Students’ talent and potential cannot be served until they are recognized by schools or caregivers. While the field of gifted education has had success in identifying many students with talents in reading and mathematics, those with spatial talents are often overlooked. This article reviews how we might identify spatial talent using traditional tests as well as observations during planned activities. Identifying spatial talent is an area in need of further research and assessment development.
AlibrandiM.GoldsteinD. (2015). Integrating GIS and other geospatial technologies in middle school. In SolariO. M.DemirciA.Van Der ScheeJ. A. (Eds.), Geospatial technologies and geography education in a changing world (pp. 53–65). Springer.
2.
AssoulineS. G.ColangeloN.VanTassel-BaskaJ.Lupkowski-ShoplikA. E. (2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses that hold back America’s brightest students. The Belin-Blank Center for Gifted and Talented Education.
3.
BrownS. B. (2023). The persistence of matching teaching and learning styles: A review of the ubiquity of this neuromyth, predictors of its endorsement, and recommendations to end it. Frontiers in Education, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1147498
4.
CallahanC. M.AzanoA.ParkS.BrodersenA. V.CaugheyM.DmitrievaS. (2022). Consequences of implementing curricular-aligned strategies for identifying rural gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(4), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862221082064
5.
CanivezG. L.McGillR. J.DombrowskiS. C.WatkinsM. W.PritchardA. E.JacobsonL. A. (2020). Construct validity of the WISC-V in clinical cases: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 10 primary subtests. Assessment, 27(2), 274–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118811609
6.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: Survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge University Press.
7.
ColemanM. R. (2016). Recognizing young children with high potential: U-STARSPLUS. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377(1), 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13161
Defense Manpower Data Center (2006). CAT-ASVAB forms 1 and 2. Defense Manpower Data Center.
10.
EliotJ.SmithI. M. (1983). An international directory of spatial tests. NFER-Nelson.
11.
GentryM. (2022). Excellence, equity, and talent development: Time to retire the g-word. Gifted Education International, 38(3), 373–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294211054203
12.
GilliganK. A.HodgkissA.ThomasM. S.FarranE. K. (2019). The developmental relations between spatial cognition and mathematics in primary school children. Developmental Science, 22(4), e12786. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12786
HawesZ.TepyloD.MossJ.Spatial Reasoning Study Group. (2015). Developing spatial thinking: Implications for early mathematics education. In DavisB. (Ed.), Spatial reasoning in the early years: Principles, assertions, and speculations (pp. 29–44). Routledge.
IvieJ. L.EmbretsonS. E. (2010). Cognitive process modeling of spatial ability: The Assembling Objects Task. Intelligence, 38(3), 324–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.02.002
17.
JohnsonW.BouchardT. J. (2007). Sex differences in mental abilities: g masks the dimensions on which they lie. Intelligence, 35(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.03.012
18.
KellH. J.LubinskiD.BenbowC. P.SteigerJ. H. (2013). Creativity and technical innovation: Spatial ability’s unique role. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1831–1836. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613478615
19.
KoretzD. (2009). Measuring up: What educational testing really tells us. Harvard University Press.
20.
LakinJ. M.WaiJ. (2020). Spatially gifted, academically inconvenienced: Spatially talented students experience less academic engagement and more behavioural issues than other talented students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 1015–1038. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12343
21.
LohmanD. F. (1999). Spatial ability and g. In DennisI.TapsfieldP. (Eds.), Human abilities: Their nature and assessment (pp. 97–116). Erlbaum.
22.
LohmanD. F. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in identifying academically gifted students: An aptitude perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(2), 111–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900203
23.
LohmanD. F.GambrellJ.LakinJ. (2008). The commonality of extreme discrepancies in the ability profiles of academically gifted students. Psychology Science, 50(2), 269–282. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-11745-012
24.
LowrieT.LoganT.HarrisD.HegartyM. (2018). The impact of an intervention program on students’ spatial reasoning: Student engagement through mathematics-enhanced learning activities. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0147-y
25.
LubinskiD. (2004). Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after spearman’s (1904) “‘General intelligence,’ objectively determined and measured”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.96
26.
