Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study explored the affective outcomes students perceived from participating in a summer program and the program components that contributed to participants’ perceived affective development. Participants were 55 middle school students (29 girls) with intellectual gifts who participated in a 4-day-long residential program conducted in a western state in India. Participants wrote descriptive reflections responding to a 16-item open-ended survey. Matrix coding was used to code affective outcomes and the associated program components. Thematic analyses of responses revealed five themes that depicted improvement in participants’ (a) confidence and courage, (b) self-awareness, (c) social awareness, (d) social skills, and (e) inspiration. Leadership workshops and group activities, rural experience, and camp structure were discussed most frequently in relation to specific affective outcomes. Findings indicated that a direct and well-planned affective intervention can provide opportunities for social and emotional learning. Implications for holistic talent development programming have been discussed.

Keywords

educational interventions high ability summer programs social-emotional enrichment program

Educators in gifted education and talent development have historically focused on the cognitive development of gifted and talented students (Gensley, 1973; Moon, 2009; Rakow, 2020; Silverman, 1993). Although educators need to understand and support the cognitive development of students with gifts and talents, they also need to know about and foster social and emotional or affective development to support talent development in the contexts of school, home, and the larger community (National Association for Gifted Children [NAGC], 2019). A substantial body of research has emphasized the importance of social and emotional skills in the manifestation of giftedness over the entire lifespan (e.g., Bloom, 1985; Gagné, 2005, 2009; Subotnik et al., 2011, 2018; Tannenbaum, 1986, 2003). Bapat (2017) posited that “the affective development [should] be seen as a necessary prerequisite in the education of the highly able for them to become competent, motivated problem-solvers, and creative builders of society and nation” (p. 218). To that end, NAGC (2019) has recommended educators design interventions for students with gifts and talents that are based on research on effective practices to develop social and emotional skills. However, few researchers have explored affective interventions with gifted and talented youth; only 17 empirical studies have been published between 1984 and 2015 on this topic (Jen, 2017). Thus, a clear need exists to design and evaluate affective interventions to provide research-based practices that can be incorporated into talent development programs (Jen, 2017; Subotnik et al., 2011, 2018). The present study aimed to fill this gap in the literature by examining the affective outcomes of a residential summer talent development program for adolescents with intellectual gifts and talents. Adolescence marks an important transition in terms of the social, emotional, and motivational development of children (Erikson, 1968, 1994). Therefore, adolescence is an opportune time to provide affective programming for students with gifts and talents. The following research questions guided our inquiry:

1. What affective outcomes did students perceive from participating in the residential summer program?

2. What program components and underlying processes contributed to participants’ perceived affective development and in what ways?

Theoretical Framework

Affective Development as an Integral Part of Talent Development

Based on Moon’s (2009) work, we define affective development in terms of emotional and moral (intrapersonal), social (interpersonal), and conative (motivational) development. Affective skills and attitudes include emotional skills and attitudes such as self-awareness, reflexivity, resilience, growth mindsets, optimism, and hope; social skills such as leadership, teamwork, communication, and presentation skills; and various aspects of motivation such as self-competence beliefs, self-determination, and interest.

Talent development is defined as the gradual development of natural abilities/gifts into domain-specific talents over time (Gagné, 2005, 2009; Subotnik et al., 2011). Under a talent development framework, abilities are viewed as malleable, and affective skills play a critical role in developing childhood potential/gifts into adulthood fulfillment or achievement (Bloom, 1985; Gagné, 2005, 2009; Subotnik et al., 2011, 2018; Tannenbaum, 1986, 2003). Honing students’ affective skills may catalyze talent development and substantially contribute to students’ later success despite failures, setbacks, and challenges. Conversely, a lack of appropriate affective skills may impede talent development in many ways such as motivational loss and development of depression, anxiety, or fear and may restrain individuals who possess immense potential for advanced performance from fully actualizing their talents (Desmet et al., 2020; Desmet & Pereira, 2022; Peterson, 2006; Peterson & Jen, 2018).

Adolescence is a transformative developmental stage, marked by numerous challenges and opportunities for growth. It is a time of gaining self-awareness, where young individuals explore and define their identities (Erikson, 1968, 1994). Adolescents often experience heightened emotional intensity during this phase (Siegel, 2015). Forming friendships, navigating social hierarchies, and understanding social norms are critical aspects of this stage (Siegel, 2015). Adolescents seek greater autonomy and independence from their families during this stage.

Although the previous descriptions of adolescence apply more generally to adolescents with gifts and talents, this group may also have unique affective needs emerging from a dynamic interaction between their advanced abilities and the environment (Hébert, 2011; Papadopoulos, 2020; Subotnik et al., 2011, 2018). Gifted early adolescents may exhibit heightened emotional intensity, deeper introspection, moral maturity, a higher sense of justice, and a drive for a mature and adult understanding of human problems and values (Hébert, 2011; Olszewski-Kubilius, 2010; Rakow, 2020). These aspects of adolescence call for systematic and proactive affective interventions that can address the challenges of adolescents with gifts and talents and help them grow into healthy, well-adjusted, and socially contributing adults (Olszewski-Kubilius, 2010; Peterson & Jen, 2018).

