The Actiotope Model of Giftedness focuses on the interactions between the individual and the environment. Developing excellence requires educational and learning capitals that can support the individual in achieving a specific target. This study examined differences in the educational and learning capitals of students graded in three levels of mathematical abilities. To design the groups for this study, the researcher used participants’ scores from an administration of the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices Test for general ability evaluation and an achievement test in mathematics. Students also received the Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital. Teachers completed the Teachers Checklist of Educational and Learning Capital, and students’ grades were collected. Results showed that students skilled in mathematics reported higher learningcapital than students with low mathematical performance. Teachers observed that students skilled in mathematics have significantly more educational and learning capital than their less skilled peers. The results confirm that educational and learning capitals are essential for the development of excellence.
BellerM. (2013). Assessment in the service of learning: Theory and practice. Ramat Gan, Israel: RAMA.
3.
CallinghamR. (2013). Chinese students and mathematical problem solving: An application of the Actiotope Model of Giftedness. In PhillipsonS. N.StoegerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (pp. 136–153). London, England: Routledge.
4.
CastelliD. M.HillmanC. H.BuckS. M.ErwinH. E. (2007). Physical fitness and academic achievement in third- and fifth-grade students. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29, 239–252.
5.
ChiuM. M.KhooL. (2005). Effects of resources, inequality, and privilege bias on achievement: Country, school, and student level analyses. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 575–603.
6.
ClearyT. J.ZimmermanB. J. (2001). Self-regulation differences during athletic practice by experts, non-experts, and novices. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13, 185–206.
7.
GruberH.JansenP.MarienhagenJ.AltenmuellerE. (2010). Adaptations during the acquisition of expertise. Talent Development & Excellence, 2, 3–15.
8.
HamelR.SchmittmannV. D. (2006). The 20-minute version as a predictor of the Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices Test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 1039–1046.
9.
HarderB.TrottlerS.VialleW.ZieglerA. (2015). Diagnosing resources for effective learning via teacher and parent checklists. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 57, 201–221.
10.
HarnischD. L. (1994). Supplemental education in Japan: Juku schooling and its implications. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26, 323–334.
11.
IsraelG. D.BeaulieuL. J.HartlessG. (2001). The influence of family and community social capital on educational achievement. Rural Sociology, 66, 43–68.
12.
KempL. C. D. (1955). Environmental and other characteristics determining attainments in primary schools. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 25, 67–77.
13.
KennyD. T.FaunceG. (2004). The effects of academic coaching on elementary and secondary school students. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 115–126.
14.
KitsantasA.ZimmermanB. J. (2002). Comparing self-regulatory processes among novice non-expert, and expert volleyball players: A microanalytic study. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 91–105.
15.
Leana-TaşcılarM. Z. (2015). The Actiotope Model of Giftedness: Its relationship with motivation, and the prediction of academic achievement among Turkish students. The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 32, 41–55.
16.
LeungK. S. F. (2005). Some characteristics of East Asian classrooms based on data from the 1999 TIMSS video study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 199–215.
17.
LindbergS. M.HydeJ. S.PetersonJ. L.LinnM. C. (2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1123–1135.
18.
LynnR.VanhanenT. (2002). IQ and the wealth of nations. Westport, CT: Praeger.
19.
Manny-IkanE.DaganO.TikochinskiT.ZormanR. (2011). Using the interactive white board in teaching and learning—An evaluation of the SMART CLASSROOM pilot project. Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, 249–273.
20.
Paz-BaruchN. (2015). Validation study of the Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital (QELC) in Israel. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 57, 222–235.
21.
RavenJ.RavenJ. C.CourtJ. H. (2000). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists.
22.
RisembergR.ZimmermanB. J. (1992). Self-regulated learning in gifted students. Roeper Review, 15, 98–101.
23.
RubanL.ReisS. M. (2006). Patterns of self-regulatory strategy use among low-achieving and high-achieving university students. Roeper Review, 28, 148–156.
24.
Salvi del PeroA.BytchkovaA. (2013). A bird’s eye view of gender differences in education in OECD countries (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 149). Paris, France: The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. doi:10.1787/5k40k706tmtb-en
25.
SchweizerK.MoosbruggerH. (2004). Attention and working memory as predictors of intelligence. Intelligence, 32, 329–347.
26.
SchweizerK.ZimmermannP.KochW. (2000). Sustained attention, intelligence and the crucial role of perceptual processes. Learning and Individual Differences, 12, 271–286.
27.
ShephardR. J. (1997). Curricular physical activity and academic performance. Pediatric Exercise Science, 9, 113–126.
28.
SmithH.HigginsS.WallK.MillerJ. (2005). Interactive whiteboard: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 91–101.
29.
SontagC.StoegerH.HarderB. (2012). The relationship between intelligence and the preference for self-regulated learning: A longitudinal study with fourth-graders. Talent Development & Excellence, 4, 1–22.
30.
StoegerH. (2013). Support-oriented identification of gifted students in East Asia according to the Actiotope Model of Giftedness. In S. N. Phillipson, H. Stoeger, & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Exceptionality in East-Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (pp. 188–211). London, England: Routledge.
31.
StoegerH.SontagC. (2012). How gifted students learn: A literature review. In ZieglerA.FischerC.StoegerH.ReutlingerM. (Eds.), Gifted education as a lifelong challenge: Essays in honour of Franz J. Monks (pp. 315–336). Münster, Germany: LIT.
32.
VialleW. (2013). The “tiger mother” factor: Curriculum, schooling and mentoring of Asian students in an Australian context. In PhillipsonS. N.StoegerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East-Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (pp. 136–153). London, England: Routledge.
33.
VladutA.LiuQ.Leana-TaşcılarM. Z.VialleW.ZieglerA. (2013). A cross-cultural validation study of the Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital (QELC) in China, Germany and Turkey. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 55, 462–478.
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.
35.
ZieglerA. (2005). The Actiotope Model of Giftedness. In SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 411–434). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
ZimmermanB. J.PonsM. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American educational research journal, 23, 614–628.
37.
ZieglerA.BakerJ. (2013). Talent development as adaptation: The role of educational and learning capital. In PhillipsonS.StögerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (pp. 18–39). London, England: Routledge.
38.
ZieglerA.StoegerH.GrassingerR. (2011). Actiotope Model and self-regulated learning. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53, 161–179.
39.
ZieglerA.VialleW.WimmerB. (2013). The Actiotope Model of Giftedness: A short introduction to some central theoretical assumptions. In PhillipsonS. N.StoegerH.ZieglerA. (Eds.), Exceptionality in East-Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (pp. 1–17). London, England: Routledge.
40.
ZoharA. (1990). Mathematical reasoning ability: Its structure, and some aspects of its genetic transmission (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.
