Identifying intellectual giftedness by reliance on norm-referenced measures may underestimate young children who have not yet experienced formal academic teaching or who are variable in the testing situation. Teachers can detect potential giftedness by observation, especially in an environment that invites children to display their advanced abilities. Such an environment, in which the curricular dimensions of content, process, product, and learning environment were modified, was offered to 11 three-and four-year-olds who had been nominated by their parents as possibly gifted. Anecdotal records revealed a variety of behavioural indicators of potential giftedness and a diversity of individual profiles of development. Norm-referenced measures of ability and achievement generally reinforced the observations. Teachers need training in the behavioural indicators of potential giftedness and in the provision of a sufficiently challenging curriculum if the educational needs of the young gifted child are to be detected and met.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarbourN. E., & ShakleeB. D. (1998). Gifted education meets Reggio Emilia: Visions for curriculum in gifted education for young children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 228–237.
2.
BorlandJ. H. (1986). IQ tests: Throwing out the bathwater, saving the baby. Roeper Review, 8(3), 163–167.
3.
BredekampS., & CoppleC. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Revised edn). Washington DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
4.
BraggettE. J. (1984). The ‘developmental spurter’: A study of accelerated development in young children. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 9(3), 8–13.
5.
CihaT. E., HarrisR., HoffmanC., & PotterM.W. (1974). Parents as identifiers of giftedness, ignored but accurate. Gifted Child Quarterly, 18, 191–193.
6.
DunnL. M., & L. M. (1981). Peabody picture vocabulary test: Revised.Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
7.
GagneF. (1994). Are teachers really poor talent detectors? Comments on Pegnato and Birch's (1959) study of the effectiveness and efficiency of various identification techniques. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 124–126.
8.
GinsburgH. P., & BaroodyA. (1983). Test of early mathematics ability.Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
9.
GoodwinW. L., & GoodwinL. D. (1982). Young children and measurement: Standardised and nonstandardised instruments in early childhood education. In SpodekB. (Ed.), Handbook of research in early childhood education (pp. 441–463). New York: The Free Press.
10.
GrossM. U. M. (1993). Exceptionally gifted children.London: Routledge.
11.
HodgeK. A, & KempC. R. (2000). Exploring the nature of giftedness in preschool children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24(1), 46–73.
12.
HohmannM., BanetB., & WeikartD. (1979). Young children in action.Ypsilanti, Mich: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation Press.
13.
KarnesM. B., ShwedelA. M., & WilliamsM. (1983). Combining instructional models for young gifted children. Teaching Exceptional Children, 3, 128–135.
14.
KitanoM. K. (1985). Ethnography of a preschool for the gifted: What do young children do?Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 67–71.
15.
KitanoM. K. (1989). K–3 teacher's role in recognizing and supporting young gifted children. Young Children, 44(3), 57–63.
16.
MakerC. J. (1986). Suggested principles for gifted preschool curricula. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6, 62–73.
17.
McBrideN. (1992). Early identification of the gifted and talented students: Where do teachers stand?Gifted Education International, 8(1), 19–22.
18.
McCallR. B., AppelbaumM. I., & HogartyP. S. (1973). Developmental changes in mental performance. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38 (3 Serial No. 150).
19.
MorelockM. J., & FeldmanD. H. (1992). The assessment of giftedness in young children. In NuttallE. V., RomeroI., & KalesnkJ., (Eds.), Assessing and screening preschoolers: Psychological and educational dimensions (pp. 301–309). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20.
New South Wales Department of School Education (1991). The education of gifted and talented students: Policy statement and implementation strategies. Sydney.
21.
NealeM. D. (1988). Neale analysis of reading ability revised manual.Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
22.
ParkeB. N., & NessP. S. (1988). Curricular decision-making for the education of young gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 196–199.
23.
PletanM. D., RobinsonN. M., BerningerV. W., & AbbottR. D. (1995). Parents’ observations of kindergartners who are advanced in mathematical reasoning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 30–44.
24.
PorterL. (1999). Gifted young children.Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
ReidD. K., HreskoW. P., & HammillD. D. (1989). Test of early reading ability (Second edn). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
27.
RenzulliJ. S. (1988). A decade of dialogue on the three-ring conception of giftedness. Roeper Review, 11(1), 18–25.
28.
RoedellW. C., JacksonN. E., & RobinsonH. B. (1980). Gifted Young Children.New York: Teachers College Press.
29.
SilvermanL. K., ChitwoodD. G., & WatersJ. L. (1986). Young gifted children: Can parents identify giftedness?Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6(1), 23–38.
30.
SprodT. (1993). Books into ideas: A community of inquiry.Melbourne: Hawker Brownlow Education.
31.
TannC. S. (1988). The practice of topic work. In TannC. S. (Ed.), Developing topic work in the primary school (pp. 21–45). London: The Falmer Press.
32.
WhitmoreJ. R. (1982). Recognizing and developing hidden giftedness. The Elementary School Journal, 82, 274–283.