Affective skills and attitudes are teachable and can be developed through deliberate interventions such as enrichment programs (Olszewski-Kubilius et al., 2016; Subotnik et al., 2011, 2018). In general, enrichment programs and, especially, summer programs are particularly effective in developing students’ affective skills (Kim, 2016). Enrichment programs can be instrumental in enhancing students’ independence and confidence (Desmet et al., 2022; Desmet & Pereira, 2022; Lee et al., 2015), openness (Jen et al., 2017), friendships (Cross et al., 1991; Jen et al., 2017; VanTassel-Baska et al., 1984), academic self-perceptions, planning skills, self-monitoring (Desmet et al., 2023), resilience and mental health (Armstrong et al., 2019), and social interactions and motivation (Chowkase et al., 2022; Wu & Gentry, 2014), as well as reversing underachievement behaviors (Desmet & Pereira, 2022; Matthews & McBee, 2007). Enrichment programs take multiple forms; however, summer enrichment programs are especially popular among middle and high school students. However, as few as 17 studies have been published on affective interventions for youth with gifts and talents from 1984 through 2015 (Jen, 2017). Also, there is an expressed need in the field for more focus on studies involving the structured components of summer programs that influence affective development (Jen et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2015).

Using design-based research, Jen et al. (2017) studied high-ability students’ perspectives on an affective intervention in a university-based summer residential program in the United States. Their intervention focused on one-hour small-group meetings among 8–12 camp participants to facilitate conversations regarding affective topics such as stress, competition, bullying, perfectionism, change, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Through these group meetings, participants learned more about values, other group members, different cultures, and themselves. Long-term effects included stronger self-confidence and being more open to people. These researchers concluded that a direct affective intervention could enhance the participants’ summer program experiences and provide opportunities for social and emotional learning, and therefore, recommended educators to incorporate well-planned affective interventions in summer programs for youth with gifts and talents and empirically investigate their outcomes.

Methods

We used a qualitative, inductive thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Nowell et al., 2017) to examine 55 students’ perceived affective outcomes after participating in a residential summer program conducted in 2019. Thematic analysis is well-suited to organize and analyze larger qualitative datasets such as ours. This method allowed us to summarize and examine our participants’ perceived affective outcomes for similarities and differences.

Setting

Our data were collected at an outside-of-school talent development program in Western India. The program enrolls children with intellectual gifts and talents from urban middle- and high-income families in Grades 6 and 7. The program component being researched involved a 4-day-long residential summer program. The 4-day residential program targets two themes, namely, know yourself (self-awareness and self-management) and know your society (social awareness and social responsibility). The program aligns with the Peterson Proactive Developmental Attention (PPDA) model (Peterson & Jen, 2018) and emphasizes affective services should be made available to individuals in anticipation of challenges they may face and prepare them to develop appropriate affective skills that promote individual growth and positive development (Colangelo, 2003; Erford, 2010; Hébert, 2011; Neihart et al., 2002; Peterson, 2002; Peterson & Jen, 2018).

The residential summer program consists of intense and organic experiences of social living, group work, self-reliance, and field visits. Irrespective of whether the affective intervention components are based on direct instruction (e.g., motivational speeches, discussions of readings) or indirect experiences (e.g., social living, rigorous program routine; Moon, 2009), the intervention follows the triadic conceptual framework described earlier; that is, the intervention is proactive, prolonged, and holistically integrated within a larger year-round holistic talent development program. The central aim of the summer program was to acquaint students with various aspects of rural life including people, their livelihoods, economy, culture, and social realities. The summer program was housed on a school campus in a remote rural village 20 miles away from the home city. Students engaged in leadership development workshops conducted by experts and numerous group activities. Table 1 provides an overview of a typical day in the summer program.

Table 1.

A Typical Day in the Summer Program.

Time	Activity	Description
6.00 a.m.–6.45 a.m.	Morning meditation and discourse	Camp facilitators led guided meditation sessions followed by discourses on “Know Yourself.” Illustrative topics include leaving comfort zones, know your potential, and pushing mental limits.
7.00 a.m.–8.00 a.m.	Physical activity	Physical exercises, yoga, and group tasks
9.30 a.m.–1.00 p.m.	Workshop	Campers participated in a leadership development workshop conducted by experts, which included group activities and role-plays. Also, campers participated in STEM activities and workshops.
1.00 p.m.–2.30 p.m.	Lunch and rest	Campers ate together with their facilitators. Meal responsibilities were divided into groups. Food wastage was strictly avoided. Campers cleaned their dishes.
2.30 p.m.–5.30 p.m.	Field visit	Campers visited local rural businesses, the village community, and cultural centers, and interacted with village leaders, school leaders, and social workers.
6.00 p.m.–7.00 p.m.	Sports	Campers participated in team sports and intense physical and mental activities such as wrestling and the treasure game (a team game involving physically guarding your treasure and stealing from the opponents).
7.00 p.m.–8.00 p.m.	Diary writing	Campers wrote reflective diary entries on their daily experiences in the camp.
8.00 p.m.–9.00 p.m.	Dinner	Same as during lunch
9.00 p.m.–10.30 p.m.	Guest speaker	Guest speakers from diverse sectors interacted with campers about the camp’s themes. The interactions included hands-on activities on solar energy and narration of the life of an eminent chief of the Indian army.
10.30 p.m.–11.00 p.m.	Group prayer	Facilitators led the group prayer, which emphasized affective aspects such as hope, positive attitude, resilience, achievement motivation, mental resolution, life goals, and social commitment.

