You are on page 1of 12

Application of Technology for Gifted and Talented approach in Education: A Review of Best

Practices and Cognitive Research

Latifa Rahman Bidita

St. Johns University, New York, USA

Abstract

Technology is the only tools which we will advance in Education in face 21 centuries and use

technology learning can shape students mind indicating experience through searching and

researching information and uses the applications and software are in the classroom well.

Educational Technology is working with instruction and observation through research and

findings which can help for gifted and talented Childs /students especially. Teachers in the

classroom should engage students in cognitive talk rather than the descriptive system. The

theories of the cognitive research can help to meet successful needs for students who need extra

assistance for development of their talent. The identification of intelligence can established extra

ordinary learning pattern with technological tools for talent children allow them for betterment of

their necessity. With increasing awareness about integrating technology used in different areas of

learning environments, gifted programming, and professional learning development.

Keywords: Technology, Communication, and Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Creativity and

Innovation, Gifted and Talented Education, Cognitive Research, Classroom Environment.

1 | Page
Introduction

Assistive technology is effective tools to create a natural classroom for example, while an

inclusion student with a cognitive disability is in the classroom, the teacher can instruct while the

student sits at a computer equipped with the assistive technology needed of him her to be

successful in the days lesson. Such students need to receive specialized educational

interventions to meet their learning needs and help them reach their full potential. They require

greater instrumental intensity or higher levels of autonomy (Russi, 2004) than other students

since, their degree of motivation influence their level of productivity (Colangelo and Davis,

2003). This is a common scenario for many teachers in todays schools. Among the many diverse

challenges being faced by the general education teacher, one challenge is particularly perplexing.

How does one address both the special needs of students with extraordinary academic ability?

(Wallace, 2005) And the needs of those students who are not as advanced? Unfortunately, the

harsh reality of overcrowding and budget cuts makes it increasingly difficult to meet the

educational needs of every student. Teacher-centered instruction, or teaching the same curricula

to all students, is no longer a viable solution (Rapp, 2005) Teachers of gifted and talented need to

be creative to effectively develop or modify programs and curricula for their students (Rajskind,

2000). It is important to prepare teachers to not only use technology but also to integrate it into

instruction (Sanadholtz, 2001).

Teachers, administrators, and researchers alike are seeking ways to utilize technology to enhance

teaching and learning. Technology planning teams are being created, financial resources are

being sought to purchase resources, and implementation models are critically examined

(Buckley, 1995; Collis and Moonen, 1994; Musco, 1995; Newman, 1992). Curriculum

compacting is an instructional technique used for modifying the regular curriculum to meet the

2 | Page
needs of high-ability students by carefully assessing the work they already know and substituting

or streamlining it for more challenging content through curriculum enrichment (Reis, Burns and

Renzulli, 1992). Curriculum enrichment is a technique used to deepen students understanding of

issues (Wasserman, 2001).

Information technology has become a common instructional method used with gifted and

talented learners (Kalchman and Case, 1999; Wallace, 2005; Wasserman, 2001). It can be used to

enhance and replace existing delivery methods and to improve education for the gifted student

(McKinnon and Nolan, 1999). Todays students have grown up with mobile phones, computers,

and MP3 players (Sheffield, 2007), and highly important that their education keeps up with their

interests and advancements in technology. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the empirical

research related to use of technology with gifted learners and their teachers. This will-will

contribute to the technology literature but put into perspective the research articles in this area

using the different strands in national gifted programming standards (National Association for

Gifted children (NAGC), 2010: learning and development, assessment, curriculum planning and

instruction, learning environments, programming, and professional development.

According to the Technological Pedagogical content knowledge theory by Koehler and Mishra

(2005), the use of technology influences the teaching of content. The interaction between the

characteristics of technology and the structure of the content directs examples used in teaching

content (Bielefeldt, 2012; Koehler and Mishra, 2005). Also, a teachers knowledge of the content

area directs the technologies selected and the pedagogy used. Finally, since the teachers

understand of technology, content, and pedagogy interact, the teachers expertise with pedagogy

also will dictate the use of technology and the content being taught (Angeli and Valanides, 2009).

