Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Enhancing Achievement Motivation in Diverse Gifted Underachievers: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the Achievement Motivation Enhancement (AME) Curriculum
This mixed-methods study evaluated the Achievement Motivation Enhancement (AME) curriculum’s effectiveness in improving academic motivation, self-regulation, and metacognitive skills among 19 predominantly Black gifted middle school students at risk of underachievement in South Georgia. Using a quasi-experimental delayed treatment design, the study examined changes in academic self-perception, goal valuation, self-regulation, and metacognition. Quantitative findings revealed significant positive effects for academic self-perception (η2 = 0.13) and motivation/self-regulation (η2 = 0.10), with particularly strong effects in metacognitive evaluation skills (η2 = 0.23). Qualitative data from interviews and exit tickets revealed improved positive self-talk, enhanced goal-setting strategies, sustained self-monitoring practices, and clearer goal valuation. Spring implementation showed stronger effects than fall delivery. The AME curriculum shows promise as a targeted intervention for diverse gifted underachievers, with metacognitive strategies demonstrating sustainability beyond the intervention period. Future research should examine long-term effects and optimal implementation factors.
BarbierK.DoncheV.VerschuerenK. (2019). Academic (under)achievement of intellectually gifted students in the transition between primary and secondary education: An individual learner perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. Article 2533. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02533
2.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Casino-GarcíaA. M.Llopis-BuenoM. J.Llinares-InsaL. I. (2021). Emotional intelligence profiles and self-esteem/self-concept: An analysis of relationships in gifted students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(3), 1006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031006
5.
DesmetO. (2020). The achievement motivation enhancement model: Evaluating an affective intervention to resolve underachievement (Doctoral thesis. Purdue University). https://doi.org/10.25394/PGS.12383381.v1
6.
DesmetO.CrimminsD.Seigfried-SpellarK. C.GentryM. (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
7.
DesmetO. A.CakmakciH.TuzgenA. (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
8.
DesmetO. A.PereiraN. (2022). The achievement motivation enhancement curriculum: Evaluating an affective interven-tion for gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(1), 129–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202x211057424
9.
DesmetO. A.PereiraN.PetersonJ. S. (2020). Telling a tale: How underachievement develops in gifted girls. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219888633
10.
Ferrer-WrederL.WänströmL.CorovicJ. (2014). Midlife outcomes of educationally underachieving Swedish adolescents with above average Generalized intelligence. Research in Human Development, 11(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2014.936172
11.
FordD. Y.WhitingG. W. (2011). Beyond testing: Social and psychological considerations in recruiting and retaining gifted Black students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(1), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235321003400106
GagnéF. (2018). Academic talent development: Theory and best practices. American Psychological Association eBooks, 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-011
14.
GentryM.PereiraN.PetersS. J.McIntoshJ. S.FugateC. M. (2021). HOPE teacher rating scale: Involving teachers in equitable identification of gifted and talented studentsin K-12: Manual. Routledge.
HughesD.WitherspoonD.Rivas-DrakeD.West-BeyN. (2009). Received ethnic-racial socialization messages and youths' academic and behavioral outcomes: Examining the mediating role of ethnic identity and self-esteem. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(2), 112–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015509
17.
Infantes-PaniaguaÁ.Fernández-BustosJ. G.RuizA. P.Contreras-JordánO. R. (2022). Differences in self-concept between gifted and non-gifted students: A meta-analysis from 2005 to 2020. Anales de Psicología, 38(2), 278–294.
18.
JaramilloJ. M.RendónM. I.MuñozL.WeisM.TrommsdorffG. (2017). Children’s self-regulation in cultural contexts: The role of parental socialization theories, goals, and practices. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 923. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00923
19.
KalajiG.AlbornoN. (2023). The influence of gifted and talented programs on students’ self-concept. Athens Journal of Education, 10(3), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.10-3-8
20.
Kannis-DymandL.HughesE.MulgrewK.CarterJ. D.LoveS. (2020). Examining the roles of metacognitive beliefs and maladaptive aspects of perfectionism in depression and anxiety. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 48(4), 442–453. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465820000144
McCoachD. B. (2002). A validation study of the School Attitude Assessment Survey. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 35, 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069050
23.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2003a). Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700205
24.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2003b). The school attitude assessment survey-revised: A new instrument to identify academically able students who underachieve. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(3), 414–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403063003005
ObergriesserS.StoegerH. (2015). The influence of emotions and learning preferences on learning strategy use before transition into the high-achiever track in secondary school. High Ability Studies, 27(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2015.1100980
27.