Participants

Fifty-five students in Grades 6 and 7 (Ages 11–13; 26 boys) participated in this study. The program required above-average or higher intellectual performance on three different standardized intelligence measurements: (a) the Prajna Shodh Test Battery (Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology, 1992), (b) Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices (Raven et al., 2000a, 2000b), and (c) the Indian Child Intelligence Test (Khire et al., 1992). Participants came from middle- and high-income families who had at minimum a college degree. Ninety-four percent of participants attended school in English, and the others studied in Marathi schools. None of these schools offered any exclusive gifted education programming, but most students attended additional outside-of-school programs besides the program being studied to pursue curricular and extracurricular interests.

Data Sources

Participants’ written, descriptive responses to the end-of-program reflection questionnaire were collected for analysis. The 16-item questionnaire (see Appendix) was designed for students to reflect on their camp experiences and what they learned. Example prompts included “If anything, what did you learn in the camp?” and “Tell us about the things that you think you are capable of doing now, which you could not do before you came to the camp.” This questionnaire was developed based on Jen et al. (2017) interview protocol, which served a similar purpose in their study of affective outcomes of students in a high-ability summer program. The use of written essays is particularly appropriate in the assessment of affective outcomes and has therefore been recommended by NAGC (2019).

Data Analysis

Participants’ written responses to the reflection questionnaire were thematically analyzed by the first and second authors (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Nowell et al., 2017). Specifically, we followed the six steps outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) and coded the data collaboratively throughout the process. The authors met 34 times for a total of 54 hours to complete the data analysis. The decision to code collaboratively was made to establish an ongoing audit process and bias check for both authors. Because the first author was familiar with the program and culture of the participants and the second author was not, the collaborative process allowed them to critically examine the data from different perspectives and achieve consensus at each point of the analysis process. Throughout the data analysis process, the first and second authors documented analytical decisions clearly to keep track of the development of all concepts and themes (i.e., analytical memos). We have interwoven the discussion of other measures taken to enhance the trustworthiness of our findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Madill et al., 2000) in the description of our analytical approach presented below.

Step 1 of our thematic analysis involved familiarizing ourselves with the data by reading the data multiple times and discussing and documenting our initial thoughts. We also used this time to organize the data in Nvivo.

Step 2 involved generating initial codes. We used brush coding to classify student responses in one of three general affective outcome categories: “emotional,” “social,” and “motivational.” We also brush-coded responses to classify responses per survey question. This allowed us to compile similar data excerpts from all participants into separate categories.

Once we finalized our brush codes, we moved on to Steps 3 and 4, which involved an iterative process of searching for themes and reviewing and refining them. Specifically, we started examining each general affective outcome category separately. For example, within the emotional category, we initially identified “courage,” “empathy,” “self-awareness,” “confidence,” “pride,” and “self-reliance.” We later merged the initial codes of “confidence” and “courage” because students would discuss similar experiences within each of these initial codes. “Pride” was dropped because too few participants mentioned this outcome. Upon further examination of the initial code “empathy,” we determined it showed overlap with “perspective-taking,” which was classified within the social category and later merged into “social awareness.” Finally, after many rounds of analysis, we recoded “self-reliance” into “self-awareness” or “confidence and courage” where appropriate to better capture the affective outcomes captured within the initial code of “self-reliance” and avoid overlap within our themes. During this initial coding process, we also coded each affective outcome excerpt into nodes reflecting the specific program component participants associated with that particular affective outcome. This method of matrix coding allowed us to develop a matrix of outcomes versus program components (see Table 2). Simultaneously, we developed a mind map to represent the connections between outcomes and program components. We revised the mind map iteratively as the coding process progressed toward Step 5. The final mind map is presented in Figure 1.

Table 2.

Coding References by Themes and Program Components.

Program component	Confidence and courage	Self-awareness	Social awareness	Social skills	Inspiration
Leadership and group activities	12(11)	22(21)	0(0)	20(16)	1(1)
Rural experience	3(3)	3(3)	24(18)	5(4)	2(2)
Camp structure	12(11)	1(1)	1(1)	2(2)	0(0)
Guest speakers	2(2)	0(0)	8(6)	1(1)	17(8)
Camp, in general	10(10)	3(3)	2(2)	9(7)	1(1)

Note. Numbers in the parentheses represent the number of participants. For example, 11 participants referenced confidence and courage 12 times as an outcome of the camp structure.

Figure 1.

The final mind-map of affective outcomes and associated program components.

Step 5 then involved refining and finalizing the themes. At this stage, we critically examined all coded pieces within themes and across themes to ensure their fit. Once the first and second authors reached a consensus, the first author presented the analytical memos along with the final themes to the other authors for an additional audit process. After achieving consensus among all authors about the final themes, the first author reanalyzed the data with those themes in mind to locate additional evidence to identify the final, salient themes.

Our data analysis concluded with a final integrity check in which the first author presented the final themes to participants to verify they agreed that our themes represented their perceptions. This process is also known as member checking. Participants agreed that our final themes represented their perceived outcomes well. The sixth and last step of our analysis process involved selecting pertinent illustrative data extracts and writing up the results.

Results

After thematically analyzing open-ended survey responses, we identified five salient themes depicting affective outcomes from participation in the residential summer camp. Participants identified and showcased improved (a) confidence and courage, (b) self-awareness, (c) social awareness, (d) social skills, and (e) inspiration. Additionally, as shown in Figure 1, analysis of our matrix coding scheme showed that the leadership workshops and group activities (66 references across 42 participants), rural experience (33 references across 23 participants), and camp structure (28 references across 21 participants) were discussed most frequently in relation to specific affective outcomes. The camp structure indicates specific program elements that were most impactful for students such as the residential nature of the camp and expectations around self-reliance. (See Table 3 for additional quotes from the participants.)