Thus, according to Koehler and Mishras (2005) technological pedagogical content knowledge

3 | Page
theory, it is the overlap between knowing the content, knowing appropriate pedagogy, and

knowing ways that technology can use that the most powerful teaching occurs.

Review of literature

Building on a childs natural abilities, a part of the learners developmental process involves

being exposed to a number catalyst. These include the elements in a childs life which can shape

the emergence of the development of their innate abilities. With the intervention of interpersonal

and environmental catalyst, a gifted student may enhance and enrich their natural aptitudes to

acquire systematically developed skills, or talent. Therefore, it can be assumed that Gagne (1992)

views giftedness as being natural ability or potential, and talent as the product of intervention, or

achieving a students potent through experience.

Technology Environment

A successful technology-enhanced environment encourages learners to use its resources and

tools to process information deeply and extend thinking (Kozma, 1987). Research aimed at

establishing the essential elements of a successful technology-enhanced environment has

contributed to knowledge on the short term effects of specific technological interventions

(Brungardt and Zollman, 1995; Henessey et al., 1995), on the development of specific programs

or technologies (Linn, 1997; Roth, Woszczyna, and Smith, 1995), on the development of specific

curriculum tools (Gordin, Polman, and sea, 1994; Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1996), on the

academic achievement of students (Lazarowitz and Huppert, 1993; Lewis, Stern, and Linn,

19930, on student attitudes toward computers (Boone and Edson, 1994; Shashaani, 1994), and on

the use of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) (Lockard et al., 1994).

4 | Page
Creating virtual learning environment

A virtual learning environment (VLE) refers to computer-based environments for delivering

learning materials on the Internet (Wilson, 1996). Virtual learning environment may be used to

develop cultural experiences in the visual, creative, and performing arts; visit all types of

museums, industries, governmental agencies, and institutions; expose students to different ideas

through prominent and controversial persons; and provide advanced study in the content areas

that include research activities (Belcastro, 2005). They can be exciting learning approach for

students because of the unlimited amount of information that is available online. Instant

information is as close as a search engine way. (Will, 2005).

Comfortable uses technology in classroom

Teachers do not embrace technology just because it exists, but because it is user-friendly,

flexible, engaging, useful, and results-oriented (Baule, 2007). For some teachers, technology is

blended seamlessly with their instruction (Clausen, 2007), but for others, many aspects of

planning and organizations make technology enhancements problematic (Garcia and Rose,

2007). Whether a teacher chooses to use technology or not, the teacher had control over the use

of technology in school and related to school work for students (Kimball, 2001, Ritshaupt,

Dawson and Cavanaugh, 2012).

Technology for development and Assessments

Computer-based assessment can be a great alternative to self-reports. Steiner (2006) used a

computer program called Space Race to assess strategic thinking of gifted elementary students.

For cognitive disabilities, Kurzweil 3000 is text scanning software that allows for the type-

written text to be scanned into the computer and read aloud. It offers many benefits to enhance

reading fluency, such as voice options, highlighting options, dictionaries, a thesaurus, and a

5 | Page
syllable break down. This software is approved by the state of Maryland for accommodating

students on state testing where IEPs may require a student to have a verbatim reading. Calero,

Garcia-Martin, Jimenez, Kazen, and Araque (2007) studies self-regulation efficiency of gifted

students using a computer-based task, self-regulation and concentration test. Teachers may want

to enhance learning concepts from the unit using online learning games (West water and Wolfe,

2000). Teachers can find games titled Math Bingo and Wacky Wordplay at Education Worlds

Online Game Archives or subject area action games at about.com. Online learning games can be

used to reinforce concepts in the multicultural unit. The JASON project is a curricula supplement

which enhances students with hands-on explorations and experiments. It is best for students in

grades 4-9, and it benefited becoming members of a virtual research community, multimedia

expeditions, broadcasts, and video, and JASON also offers online professional development

opportunities. Online assessments were effective for gifted high school students when Cope and

Suppes (2002) examined the use of computer-based assessments with those enrolled in online

courses. Such assessments allowed the instructions to analyze how many their students took to

complete their assessments, and whenever a student spent more time on a section, they could

analyze the data and help the student to understand difficult concepts.

Assessment Rubric

Teachers can find rubrics online to help assess the learning objectives developed for the unit.

