Abstract
In reading through the articles in 35(1), a throughline immediately popped out at me—or perhaps, an ombre shade of a throughline. Three articles investigate gifted students’ perceptions directly, on varying psychosocial factors. One article looks at parents’ competency in understanding their children's giftedness. And one study looks at teachers’ decision-making and thought processes around professional learning, which directly impacts gifted children. Sometimes I think in concept maps or pictures, and what came to mind was an image with the darkest shade at one end, fading outward to the lightest shade. In the midst of these hues was an outline of a child. I was picturing how the articles showcased the power and representation children have in their own learning in the classroom: an ombre shade of student voice and agency.
Wilcocks (2017) postulates that agency for gifted learners consists of four concepts, collated from gifted education and psychology research: “self-efficacy, self-regulation, autonomy, and relatedness … [from] Bandura's social cognitive model, Ryan and Deci's self-determination theory and Siegle and McCoach's Achievement Orientation Model” (p. 49). I operationalize agency in the context of this editorial as learner autonomy, responsibility, and ownership, distinct from voice, which is learner communication to influence change. Both voice and agency are rooted in power and in belief in the self (e.g., ownership, self-efficacy, ability to influence change) but are distinct in the action. Gifted mathematician, tinkerer, activist, and educational innovator, Dr Seymour Papert said “when you go to school, the trauma is that you must stop learning, and accept being taught” (Abdaal, 2019, para. 53). Voice speaks out against this, while agency empowers students to act to create one's own learning or enact change.
Gifted Students’ Perceptions
In “Gifted High School Students’ Perceptions of the Impact of Classroom Power Dynamics on Motivation and Empowerment,” Dr Amy Graefe asked gifted high school students about power in the classroom. While voice is evident throughout this qualitative research article through thick rich descriptions and powerful quotes, so too is the students’ agency. Students defined power in the context of the classroom, recognized when teachers used power in positive and negative ways, and operationalized learner empowerment in different contexts.
Drs Megan Parker Peters and Emily Mofield used a mixed methods research design in “Examining Students’ Perceptions of Giftedness, Need for Cognition, and Goal Orientations.” Asking middle school students to respond to a survey, the researchers reported findings on students’ beliefs regarding the constancy of intelligence and giftedness. Student voice was evident through the results of open-ended questions, and the middle schoolers shared their views on giftedness and identity. I noted the throughline of agency in the findings related to goal orientation and preference for challenge.
Advanced placement and preinternational baccalaureate freshmen participated in Drs Kai Zhuang Shum, Shannon Suldo, Elizabeth Shaunessy-Dedrick, and Lindsey O’Brennan's article, “An Exploration of the Facilitators and Barriers of Cognitive Engagement Among 9th Grade Students in Accelerated Curricula”. Researchers elevated student voices in their article and analyzed the interviews, presenting the findings as themes, secondary themes, and codes. Several of the researchers’ findings of the facilitators to cognitive engagement connect to agency, such as student beliefs and connectedness.
Parental Competency
Moving from gifted students’ perceptions to parental knowledge of students’ giftedness, Drs Dongsim Kim, Dahyeon Ryoo, and Myunghwa Lee contributed the “Development of a Scale to Measure the Parental Competency of Science-Gifted Students in South Korea” to 35(1). Keeping in mind the goal of providing appropriate support for gifted science learners, the researchers created a scale with three measures of parental competence: learner, fosterer, and scientist. While this study takes a measured step away from both learner voice and agency, hence the faded ombre, the throughline is maintained because of the focus on the why––the need for appropriate support. Moreover, as you dive into this article, note that the research base is grounded in understanding the who––the gifted science learners, and the importance of parents as empowerers.
Teachers’ Decision Making
Ms Rachael Cody, Mr Gregory Boldt, and Dr E. Jean Gubbins present research from a Jacob K. Javits grant, Thinking Like Mathematicians: Challenging All Grade 3 Students in “How Teachers Make Decisions in Response to Professional Learning: A Study on Grade 3 Differentiation in Mathematics.” The researchers used a mixed-methods approach, and while the study did not feature student voice there were implications for student agency. Researchers presented quantitative findings that after professional learning teachers reported a significant increase with a large effect size on students’ use of mathematical practices. As you read Cody et al., take note of the teachers’ comments, mentioning student risk-taking and confidence.
As I read through each article one last time, I reflected on Dr Seymour Papert's words shared earlier in this editorial, and the concept of learning vs schooling. Papert was once asked about what continued to keep him going after over 30 years in education, and he responded, “the deepest question about education is, what drives learning? What drives kids? What drives everybody? And when I look at young kids who haven't yet been to school, they are all driven. They are passionate about what they want to do” (Papert, 1999, para. 39). He then followed up with a question of his own, “how is it that you and I and all the people in the world who remain creative and passionate about what they're doing survived the system, that in so many other cases—in the majority of cases—strangles that enormous energy?” (Papert, 1999, para. 40). The conceptual throughline in 35(1) serves as a reminder that while students have power in voice and agency, so too do researchers and educators.