LubinskiD. (2010). Spatial ability and STEM: A sleeping giant for talent identification and development. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(4), 344–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.022
MakelM.KellH. J.LubinskiD.PutallazM.BenbowC. P. (2016). When lightning strikes twice: Profoundly gifted, profoundly accomplished. Psychological Science, 27(7), 1004–1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616644735
29.
MeyerM. S.PluckerJ. A. (2022). What’s in a name? Rethinking “gifted” to promote equity and excellence. Gifted Education International, 38(3), 366–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294211038988
30.
MossJ.BruceC. D.CaswellB.FlynnT.HawesZ. (2016). Taking shape: Activities to develop geometric and spatial thinking (Grades K-2). Pearson Canada.
31.
OkamotoY.KotsopoulosD.McGarveyL.HallowellD. (2015). The development of spatial reasoning in young children. In DavisB. (Ed.), Spatial reasoning in the early years (pp. 15–28). Routledge.
32.
ParkG.LubinskiD.BenbowC. P. (2007). Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences: Tracking intellectually precocious youth over 25 years. Psychological Science, 18(11), 948–952. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02007.x
33.
PashlerH.McDanielM.RohrerD.BjorkR. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest: A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
34.
RamfulA.LowrieT.LoganT. (2017). Measurement of spatial ability: Construction and validation of the spatial reasoning instrument for middle school students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(7), 709–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916659207
35.
RinnA. N.MunR. U.HodgesJ. (2022). National association for gifted children and the council of state directors of programs for the gifted (pp. 2020–2021). State of the States in Gifted Education [report].https://nagc.org/page/state-of-the-states-report
36.
RobinsonA.AdelsonJ. L.KiddK. A.CunninghamC. M. (2018). A talent for tinkering: Developing talents from low-income households through engineering curriculum. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2018.03.017
37.
RousseauL. (2021). “Neuromyths” and multiple intelligences (MI) theory: A comment on Gardner, 2020. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 720706. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720706.
38.
SackettP. R.BornemanM. J.ConnellyB. S. (2008). High-stakes testing in higher education and employment: Appraising the evidence for validity and fairness. American Psychologist, 63(4), 215–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.4.215
39.
SnowR. E. (1999). Commentary: Expanding the breadth and depth of admissions testing. In MessickS. J. (Ed.), Assessment in higher education: Issues of access, quality, student development, and public policy (pp. 133–140). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40.
SorbyS. A. (2009). Educational research in developing 3-D spatial skills for engineering students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 459–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802595839
41.
SorbyS. A.VeurinkN.StreinerS. (2018). Does spatial skills instruction improve STEM outcomes? The answer is “yes”. Learning and Individual Differences, 67(October), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.09.001
42.
StambaughT.ChandlerK. (2021). Effective curriculum for underserved gifted students: A CEC-TAG educational resource. Routledge.
43.
StumpfH.MillsC. J.BrodyL. E.BaxleyP. G. (2013). Expanding talent search procedures by including measures of spatial ability: CTY's spatial test battery. Roeper Review, 35(4), 254–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2013.829548
44.
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.WorrellF. 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
45.
UttalD. H.CohenC. A. (2012). Chapter four – spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why, and how?Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 57(1), 147–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394293-7.00004-2
46.
UttalD. H.MeadowN. G.TiptonE.HandL. L.AldenA. R.WarrenC.NewcombeN. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial-skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028446
47.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.FengA. X.EvansB. L. (2007). Patterns of identification and performance among gifted students identified through performance tasks: A three-year analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302717
48.
WaiJ.BardachL.TranB. (2022). What longitudinal research and large-scale population representative studies can tell us about gifted students and education policy 50 years after the Marland Report. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 45(1), 46–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211063942
49.
WaiJ.BenbowC. P. (2021). Educational interventions on behalf of the gifted: Do they have lasting links with development? In Van Tassel-BaskaJ. (Ed.), Talent development in gifted education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 115–130). Routledge.
50.
WaiJ.LubinskiD.BenbowC. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127
51.
WaiJ.WorrellF. C. (2015). Helping disadvantaged and spatially talented students fulfill their potential: Related and neglected national resources. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215621310
YoonS. Y. (2011). Psychometric properties of the revised Purdue spatial visualization tests: Visualization of rotations (the revised PSVT: R) [dissertation]. Purdue University.