When using a rubric, both the student and the teachers should understand and agree how projects

will be evaluated (Tuttle, 1996). There is a free online rubric generator

(see http://rubistar.4teachers.org); it will find Variety of subjects will help the further assess the

virtual learning place.

6 | Page
Instrumentation for analysis of data

Students with the potential for creative productivity may find that pacing, materials, and

approaches to learning in traditional general education classroom diminish their curiosity

(Harrison, 2004). A classroom observation instrument that served as an indicator of teacher

pedagogy was developed a used to provide descriptions of the teaching and learning

environment. Some approaches have been proposed for analyzing interaction in classrooms and

learning environments, such as discourse analysis, systematic observation and coding schemes

(McLaughlin and Oliver, 1995).

Data analysis influenced collection and vice versa. As units of data segmented, they were

collected, organized and manipulated using a computer spreadsheet (Creswell, 2007). Thematic

coding was both within-case and cross-case in nature, and themes emerged from similarities or

differences among teaching contexts (Siegle, 2005) and characteristics of participants (Creswell,

2007; Smith and Osborn, 2004).

Pedagogical techniques in the classroom

Research on classrooms has shown that teachers engage in talk than students and that such roles

tend to be interrogative (Carlsen, 1991). Teaching is the best way to deliver the highest value of

life to the students and provide opportunities for children to cooperate, to explore and to involve

with peer review of the ideas which is adaptable.

7 | Page
Pedagogical roles to the Structural function in the Socio- Cognitive function to

classroom classroom the classroom


Control the management of Managing the classroom Promoting friendly interaction

the classroom
Provide positive feedback Involving discussion and talk Create creative confidence
Create reflective questioning Share and Expand the ideas Design thinking and deep

learning with team

association.

Teachers roles more participatory and less didactic and learner control of the technology was

encouraged. Students achieved the higher outcome from order thinking, and this was reflected in

classroom dialogue, independence of thought and the growth of autonomy (McLoughlin and

Oliver, 1998)

Discussion

8 | Page
Technology is the tools to use in gifted and talented education gradually so that it will highlight

the cognitive research in this area. To help the structure this literature review, it asked with three

research questions. The following sections present answers to these questions based on this

analysis of (a) research on technology use in gifted education, (b) descriptive and evaluative

articles relevant to the topics addressed here (published in gifted education journals during 2000

to 2012), and (c) recent research trends in general education (Maddux, 2009; Maddux, Gibson,

and Dodge, 2010; Martin et al., 2011)

Conclusion

Gifted students would benefit from using technology to help them to extend and enrich more

about curriculum. Using computer-based resources are a great way to provide gifted students

with an opportunity to network and gain global understandings of the topics they are examined

in. Gifted and talented students can be educationally enriched through a virtual learning

environment. It can use to way to integrate the curriculum with Information technology. This

research is conducted in specific contexts focuses on the students who need a different dynamic

environment to the classroom. The freedom in the classroom should be more influencing and

creative using educational application and software to teach the way of topic. The technology

used for cognitive and social interaction to improve cognitive outcomes for students to enable

collaborative contraction to enhance learning to achieve higher order thinking outcomes to the

classroom.

9 | Page
Reference

McKinnon, D., & Nolan, C. (1999). Distance education for the gifted and talented: An interactive
design model. Roeper Review, 21, 320325.

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the
conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in
technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1),
154-168.

Belcastro, F. (2005). Applications of electronic technology to rural gifted students who are blind
or visually impaired. Information Technology and Disabilities E-Journal. Retrieved
August 11, 2006, from http://www.rit. edu/~easi/itd/itdv11n1/belcast.htm

Buckley, R. B. (1995). What happens when funding is not an issue? Educational Leadership, 53,
6466.
Boone, W. J., & Edson, J. (1994). Ninth graders attitudes towards selected
uses of technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 3,
239247.
Baule, S. M. (2007). The components of successful technology. Teacher Librarian, 34(5), 16-18.

