Over the past few decades, systemic thinking has gained in popularity in developmental and learning sciences. The trend has, however, shown up in gifted education research only occasionally. The aim of this article is to introduce systemic thinking to the field of giftedness and explore possibilities for its application. In the first part, a definition of a system is provided and basic concepts of systemic thinking are introduced. In the second part, a full-fledged systemic model is introduced, the actiotope model of giftedness. In the third part, implications for gifted education are elaborated. In the discussion, the authors explain (a) how systemic thinking can make a valuable contribution to gifted education, (b) why systemic thinking will complement rather than replace current approaches to gifted education, and (c) the necessity of combining systemic thinking with other empirically testable theories.
BatesonG. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
2.
BaumeisterR. F. (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown, and emotional distress as factors in self-defeating behavior. Review of General Psychology, 1, 145-174. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.2.145
3.
BrownlieD. (1994). Environmental scanning. In BakerM. J. (Ed.), The marketing book (3rd ed., pp. 139-192). Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann.
4.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
ChaiklinS. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In KozulinA.GindisB.AgeyevV.MillerS. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory and practice in cultural context (pp. 39-64). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6.
CrockerJ.LuhtanenR. K. (2003). Level of self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth: Unique effects on academic, social, and financial problems in college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 701-712. doi:10.1177/0146167203029006003
7.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1998). Creativity and genius: A systems perspective. In SteptoeA. (Ed.), Genius and the mind: Studies of creativity and temperament (pp. 39-64). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
8.
DaiD. Y. (2009). Essential tensions surrounding the concept of giftedness. In ShavininaL. V. (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 39-80). New York, NY: Springer.
9.
DallosR.DraperR. (2005). An introduction to family therapy: Systemic theory and practice. London, England: Open University Press.
10.
FlynnJ. R. (2012). Are we getting smarter? Rising IQ in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
11.
GuignardJ. H.JacquetA. Y.LubartT. I. (2013). Perfectionism and anxiety: A paradox in intellectual giftedness?PLoS ONE, 7(7), e41043. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041043
12.
HarderB.TrottlerS.VialleW.ZieglerA. (2015). Diagnosing resources for effective learning via teacher and parent checklists. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 57, 201-221.
13.
HellerK. A. (1991). The nature and development of giftedness: A longitudinal study. European Journal for High Ability, 2, 174-188. doi:10.1080/0937445910020207
14.
HellerK. A. (2004). Identification of gifted and talented students. Psychology Science, 46, 302-323.
15.
JonesG. (2012). The role of superior performance intelligence in sustained success. In MurphyS. M. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sport and performance psychology (pp. 62-80). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199731763.013.0004
16.
LuenbergerD. G. (1979). Introduction to dynamic systems: Theory, models, and applications. New York, NY: Wiley.
17.
MadanesC. (1981). Strategic family therapy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18.
MatthewsM. S. (2009). Gifted learners who drop out: Prevalence and prevention. In ShavininaL. V. (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 527-536). New York, NY: Springer.
19.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2003). Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 144-154. doi:10.1177/001698620304700205
20.
MichelA.WangK.HuB. (2001). Qualitative theory of dynamical systems. London, England: Taylor & Francis.
21.
MillerG. A.GalanterE.PribramK. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York, NY: Holt.
22.
MinuchinS.FishmanH. C. (1981). Family therapy techniques. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
NisbettR. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerns think differently and why. London, England: Nicholas.
24.
OvertonW. F. (2013). Relationism and relational developmental systems: A paradigm for developmental science in the post-Cartesian era. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 44, 21-64.
25.
PekrunR.LichtenfeldS.MarshH. W.MurayamaK.GoetzT. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/cdev.12704
26.
PiagetJ. (1960). Equilibration and development of logical structures. In TannerJ. M.InhelderB. (Eds.), Discussions on child development (Vol. 4, pp. 98-115). New York, NY: International Universities Press.
27.
RenzulliJ. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53-92). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
28.
RichardsonK. (2002). What IQ tests test. Theory and Psychology, 12, 283-314. doi:10.1177/0959354302012003012
29.
RichardsonK. (2013). The evolution of intelligent developmental systems. In LernerR. M.BensonJ. B. (Eds.), Embodiment and epigenesist: Theoretical and methodological issues in understanding the role of biology within relational developmental systems (pp. 127-160). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
30.
SimontonD. K. (2005). Giftedness and genetics: The emergentic-epigenetic model and its implications. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28, 270-286. doi:10.4219/jeg-2005-338
31.
SteeleC. M. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi and other clues to how stereotypes affect us. New York, NY: Norton.
32.
SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (2005). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33.
ThelenE.SmithL. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge: MIT Press.
34.
VladutA.VialleW.ZieglerA. (2016). Two studies of the empirical basis of two learning resource-oriented motivational strategies for gifted educators. High Ability Studies, 27, 39-60. doi:10.1080/13598139.2016.1212702
35.
von BertalanffyL. (1975). Perspectives on general system theory: Scientific-philosophical studies. New York, NY: George Brazilier.
36.
ZieglerA. (2005). The actiotope model of giftedness. In SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 411-434). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
37.
ZieglerA.BakerJ. (2013). Talent development as adaption: The role of educational and learning capital. In PhillipsonS.StoegerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the actiotope model of giftedness (pp. 18-39). London, England: Routledge.
38.
ZieglerA.ChandlerK.VialleW.StoegerH. (in press). Exogenous and endogenous learning resources in the actiotope model of giftedness and its significance for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted.
39.
ZieglerA.PhillipsonS. (2012a). Exceptionality and gifted education: A re-examination of its hard core. High Ability Studies, 23, 133-142. doi:10.1080/13598139.2012.736221
40.
ZieglerA.PhillipsonS. (2012b). Towards a systemic theory of giftedness. High Ability Studies, 23, 3-30. doi:10.1080/13598139.2012.679085
41.
ZieglerA.StoegerH.BalestriniD. (in press). Systemic gifted education. In O’ReillyC.CrossT.Riedl CrossJ. (Eds.), Provisions for gifted students. Dublin, Ireland: CTYI Press.
42.
ZieglerA.VialleW.WimmerB. (2013). The actiotope model of giftedness: A short introduction to some central theoretical assumptions. In PhillipsonS.StoegerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the actiotope model of giftedness (pp. 1-17). London, England: Routledge.
