Self-esteem is an accumulation of cognitive and emotional self-reflections. Perfectionism and self-esteem in adolescence are associated to later life (mal)adaptive development. Whereas self...Show moreSelf-esteem is an accumulation of cognitive and emotional self-reflections. Perfectionism and self-esteem in adolescence are associated to later life (mal)adaptive development. Whereas self-oriented perfectionists (SOP) aspire to an ideal standard for themselves, socially prescribed perfectionists (SPP) experience pressure from others. While striving traits of SOP (SOP-S) are associated with healthy adjustment, critical SOP (SOP-C) and SPP tendencies have been associated with maladjustment. It remains unclear whether intellectual giftedness, a high cognitive ability level, serves as a risk factor or a protective factor for self-esteem. Nevertheless, subgroups of gifted individuals seem vulnerable to maladaptive perfectionism. Therefore, this study investigated associations between perfectionism and self-esteem through multiple linear regression. SOP-S was assumed to have a positive relationship to self-esteem, whereas SOP-C and SPP, respectively, were predicted to have a negative relationship to self-esteem. Moreover, giftedness was hypothesized to be a moderator for all three relationships. Gifted and nongifted children, ages 10 through 12, completed the Child and Adolescent Perfectionism Scale (CAPS) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES). SOP-C was indeed negatively associated with self-esteem. Neither SOP-S or SPP appeared significantly related to self-esteem. No moderation effect of giftedness was found, suggesting a similar effect of SOP-C on self-esteem for gifted and nongifted students. The lack of associations for either SOP-S or SPP with self-esteem was not in line with past literature. The CAPS may have failed to capture the essence the SOP-S dimension and the developmental stage of participants might have influenced their experience of SPP. Future studies should include larger sample sizes and preferably additional measures of perfectionism. Multiple reporters would be beneficial.Show less
The present study aimed to enhance understanding of the connection between empathy and openness to experience. While research has explored this connection previously, this study also aims to apply...Show moreThe present study aimed to enhance understanding of the connection between empathy and openness to experience. While research has explored this connection previously, this study also aims to apply it to the gifted and pre-adolescent population. Giftedness is a complex topic with a wide array of definitions and an even wider array of implications. In the current study, children between the ages of 9-12, in either non-gifted or gifted schools all over the Netherlands, were administered the subscale of openness to experience from the Big Five Questionnaire for Children and the subscales of Empathic Concern and Perspective Taking from the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. For the first hypothesis, testing whether openness to experience can be predicted from empathy, results showed that students (N = 95) showed higher scores in openness to experience if they were more empathetic. The overall Interpersonal Reactivity Index score was the best predictor, closely followed by the Perspective Taking scores. Results for the second hypothesis, that the previous prediction would be more significant for gifted students (N = 44) than non-gifted students (N = 51), showed no statistical evidence, but hinted towards a significant trend. It was concluded that individuals higher in empathy might also show more openness to experience. Additionally, the study highlights the need for improvement in the current educational systems by mentioning current options and their practical limitations in relation to gifted and non-gifted individuals.Show less
In this study, it was examined whether both intelligence and creativity significantly predict giftedness in students aged seven to thirteen years. More specifically, we investigated whether...Show moreIn this study, it was examined whether both intelligence and creativity significantly predict giftedness in students aged seven to thirteen years. More specifically, we investigated whether giftedness can be predicted by spatial as well as verbal intelligence, creative problem-solving and mathematical creativity. Results from previous research have indicated that these factors are interrelated, especially spatial intelligence and mathematical creativity. Four hypotheses were described, based on an extensive and diverse body of literature. The current used sample consisted of 310 participants, of which 36 children were gifted. After conducting forty logistic regression analyses, we concluded that, overall, only spatial intelligence was a significant predictor of giftedness, having significant p-values in 80% of the analyses for specifically this predictor. The other three variables were not found to significantly predict giftedness, as they were significant predictors in only 20%, 30% or none of the analyses. These findings highlight the need to differentiate between subtypes of giftedness. Therefore, the present conclusions are of significant importance for the improvement and broadening of gifted assessment instruments, scientifical developments with reference to the concept, theories and definition of giftedness and specialized educational programs in both primary and secondary school for gifted students. Optimizing educational programs for gifted students provide them with more opportunities to optimize their learning experience and to flourish at school. Future research on subtypes of giftedness will enable more confident conclusions about the importance of creativity in the concept of giftedness, hence contributing to improvements of giftedness assessments and policies for gifted education.Show less
One of the common misconceptions when it comes to teaching a second language to gifted students is that teachers expect gifted students to be better at learning a second language than non-gifted...Show moreOne of the common misconceptions when it comes to teaching a second language to gifted students is that teachers expect gifted students to be better at learning a second language than non-gifted students. Expectations are usually high, and when a student does not live up to these expectations, it causes frustration; not just for the student, but also for the teacher and the parents. This misconception stems from the fact that most gifted students show an extensive knowledge of their L1 (first language) at an early age. In theory, a gifted child should therefore be faster at picking up an L2 (second language) than non-gifted students: Hayes et al (1998, p. 179) states: “there is a strong connection between language ability and learning ability.” So hypothetically, with their advanced thinking skills, their more extensive verbal skills, and with their aptitude for learning, these gifted students should have little trouble with learning a second language. In practice, however, this does not always seem to be the case; gifted students do not automatically apply their abilities in learning second languages. For example, classroom practice shows that gifted students generally have greater difficulties with learning and memorizing vocabulary than non-gifted students. The study described in this thesis has multiple aims. First and foremost it aims to examine if there is a difference in the ways gifted and non-gifted students acquire English as a second language. Secondly it explores how language pedagogy as well as taking learning styles into account could benefit gifted students. This is in turn compared to the current classroom practice at the Rijswijks Lyceum. It should finally lead to the causes of these differences or similarities along with the consequences for gifted students.Show less
In this research, teachers' motivation for professionalization activities about learning delays and giftedness was explored by interviewing twenty-eight primary school teachers in the Netherlands....Show moreIn this research, teachers' motivation for professionalization activities about learning delays and giftedness was explored by interviewing twenty-eight primary school teachers in the Netherlands. With this information an attempt was made to answer the following question: To which extent do differences exist in the affective valences, cognitive valences and sense of competence among teachers with regard to professionalization activities about learning delays and giftedness and how can differences be explained? Results show that teachers feel that pupils with learning delays need emotional as well as cognitive help. However, there's a limit to what these pupils can achieve cognitively, so teachers aim for their emotional well being. Teachers do not mention a cognitive limit for the gifted pupils, but do mention the emotional well being of these pupils as one of the conditions that needs to be met to help them excel, alongside testing the giftedness of the pupil and knowing how to help these pupils. Furthermore, teachers with a preference for professionalization activities about learning delays mainly build upon non-personal cognitive valences, like wanting to renew their knowledge to connect to the needs of these students and wanting to help the large number of pupils with learning delays, for their motivation. In contrast, teachers with a preference for professionalization activities about giftedness mainly build upon positive personal cognitive valences, like feeling the need to gain new knowledge to develop themselves, for their motivation. The number of years a teachers has been working in education explained most of the differences in their motivation, like the decreasing will to gain new knowledge and to renew old knowledge. The outcomes of this research should be explored further, but can already be to used to improve professionalization activities by building upon the motivational aspects that play a role in teachers' motivation for these activities.Show less