Table 3.

Illustrative Quotes.

Theme	Participant quotes
Confidence and courage	“I learned that a boy and a girl should be treated the same. I can do all the things (that) a boy or a man can do.” Girl 23 “The thing that I could not do before and can do now is speaking confidently in front of [a] crowd. I could not do it before, but I have developed a habit of speaking in front of [a] crowd. I had stage fear but it has vanished now.” Boy 6
Self-awareness	“Earlier I was very bossy. I was like Virat Kohli [an Indian sportsperson]. But now I understand it is not useful. You need to change. I would like to change: distributing work, knowing my team members, taking team burden on me.” Girl 21 “I feel that the leadership development workshop has helped me. Because I got to know what I need to change to become a better leader, [I need to be] more calm and collected. Because I love to lead anything but I never use suggestions given by my group.” Boy 10
Social awareness	“I learned about the people in the village. Instead of shifting to cities, we can solve problems on our own.” Girl 17 “I got to know about the culture of the village, their necessities and problems, and solutions to them. It gave me innovative ideas for the betterment of the people.” Boy 12
Social skills	“I liked the treasure game the most. … I learned how to coordinate the team.” Girl 17 “The topics were nice. [They] especially helped me to be a part of the village. Also, communicating [with] people was a task for me as I was scared of talking with strangers, but it [the camp] gave me a good approach, and I started communicating with others.” Boy 20
Inspiration	“The session that was [led] by [name removed] about Pawana Mai utsav [the river festival] taught me that we should save our river, and if one person starts walking on the right path, then everyone will follow him.” Girl 23 “This camp provided me the inspiration I need through the topics discussed during sessions… It gave me innovative ideas for the betterment of the people.” Boy 12

Theme 1: Confidence and Courage

Participants most prominently discussed and showcased increased confidence and courage (35 references across 27 participants) due to their participation in program activities. Participants described instances from the camp that helped them develop courage, self-competence beliefs, and a sense of independence. For example, Girl 2 suggested: “Now I can independently live anywhere and take my own responsibilities. Due to this [program], I can adapt myself to any place. … Also now I am independent.” Later, she added: “I learned to be independent and take responsibility . . . eat everything everywhere, living with fewer facilities.” Girl 1 illustrated her enhanced self-competence beliefs: “I liked the electronics activity very much. By that, I came to know that I am capable of doing it.”

Our matrix coding shows that participants discussed confidence and courage most in relation to camp structure (12 references) and leadership and group activities (12 references). For example, one participant discussed how self-reliant behavior expectations as part of the camp structure improved his confidence: “I became confident of leading a self-dependent life in which we wash our own plates and eat food we dislike” (Boy 21). Many camp responsibilities, such as serving food, were divided among campers, and the campers cleaned their own dishes and made their own beds. In addition, all campers were grouped into four groups and were given various group activities throughout the camp, which created opportunities for group leadership roles. Boy 21 further wrote: “I had never wondered to become a leader or captain of any group. But using these qualities [discussed in the leadership workshops] and after becoming the group leader for [4] days in the camp, I have had enough experience that can definitely cheer me up to become a good leader,” illustrating the direct impact the leadership workshop and group activities had on his confidence and courage.

Theme 2: Self-Awareness

The second theme we identified captured participants’ discussion of increased self-awareness (29 references across 25 participants). Generally, participants were increasingly able to identify areas for personal growth. For example, Girl 2 wrote: “I would like to change the habit of getting angry at the people in the group for silly reasons. … Also, I would enhance my positive thoughts and be confident.” The camp provided numerous opportunities for participants to reflect on their habits, attitudes, and behaviors, which seemed to help develop better self-awareness. A majority of the participants (22 references; 21 participants) discussed their increased self-awareness in relation to the leadership workshops where reflection was central: “To be a leader, I must be cool-minded because at home if I don’t find something I get frustrated and angry. … I should have a positive attitude because I think negatively” (Boy 3).

Theme 3: Social Awareness

Participants (33 references across 23 participants) frequently acknowledged and showcased social awareness in their post-camp reflections. A key part of the curriculum was oriented toward increased understanding of rural life, which encouraged participants to become aware of rural settings including people and places. For example, Boy 8 wrote: “the program gave us an insight at the rural lifestyle and also the small discussion with the Sarpanch [head] of Darumbre [name of the village] was a glance at the rural government.” Nineteen participants wrote the rural experience contributed to their improved social awareness. For example, Girl 1 wrote: “I learned the difficulties in the rural areas [and the] schedule of people over there” and Boy 9 concurred: “I learned … how the outside world really is. What are the problems faced by people and their solutions.”

Theme 4: Social Skills

The program’s emphasis on leadership development and group work resulted in participants reporting increased social skills (32 references across 22 participants). Sixteen participants identified improved social skills as a direct outcome of participating in leadership workshops and group activities during the camp. Boy 8 reported: “Working in a group certainly enabled me to practice my leadership skills and allowed me to get along with people to whom I spoke with less in the past. This helped me to understand that cooperation is the topmost priority while working in a team.” Girl 14 concurred:

Working in the group was enjoyable. ... We had to work in teams, so everyone had to help and support everyone. I learned to work in teams properly, which is a change in me. Even while playing, if someone made a mistake, no one complained about it. Instead, everyone would motivate [the team members] to do better. That was a sign that the group was working properly and together.