PerryS. P.WagesJ. E.3rdSkinner-DorkenooA. L.BurkeS. E.HardemanR. R.PhelanS. M. (2021). Testing a self-affirmation intervention for improving the psychosocial health of black and white medical students in the US. Journal of Social Issues, 77(3), 769–800. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12448
28.
PottsM. L. (2024). Gifted and Black: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis for Inclusive Gifted Curriculum, Programmatic Options, and Future Research. International Journal of Applied Sciences & Development, 3, 241–269. https://doi.org/10.37394/232029.2024.3.24
29.
Rambo-HernandezK. E.AminS.WilkersonN.BrigandiC. (2025). Teacher rating scales continue to be a problematic source of identification: Evidence from ratings of primary students in a rural, low socioeconomic school. Gifted Child Quarterly, 69(3), 298–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862251330254
30.
RaoofK.ShokriO.FathabadiJ.PanaghiL. (2024). Unpacking the underachievement of gifted students: A systematic review of internal and external factors. Heliyon, 10(17), Article e36908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36908
31.
ReisS. M.GreeneM. J. (2014). Using self-regulated learning to reverse underachievement in talented students. In Neag center for gifted education and talent development. University of Connecticut.
32.
ReisS. M.McCoachD. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(3), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620004400302
33.
Rivas-DrakeD.SeatonE. K.MarkstromC.QuintanaS.SyedM.LeeR. M.SchwartzS. J.Umaña-TaylorA. J.FrenchS.YipT.Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for psychosocial, academic, and health outcomes. Child Development, 85(1), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12200
34.
RozentalA. (2020). Beyond perfect? A case illustration of working with perfectionism using cognitive behavior therapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 76(11), 2041–2054. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.23039
35.
RubensteinL. D.SiegleD.ReisS. M.McCoachD. B.BurtonM. G. (2012). A complex quest: The development and re-search of underachievement interventions for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(7), 678–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21620
SiegleD.McCoachD. B. (2005). Making a difference: Motivating gifted students who are not achieving. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990503800104
SnyderK. E.FongC. J.PainterJ. K.PittardC. M.BarrS. M.PatallE. A. (2019). Interventions for academically underachieving students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, Article 100294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100294
StantonJ. D.SebestaA. J.DunloskyJ. (2021). Fostering metacognition to support student learning and performance. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 20(2), fe3. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-12-0289
42.
Steenbergen-HuS.Olszewski-KubiliusP.CalvertE. (2020). The effectiveness of current interventions to reverse the underachievement of gifted students: Findings of a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(2), 132–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986220908601
43.
SternbergR. J.Soleimani DashtakiA. (2024). Effectivity: An alternative to conceptions of gifted under- and over-achievement. Gifted Education International, 41(2), 182–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294241280862
44.
StoegerH.FleischmannS.ObergriesserS. (2015). Self-regulated learning (SRL) and the gifted learner in primary school: The theoretical basis and empirical findings on a research program dedicated to ensuring that all students learn to regulate their own learning. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(2), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9376-7
45.
StoegerH.ZieglerA. (2005). Evaluation of an elementary classroom self-regulated learning program for gifted mathematics underachievers. International Education Journal, 6(2), 261–271. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ854979.pdf
46.
StoegerH.ZieglerA. (2008). Evaluation of a classroom-based training to improve self-regulation in time management tasks during homework activities with fourth graders. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9027-z
47.
ThamesA. D.HinkinC. H.ByrdD. A.BilderR. M.DuffK. J.MindtM. R.ArentoftA.StreiffV. (2013). Effects of stereotype threat, perceived discrimination, and examiner race on neuropsychological performance: Simple as black and white?Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS, 19(5), 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617713000076
48.
TibkenC.RichterT.Von Der LindenN.SchmiedelerS.SchneiderW. (2022). The role of metacognitive competences in the development of school achievement among gifted adolescents. Child Development, 93(1), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13640
49.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S.FredricksJ. A.SimpkinsS.RoeserR. W.SchiefeleU. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. In LambM. E.LernerR. M. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Socioemotional processes (7th ed., pp. 657–700). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy316