Bielefeldt, T. (2012). Guidance for technology decisions from classroom observation. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 44, 205-223.
Brungardt, J. B., & Zollman, D. (1995). Inuence of interactive videodisc
instruction using simultaneous-time analysis on kinematics graphing
skills of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32, 855869
Clausen, J. M. (2007). Beginning teachers technology use: First-year teacher development and
the institutional contexts effect on new teachers technology use with students. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 39, 245-26
Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: a sociolinguistic perspective. Review of
Educational Research, 61(157-178).
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc
Gordin, D. N., Polman, J. L., & Pea, R. D. (1994). The climate visualizer: Sense-
making through scientic visualization. Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 3, 203226.
Garcia, P., & Rose, S. (2007). The influence of technocentric collaboration on preservice
teachers attitudes about technologys role in powerful learning and teaching. Journal of
Technology and Teacher Education, 15, 247-266.
Hennessy, S., Twigger, D., Driver, R., OShea, T., OMalley, C. E., Byard, M.,
Draper, S., Hartley, R., Mohamed, R., & Scanlon, E. (1995). A classroom

10 | P a g e
intervention using a computer-augmented curriculum for mechanics.
International Journal of Science Education, 17, 189206.
Lockard, J., Abrams, P. D., & Many, W. A. (1994). Microcomputers for twenty-
rst century educators (3rded.). New York: Harper Collins.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Engaging students in a knowledge
society. Educational Leadership, 54, 610.
Shashaani, L. (1994). Gender differences in computer experience and its
inuence on computer attitudes. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 11, 347368.

Kozma, R. B. (1987). The implication of cognitive psychology for computer-


based learning tools. Educational Technology, 27, 2025.
Kimball, K. L. B. (2001). Interpretative stories from school careers of gifted students. ProQuest
database. (AAT 3032075).
Linn, M. (1997). The role of the laboratory in science learning. The
Elementary School Journal, 97, 401 417.
Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (1994). Leadership for Transition: Moving from the special project to
systemwide integration. In G. Kearsley & W. Lynch (Eds.), Educational technology
leadership perspectives (pp. 98111). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Publications.
Newman, D. (1992). Technology as support for school structure and school restructuring. Phi
Delta Kappan, 74, 308315.

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational
technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal
of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.

Lockard, J., Abrams, P. D., & Many, W. A. (1994). Microcomputers for twenty-
rst century educators (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins

Rapp, W. (2005). Inquiry-based environments for the inclusion of students with exceptional
learning needs. Remedial and Special Education, 26, 297310.

Reis, S. M., Burns, D. E., & Renzulli, J. S. (1992). Curriculum compacting: The complete guide
to modifying the regular curriculum for high ability students. Mansfield Center, CT:
Creative Learning Press.

Russo, C. F. (2004). A comparative study of creativity and cognitive problem-solving strategies


of high-IQ and average students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 179-190.

Sandholtz, J. H. (2001). Learning to teach with technology: A comparison of teacher


development programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 349374.

11 | P a g e
Tuttle, H. (1996). RUBRICS. Multimedia Schools, 3(1), 3033.
Siegle, D. (2005). Six uses of the Internet to develop students' talents and gifts. Gifted Child
Today, 28(2), 30-36.
Wallace, P. (2005). Distance education for gifted students: Leveraging technology to expand
academic programs. High Ability Studies, 16(1), 7786.
Rejskind, G. (2000). TAG teachers: Only the creative need apply. Roeper Review, 22, 153157.
Ritzhaupt, A. D., Dawson, K., & Cavanaugh, C. (2012). An investigation of factors influencing
student use of technology in K-12 classrooms using path analysis. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 46, 229-254
Wasserman, S. (2001). Curriculum enrichment with computer software: Adventures in the
trade. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 592598.
National Association for Gifted Children. (NAGC). (2010). Pre-KGrade 12 gifted programming
standards. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=546
Sheffield, C. C. (2007). Technology and the gifted adolescent: Higher-order thinking, 21st-
century literacy, and the digital native. Meridian, 10, 5. Retrieved from http://www.ncsu.
edu/meridian/sum2007/gifted/index.htm
Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2004). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In G. M.
Breakwell (Ed.), Doing Social Psychology Research (pp. 229-254). Malden, MA: British
Psychological Society Blackwell
Will, R. (2005). The educators guide to the Read/Write the Web. Educational Leadership, 63(4),
2427.
Westwater, A., & Wolfe, P. (2000). The brain-compatible curriculum. Educational Leadership,
58(3), 4952

12 | P a g e