Theme 5: Inspiration

The fifth and final theme we identified was that participants (21 references across 10 participants) reported they left the camp inspired. Most of these inspiring experiences came from participants’ interactions with guest speakers (17 references across eight participants). For example, Boy 4 reflected on his experience listening to guest speakers: “These people who [give] the sessions inspire me. They tell us about their hard life, like what work they did. . . . I was like wow you did that?” Boy 23 concurred: “The session topics covered in this camp were quite good. Rather, they were a perfect blend of inspiration, aspirations, and motivation. For example, the work schedule was just astonishing and greatly inspiring.” Girl 15 found herself inspired to pursue social work: “The talks held by the people were very inspirational and gave us a different way of thinking. The inspirational words have made me think of social work which is very beneficial for people.”

Discussion

In the present study, we explored the affective outcomes students perceived from participating in a residential summer program and the program components that contributed to participants’ perceived affective development. Our findings indicate that a direct and well-planned affective intervention can enhance gifted and talented students’ summer enrichment program experiences and provide opportunities for social and emotional learning. Previous research (Jen et al., 2017) established the positive effects of a small-group discussion-based intervention administered as a separate component of an academic summer enrichment program. We are one of the first to examine the effects of a holistic approach to affective interventions in which the affective intervention is integrated with the cognitive and physical components. Our positive findings indicate the potential effectiveness of such a holistic approach to the development of affective interventions. Hence, our findings extend previous research on affective interventions and, in particular, holistic approaches such as the one studied here and confirm that targeted interventions implemented as part of summer enrichment programs may be particularly effective in developing students’ affective skills (e.g., Desmet & Pereira, 2022; Jen et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2015; Matthews & McBee, 2007; Wu & Gentry, 2014).

Specifically, our findings indicate students’ perceived increases in confidence, courage, and inspiration. Previous research conducted with U.S. populations found similar results (Jen et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2015; Wu & Gentry, 2014). Because our study was conducted in India, our findings suggest an enhanced transferability of previous research findings on the affective outcomes of summer programs across countries. In addition, our findings show that the summer enrichment program may have helped students develop self-awareness, social skills, and social awareness, which are among the key competencies of social and emotional learning (SEL; Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, 2018; Dusenbury et al., 2019; Payton et al., 2000). This finding is particularly notable given that the vast amount of research showing SEL competencies can positively influence academic outcomes (January et al., 2011; Corcoran et al., 2018; Durlak et al., 2010; Sklad et al., 2012), school success (Zins et al., 2007), mental wellness (Cook et al., 2015; Taylor et al., 2017), healthy relationships (Crooks et al., 2015; Wolfe et al., 2012), and life success (Oberle et al., 2016).

Most notably, the present study extends existing research on affective interventions by exploring specific program components and processes that contribute to students’ perceived affective outcomes. For example, participants described the self-reliant behavior expectations and physically challenging group games as the biggest boosters of confidence and courage. This implies the residential nature of the program and the opportunities to engage in challenging tasks can be useful in developing confidence and courage (Lee et al., 2015).

Further, participants associated increased social awareness with their interactions with guest speakers and exposure to rural experience. Therefore, our findings provide some support for experiential learning activities to promote gifted students’ affective development (Desmet, 2022; Keen & Howard, 2002; Lee et al., 2007). In our study, guest speakers from diverse sectors interacted with campers about their work in the rural sector. These interactions included hands-on activities on solar energy, the narration of life experiences of social service, and conversations with the village head. These camp activities may have enhanced students’ social awareness by giving them opportunities to socially interact with places and people in real contexts. Therefore, summer programs aiming to develop social awareness may benefit from planning for community engagement and service learning (Desmet, 2022; Desmet & Roberts, 2022), especially with people and places that reflect different realities than the campers’ regular life experiences.

Our findings also showcase the perceived benefit of a well-designed and intentional leadership development program to enhance the leadership and group skills of students with gifts and talents. The finding is critical to gifted education given the strong association between typical traits of giftedness (e.g., high intellectual functioning, advanced emotional and social interests, civic awareness, and civic engagement) and leadership functions (Bruce-Davis et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2021; Lee & Olszewski-Kubilius, 2016; Matthews, 2015). Researchers (Feldhusen & Kennedy, 1988; Lee et al., 2021) have suggested that leadership training may be a useful addition in summer programs—and programs, in general—involving youth with gifts and talents; however, leadership development has not received much attention in the field (Matthews, 2015). Finally, our findings reaffirm that a summer program offers opportunities for students to develop new friendships (Cross et al., 1991; Jen et al., 2017; VanTassel-Baska et al., 1984) and engage in social interactions (Wu & Gentry, 2014).

Limitations

The research involved analyzing existing data, namely students’ written reflections in response to a program evaluation survey. This presented several limitations. First, the depth and quality of our data were dependent on students’ ability to express themselves in written English. Although a majority of the students attended school in English, they were not native speakers of English, which may have interfered with their ability to express their thoughts in written English. Several students occasionally used Marathi (their native language) terms in their reflections and a few students completed the entire reflection in Marathi.

Second, we did not have the opportunity to ask students clarifying or follow-up questions. At times, students would imply growth or change without explicit detail, making it challenging to accurately interpret the meaning behind their words. Therefore, the first and second authors carefully monitored the coding process, to ensure we did not infer meaning beyond what was written. This resulted in not coding some pieces of data because they were simply too vague. However, based on our member checking procedures, this did not interfere with accurately representing students' perceived affective outcomes.

Third, the data involved critical self-reflection. The ability to self-reflect develops over time and with practice. Our participants were in Grades 6 and 7 at the time of data collection. Typically, at this age, students are improving their ability to self-assess and becoming increasingly self-regulated. So, not all participants may have mastered critical self-reflection skills yet. However, self-reflection was a key objective of the program, so students did have some practice.

