracy  in  assessment  within  a  par1cular            talent  area  (Hodge  &  Kemp,  2006)     -­‐  teacher  training  in  recognising    specific  giTed            behaviours  (Siegle,  Moore,  Mann  &  Wilson  ,  2010)       …and  the  associated  danger  of  ‘teacher  –developed’  concep1ons   of  giTedness  (Speirs  Neumeister,  Adams,  Pierce,  Cassady  &  Dixon,   2007).    -­‐     WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  4. 4. Research  ques1ons   •  Are  teachers’  expecta1ons  more  accurate  for   giTed  or  non-­‐giTed  students  in  reading?     •  What  personal  beliefs  (self-­‐concept,   mo1va1on)  predict  the  likelihood  that   students  are  giTed  or  non-­‐giTed  in  reading?   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  5. 5. Methodology-­‐  Par7cipants            1688  students  /89  teachers/  12  schools   •  GiTed  readers-­‐  275      Non-­‐giTed  readers  -­‐  1413   •  Total  students:  Gender  821  boys  (48.6%)  867  girls  (51.4%)   •  GiTed  readers:  Gender  113  boys  (41.1%)162  girls  (58.9%)   •  Socioeconomic  level          GiTed  -­‐93.5%  (mid-­‐high)  Non-­‐giTed  –  76.7%  (low-­‐mid)   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013    ETHNICITY  :  TOTAL  SAMPLE   713    (42.2%)  NZ  European   ETHNICITY:    GIFTED  SAMPLE   151  (54.9%)  NZ  European   312  (18.5%)  Maori        64  (23.3%)  Asian     258  (  15.3%)  Pasifika   22  (8.0%)  Maori     259  (15.3%)  Asian     16  (  5.8%)  Pasifika     146  (  8.7%)  ‘Other’     22  (  8.0%)  ‘Other’      
  6. 6. Methodology-­‐  Measures     •  Teacher  expecta1on  survey     •  Student  achievement  in  reading            h+p://e-­‐     •  Student  ques1onnaire            (SDQ-­‐1;  Marsh,1990)       WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  7. 7. SELF  CONCEPT   reading  self-­‐concept   “Work  in  reading  is  easy  for  me.”  “I  learn  things  quickly  in  reading.”   peer  rela1ons  self-­‐ concept   “  I  get  along  with  kids  easily.”  “Most  other  kids  like  me.”   academic  self-­‐concept   “I  am  good  at  all  school  subjects.”  “Work  in  all  school  subjects  is  easy  for   me.”   personal  self-­‐concept   “I  am  easy  to  like.”  “A  lot  of  things  about  me  are  good.”   MOTIVATION   performance  goal     orienta1on   “I  really  want  to  show  others  that  I  am  good  at  reading.”   perceived  competence   “Compared  to  other  subjects,  I  am  beBer  at  reading.”   self-­‐efficacy   “I  am  sure  that  I  can  learn  everything  the  teacher  teaches  in  reading  this   year.”   mastery  goal   orienta1on   “It’s  important  to  me  that  I  learn  a  lot  of  new  skills  in  reading  this  year.”   intrinsic  value   “I  find  working  on  reading  acFviFes  interesFng.”   u1lity  value   “I  will  use  reading  in  many  ways  when  I  grow  up.”   a+ribu1on   “Being  brainy  is  more  important  than  trying  hard  for  doing  well  in  school.”  *   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  8. 8. Methodology-­‐  Procedures   Teachers   Students   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013   Happened  at  around  the  same  1me  
  9. 9. Results   1.  Rela1onships  between  teacher  expecta1ons  and  student   achievement  for  giTed  and  non-­‐giTed  students     Teachers  were  less    accurate  in  their  expectaFons  of  giKed  students  than    non-­‐giKed   students  .(  Non-­‐gi'ed:  n  =  1398,  r  =  .35,  p  <  .001    GiTed  students:    n  =  273,  r  =  .26,  p  <  .001.       30.5%                          (n  =  84)                  very  much  above  average  levels     38.2%                          (n  =  105)              moderately  above  average  levels,     19.3%                          (n  =  53)                  just  above  average,     9.8%                              (n  =  27)                  average,     1%                                      (n  =  3)                      just  below  average,     .3%                                    (n  =  1)                      moderately  below  average      .7%                                  (n  =  2)                      very  much  below  average.     