Fourth, some of the program evaluation questions were designed to solicit explicit feedback regarding program components. Therefore, readers should note that in some cases students were asked to directly reflect on camp components and the outcomes they had.

In addition, this research has some general limitations that are inherent to qualitative research and should therefore be acknowledged as well. The purpose of a qualitative inquiry is not to generalize conclusions, but rather to transfer meaning to similar contexts. Therefore, readers should note the unique program that was evaluated and the context in which it was evaluated. In particular, readers should note that this study was conducted in Western India with students in sixth and seventh grades who participated in a yearlong program together. Similarly, the participants were from middle- and high-income and moderate- to high-education households. A different sample, even within India (e.g., Chowkase, 2022), may have yielded different results, and the findings of this study can only be transferred to similar contexts, programs, and participants. Additional research on perceived affective outcomes of enrichment programs is necessary to generalize findings.

Implications and Future Directions

The findings of this study offer valuable insight for researchers and educators interested in holistic talent development programming and contribute to the limited literature on designing and evaluating affective interventions for gifted youth. Our results show that a short, yet intense summer program focused on affective skills may contribute to increased emotional, social, and motivational development in students. The present study also indicates the triadic framework consisting of a proactive and holistic approach to affective development, underlying our intervention has the potential to be successful. Future studies should further explore the effectiveness of the triadic framework, especially by focusing on the prolonged aspect of the framework, and our specific intervention with a variety of participants and in a variety of contexts to further establish the transferability of findings. Additionally, it may be of interest to conduct follow-up studies or conduct longitudinal studies to establish the long-term effects of participating in this affective intervention.

A unique contribution of our findings lies in the exploration of what specific program components resulted in each of the various affective outcomes as experienced by our participants. Therefore, the findings of this study may help future researchers and educators to design effective affective interventions. For example, our findings indicate several benefits of implementing residential programs, experiential learning experiences, and leadership development training for addressing various affective objectives. Educators should carefully consider the possible benefits of these program components when designing affective interventions. Moreover, future studies could further explore additional camp components and may want to quantitatively establish the added value of various camp components to create concrete, evidence-based suggestions as to how best to address various affective learning objectives.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We thank Kameryn Graham and Rosieana Johnson at Valdosta State University for their help with identifying relevant literature and quotes and formatting the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Aakash A. Chowkase

Ophelie Allyssa Desmet

Appendix

Student Questionnaire: Feedback on the Residential Summer Camp

1. Tell us about your overall experience at this camp.

2. What did you like the most about the camp?

3. What did you like the least about the camp?

4. Was there something you wanted to do at the camp that we did not plan?

5. What is your opinion about the topics discussed in the camp?

6. What is your opinion about the activities/sessions conducted in the camp?

7. Tell us about a moment in the camp that you will probably remember for a long time.

8. Tell us about your experience in the leadership development workshop. What would you like to change/develop in you to become a better leader?

9. Describe your experience of working in your Pathak (group).

10. What is your opinion about the routine of the camp?

11. Tell us about your experience of the morning Upasana (Meditation).

12. Tell us about your Tai and Dada (facilitators). How would you describe them as facilitators?

13. If anything, what did you learn in the camp?

14. Tell us about the things that you think you are capable of doing now, which you could not do before you came to the camp.

15. What challenges, if any, did you face in the camp? How did you overcome them? Whom did you approach, if you needed help in that?

16. What would have made this camp a better experience for you? What would you like us to change about this camp? Activities? Topics? Routine? Place?

Author Biographies

Aakash A. Chowkase, PhD, is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley. He earned his PhD in Gifted, Creative, and Talented Studies from Purdue University. Aakash studies talent development, social and emotional learning, and equity in education. He is the recipient of the outstanding dissertation awards from AERA Division H and NAGC Research and Evaluation Network.

Ophélie Allyssa Desmet, PhD, is Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology and Gifted Education at Valdosta State University. Her PhD is from Purdue University. Her research focuses on the interplay of cognitive, affective, and motivational aspects to promote talent development.

Kshama Datar is a facilitator and faculty at Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology, India. She received her M.A. in Clinical Psychology and Post Graduate Diploma in Gifted Education. Her teaching and research focus on talent development’s cognitive, affective, and self-regulated learning aspects.

Ashwini Deshpande is a facilitator at Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology, India. She received her Master’s in Social Work and Post Graduate Diplomas in Gifted Education and Child Counseling. Her teaching and research interests are affective development, counseling, parenting, and motivation of high-ability students.

Sandhya Khasnis is a Research Assistant at Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology, India. She received her Master’s in Engineering and Post Graduate Diploma in Gifted Education. She also received her Master’s in Education and is now pursuing a PhD in Education (Interdisciplinary). She develops content and conducts research in talent development. She is a former lecturer of electronics at polytechnic and engineering institutes.

References

Armstrong

L. L.

Desson

St John

Watt

(2019). The DREAM program: Developing resilience through emotions, attitudes, & meaning (gifted edition)–a second wave positive psychology approach. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 32(3–4), 307–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2018.1559798

Bapat

G. S.

(2017). Man-making: Nurturing abilities, motivating the able. Jnana Prabodhini.

Bloom

B. J.

(Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. Ballantine.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bruce-Davis

M. N.

Gilson

C. M.

Matthews

M. S.

(2017). Fostering authentic problem seeking: A step toward social justice engagement. Roeper Review, 39(4), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2017.1363099

Chowkase

A. A.

(2022). A bioecological systems view of school experiences of high-ability students from rural India. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211030311

Chowkase

A. A.

Datar

Deshpande

Khasnis

Keskar

Godbole

(2022). Online learning, classroom quality, and student motivation: Perspectives from students, teachers, parents, and program staff. Gifted Education International, 38(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294211060401

Colangelo

(2003). Counseling gifted students. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 373–387). Allyn & Bacon.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning . (2018). Social and emotional learning and positive behavioral interventions and supports. CASEL.

10.

Cook

C. R.

Frye

Slemrod

Lyon

A. R.

Renshaw

T. L.

Zhang

(2015). An integrated approach to universal prevention: Independent and combined effects of PBIS and SEL on youths’ mental health. School Psychology Quarterly: The Official Journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association, 30(2), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000102

11.

Corcoran

R. P.

Cheung

A. C.

Kim

Xie

(2018). Effective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Educational Research Review, 25, 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.12.001

12.

Crooks

C. V.

Scott

K. L.

Broll

Zwarych

Hughes

Wolfe

D. A.

(2015). Does an evidence-based healthy relationships program for 9th graders show similar effects for 7th and 8th graders? Results from 57 schools randomized to intervention. Health Education Research, 30(3), 513–519. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyv014

13.

Cross

T. L.

Hernandez

N. R.

Coleman

L. J.

(1991). Governor’s schools: An idea whose time has come. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 14(4), 29–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621759101400409

14.

Desmet

Crimmins

Seigfried-Spellar

K. C.

Gentry

(2022). AME+Cyber: Evaluating the online delivery of a holistic cyber-related talent development program. Gifted Education International, 38(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294211054361

15.

Desmet

O. A.

(2022). Promoting transformational giftedness through service learning. In Sternberg

Ambrose

Karami

(Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of transformational giftedness for education (pp. 131–142). Palgrave Macmillan.

16.

Desmet

O. A.

Cakmakci

Tuzgen

(2023). Evaluating the effectiveness of the online delivery of affective curriculum for gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 46(2), 140–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532231162606

17.

Desmet

O. A.

Pereira

(2022). The Achievement Motivation Enhancement curriculum: Evaluating an affective intervention for gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(1), 129–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211057424

18.

Desmet

O. A.

Pereira

Peterson

J. S.

(2020). Telling a tale: How underachievement develops in gifted girls. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219888633

19.

Desmet

O. A.

Roberts

A. M.

(2022). Teaching for positive and transformational creativity through service learning. Education Sciences, 12(4), 234. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040234

20.

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

Pachan

(2010). A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3–4), 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9300-6

21.

Dusenbury

Yoder

Dermody

Weissberg

(2019). An examination of frameworks for social and emotional learning (SEL) reflected in state K–12 learning standards. Measuring SEL: Using data to Inspire Practice. CASEL. https://measuringsel.casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Framework-C.3.pdf

22.

Erford

B. T.

(2010). Transforming the school counseling profession (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

23.

Erikson

E. H.

(1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. WW Norton & Company.

24.

Erikson

E. H.

(1994). Identity and the life cycle. WW Norton & Company.

25.

Feldhusen

J. F.

Kennedy

D. M.

(1988). Preparing gifted youth for leadership roles in a rapidly changing society. Roeper Review, 10(4), 226–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198809553135

26.

Gagné

(2005). From gifts to talents: The DMGT as a developmental model. In Sternberg

R. J.

Davidson

J. E.

(Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98–119). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.008

27.

Gagné

(2009). Building gifts into talents: Detailed overview of the DMGT 2.0. In MacFarlane

Stambaugh

(Eds.), Leading change in gifted education: The festschrift of Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska (pp. 61–80). Prufrock Press.

28.

Gensley

(1973). The gifted child in the affective domain. Gifted Child Quarterly, 17(2), 113–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698627301700205

29.

Hébert

T. P.

(2011). Understanding the social and emotional lives of gifted students. Prufrock Press.

30.

January

A. M.

Casey

R. J.

Paulson

(2011). A meta-analysis of classroom-wide interventions to build social skills: Do they work? School Psychology Review, 40(2), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2011.12087715

31.

Jen

(2017). Affective interventions for high-ability students from 1984-2015: A review of published studies. Journal of Advanced Academics, 28(3), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X17715305

32.

Jen

Gentry

Moon

S. M.

Moon

S. M.

(2017). High-ability students’ perspectives on an affective curriculum in a diverse university-based summer residential enrichment program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(4), 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217722839

33.

Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology . (1992). Construction of a test battery based on Guilford’s Model. Jnana Prabodhini’s Institute of Psychology.

34.

Keen

Howard

(2002). Experiential learning in Antioch College’s work-based learning program as a vehicle for social and emotional development for gifted college students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13(3), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2002-373

35.

Khire

Bleichrodt

Hoksbergen

R. A. C.

Bharat

(1992). Indian Child Intelligence Test (ICIT). Technical manual. Anand Agencies.

36.

Kim

(2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(2), 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216630607

37.

Lee

S.-Y.

Matthews

Boo

Kim

Y. K.

(2021). Gifted students’ perceptions about leadership and leadership development. High Ability Studies, 32(2), 219–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2020.1818554

38.

Lee

S.-Y.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Makel

Putallaz

(2015). Gifted students’ perceptions of an accelerated summer program and social support. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(4), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986215599205

39.