Students  classified  as  giKed  were  almost  1.5  Fmes  as  likely  to  have  high  teacher   expectaFons  for  their  achievement.       WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  10. 10. Implica1ons   A  case  of  ‘short-­‐sightedness?   Teacher  pre-­‐occupa1on   with  the  needs  of  non-­‐ giTed  readers?     Could  the  ‘deficit’   orienta1on  have  been   more  generalised?   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  11. 11. Were  they  fully  aware…?   Above average ability General e.g., word comprehension word fluency verbal reasoning Specific e.g. making up / illustrating stories finding connections Task commitment Long attention span Voracious reading -fun / preferred activity Spontaneous reading of materials to prove/disprove points. Selects high-level reading materialsCreativity Originality in thinking re author’s choice of plot, setting, character etc Very different and more advanced interpretations of readings than their classmates. See novel connections between similar themed texts.Vosslamber, (2002), p. 5
  12. 12.   Results   2.  Rela7onships  between  personal  beliefs     for  gi;ed  and  non-­‐gi;ed  students    SELF-­‐CONCEPT  FACTORS   MOTIVATION  FACTORS   Peer  self-­‐concept   Perceived  competence   Reading  self-­‐concept   Self-­‐efficacy   Academic  self-­‐concept   Mastery  goal  orienta1on   Personal  self-­‐concept   Performance  goal  orienta1on   Intrinsic  value   U1lity  value   a+ribu1on   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  13. 13.   Results   2.  Rela7onships  between  personal  beliefs     for  gi;ed  and  non-­‐gi;ed  students   a.  Self-­‐concept    The  strongest  predictor  for  giTed  students  was  reading  self-­‐concept  (odds  ra1o  of   1.75)       GiTed  students  more  likely  to  report  strong  academic  self-­‐concept  (odds  ra1o  of   1.39  ).         The  higher  student  peer  self-­‐concept  was  the  less  this  predicted  being  giTed   (odds  ra1o  of  .73).         Reading  and  academic  self-­‐concept  were  more  predic1ve  of  being   giTed  than  reading  achievement.     WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  14. 14.   Results   2.  Rela7onships  between  personal  beliefs     for  gi;ed  and  non-­‐gi;ed  students   b.  Mo7va7on      •  Perceived  competence  was  a  stronger  predictor  of  being  giTed  than   reading  achievement  (odds  ra1o  of  1.61).       •  Perceived  competence  in  reading  was  more  predic1ve  of  being  giTed  than   reading  achievement.       Strong  beliefs  in  the  student’s  own  capabili1es  were  more   indica1ve  of  students  being  giTed  than  their  actual   achievement.   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  15. 15. Implica1ons   Could  high  levels  of  self-­‐confidence  enhance  learning   opportuni1es  for  young  giTed  readers?     •  GiTed  students  may  be  more  resilient  and  less  vulnerable  to   teachers’  expecta1ons  than  non-­‐giTed  students.       •  Young  giTed  readers  who  present  with  a  willingness  to  learn     may  encourage  teachers  to  enhance  their  learning   opportuni1es  (Hunsaker,  Neilsen  &  Bartle+,  2010).                          Appropriate  learning  opportuni7es  and  high  teacher  expecta7ons                                                                          enhanced  and  sustained    mo7va7on  and  self-­‐concept     WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013  
  16. 16. Reading  between  the  lines:  Comparisons   between  teacher  expecta7ons  for  young  gi;ed   and  talented  readers,  and  self-­‐percep7ons.   Lynda  Garre+,  Chris1ne  Rubie-­‐Davies,  Annaline  Flint,   Penny  Watson  &  Lyn  McDonald,   The  University  of  Auckland,   New  Zealand   WCGTC  20th  Biennial  World  Conference   2013