Lee

S.-Y.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2016). Leadership development and gifted students. In Levesque

R. J.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (2nd ed., pp. 1–10). Springer.

40.

Lee

S.-Y.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Donahue

Weimholt

(2007). The effects of a service-learning program on the development of civic attitudes and behaviors among academically talented adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 31(2), 165–197. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2007-674

41.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

42.

Madill

Jordan

Shirley

(2000). Objectivity and reliability in qualitative analysis: Realist, contextualist and radical constructionist epistemologies. British Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712600161646

43.

Matthews

McBee

(2007). School factors and the underachievement of gifted students in a talent search summer program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207299473

44.

Matthews

M. S.

(2015). Creativity and leadership’s role in gifted identification and programming in the USA: A pilot study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(2), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9373-x

45.

Moon

(2009). Theories to guide affective curriculum development. In VanTassel-Baska

J. L.

Cross

T. L.

Olenchak

F. R.

(Eds.), Social-emotional curriculum with gifted and talented students (pp. 11–39). Prufrock Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003238065-2

46.

National Association for Gifted Children . (2019). 2019 pre-K–Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards. Routledge. https://cdn.ymaws.com/nagconline.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/knowledge-center/2019_Programming_Standards.pdf

47.

Neihart

Reis

S. M.

Robinson

N. M.

Moon

S. M.

(Eds.), (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? Prufrock Press.

48.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 160940691773384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

49.

Oberle

Domitrovich

C. E.

Meyers

D. C.

Weissberg

R. P.

(2016). Establishing systemic social and emotional learning approaches in schools: A framework for schoolwide implementation. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(3), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1125450

50.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2010). Gifted adolescents. Prufrock Press.

51.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Subotnik

R. F.

Worrell

F. C.

(2016). Aiming talent development toward creative eminence in the 21st century. Roeper Review, 38(3), 140–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2016.1184497

52.

Papadopoulos

(2020). Psychological framework for gifted children’s cognitive and socio-emotional development: A review of the research literature and implications. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(1), 305–323. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.666308

53.

Payton

J. W.

Wardlaw

D. M.

Graczyk

P. A.

Bloodworth

M. R.

Tompsett

C. J.

Weissberg

R. P.

(2000). Social and emotional learning: A framework for promoting mental health and reducing risk behavior in children and youth. Journal of School Health, 70(5), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2000.tb06468.x

54.

Peterson

J. S.

(2002). An argument for proactive attention to affective concerns of gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14(2), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2003-419

55.

Peterson

J. S.

(2006). Addressing counseling needs of gifted students. Professional School Counseling, 10(1_suppl), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X0601001S06

56.

Peterson

J. S.

Jen

(2018). The Peterson Proactive developmental attention model: A framework for nurturing the rest of the whole gifted child. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(2), 111–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353218763874

57.

Rakow

(2020). Educating gifted students in middle schools: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Prufrock Press.

58.

Raven

J. C.

Court

J. H.

(2000a). Raven manual: Section 1. General overview (1998 Edition). Pearson.

59.

Raven

J. C.

Court

J. H.

(2000b). Raven manual: Section 3. Standard Progressive Matrices (including the parallel and plus versions) (2000 Edition). Pearson.

60.

Siegel

D. J.

(2015). Brainstorm: The power and purpose of the teenage brain. Penguin.

61.

Silverman

L. K.

(1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Love.

62.

Sklad

Diekstra

Ritter

M. D.

Ben

Gravesteijn

(2012). Effectiveness of school-based universal social, emotional, and behavioral programs: Do they enhance students’ development in the area of skill, behavior, and adjustment? Psychology in the Schools, 49(9), 892–909. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21641

63.

Subotnik

R. F.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Worrell

F. C.

(2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest: A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056

64.

Subotnik

R. F.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Worrell

F. C.

(2018). Talent development as the most promising focus of giftedness and gifted education. In Pfeiffer

S. I.

Shaunessy-Dedrick

Foley-Nicpon

(Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 231–245). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-015

65.

Tannenbaum

A. J.

(1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In Sternberg

R. J.

Davidson

J. E.

(Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21–52). Cambridge University Press.

66.

Tannenbaum

A. J.

(2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 45–59). Pearson.

67.

Taylor

R. D.

Oberle

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

(2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88(4), 1156–1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864

68.

VanTassel-Baska

Landau

Olszewski

(1984). The benefits of summer programming for gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 8(1), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235328400800107

69.

Wolfe

D. A.

Crooks

C. V.

Chiodo

Hughes

Ellis

(2012). Observations of adolescent peer resistance skills following a classroom-based healthy relationship program: A post-intervention comparison. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 13(2), 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-011-0256-z

70.

Gentry

(2014). Summer residential program experiences as perceived by gifted Diné youth. Journal of American Indian Education, 53(2), 66–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/jaie.2014.a798531

71.

Zins

J. E.

Bloodworth

M. R.

Weissberg

R. P.

Walberg

H. J.

(2007). The scientific base linking social and emotional learning to school success. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(2–3), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410701413145

Affective Outcomes of a Summer Talent Development Program: What Do Students Say?

Abstract

Keywords

Theoretical Framework

Affective Development as an Integral Part of Talent Development

Methods

Setting

Participants

Data Sources

Data Analysis

Results

Theme 1: Confidence and Courage

Theme 2: Self-Awareness

Theme 3: Social Awareness

Theme 4: Social Skills

Theme 5: Inspiration

Discussion

Limitations

Implications and Future Directions

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Appendix

Author Biographies

References