Learning Content and Process for Academically Talented Students

Main Article Content

Syafrimen Syafril


Academically talented students are students who have above average abilities, particularly in the academic since birth, and can develop through a process of training. As their ability to process learning and information is faster than the average students, they are prone to feel frustrated if they are treated the same as the average students. Hence, this study analyzes the content and learning process in-depth required by these academically talented students. The analysis document through the embedded multiple-case design was used for data collection in this study. The data were analyzed qualitatively using NVIVO 12.0 software. The results of the analysis showed that the learning content for academically talented students are; (i) content based on current issues, (ii) significant content, (iii) challenging content, (iv) advanced content, (v) inspiring content), (vi) thematic-integrative, (vii) critical knowledge and experience construction content-based, and (viii) controversial content issue and active debate. While the learning process for academically talented students are; (i) independent study, (ii) problem solving, (iii) criticism learning, (iv) effective learning, (v) inspired learning, (vi) higher-order thinking learning (HOTs), (vii) guesswork learning), (viii) inquiry learning, (ix) possibility learning, (x) exploring learning, (xi) flexibility learning), (xii) straight learning, and (xiii) giving students liberty (learner-centered). Considering the results of this study, to develop the ability of academically talented students to the maximum, behavioristic and constructivist learning and a varied combination of both can be applied.

Article Details

How to Cite
Syafril, S. (2021). Learning Content and Process for Academically Talented Students. Asian Social Science and Humanities Research Journal (ASHREJ), 3(1), 73-81. https://doi.org/10.37698/ashrej.v3i1.64


Aini, N. R., Syafril, S., Netriwati, N., Pahrudin, A., Rahayu, T., & Puspasari, V. (2019). Problem-Based Learning for Critical Thinking Skills in Mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1155(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012026
Al-Hadabi, A. S. D. (2010). Yemeni primary education teachers' perception of gifted students' characteristics and the methods for identifying these characteristics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.065
Ambrose, L., & Machek, G. R. (2015). Identifying Creatively Gifted Students: Necessity of a Multi-Method Approach. Contemporary School Psychology, 19(3), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-014-0020-z
Bastani, P., Samadbeik, M., Dinarvand, R., Kashefian-Naeeini, S., & Vatankhah, S. (2018). Qualitative analysis of national documents on health care services and pharmaceuticals’ purchasing challenges: Evidence from Iran. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3261-0
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative Case Study methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6dt02264b
Beckely, D. (1998). Gifted and Learning Disabled: Twice-Exceptional Students. NRC/GT Spring Newsletter. University of Connecticut, 7. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/spring98/sprng984.html
Benson, L. (2002). Serving gifted students through inclusion: A teacher’s perspective. Roeper Review, 24(3), 126–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554151
Berman, K. M., Schultz, R. A., & Weber, C. L. (2012). A Lack of Awareness and Emphasis in Preservice Teacher Training. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217511428307
Betts, G. T., & Neihart, M. (1986). Implementing Self-Directed Learning Models for the Gifted and Talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 174–177.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Calero, M. D., Belen, G. M. M., & Robles, M. A. (2011). Learning Potential in high IQ children: The contribution of dynamic assessment to the identification of gifted children. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.025
Chan, D. W. (2008). Goal orientations and achievement among gifted Chinese students in Hong Kong. High Ability Studies, 19(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130801980307
Chang, T. F., & Qin, D. B. (2017). Relations Between Academic Adjustment and Parental Psychological Control of Academically Gifted Chinese American and European American Students. Child Indicators Research, 10(3), 715–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-016-9403-1
Chesebro, J. W., & Borisoff, D. J. (2007). What Makes Qualitative Research Qualitative? Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 8(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17459430701617846
Chowdhury, M. A. (2016). Gifted education in science and chemistry: Perspectives and insights into teaching, pedagogies, assessments, and psychosocial skills development. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 4(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.2018116581
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. SAGE Publication.
Cropley, A., & McLeod, J. (1986). Preparing Teachers of the Gifted. International Review of Education, 32(2), 125–136.
Del Giorno, B. J. (1977). Retal as a model for developing critical and divergent thing in gifted and talented students of science. Gifted Child Quarterly, 21(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698627702100110
Dixon, F. A., Cross, T. L., & Adams, C. M. (2001). Psychological characteristics of academically gifted students in a residential setting: A cluster analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.1032
Eilam, B., & Vidergor, H. E. (2011). Gifted Israeli students’ perceptions of teachers’ desired characteristics: A case of cultural orientation. Roeper Review, 33(2), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2011.554156
Esterberg, K. G. (2014). Qualitative Methods in Social Research. Mc Graw Hill.
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., Mcdermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and Evaluating Qualitative Research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(6), 717–732.
Fox, L. H. (1981). Identification of the academically gifted. American Psychologist, 36(10), 1103–1111. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.10.1103
Gallagher, J., Harradine, C. C., & Coleman, M. R. (1997). Challenge or boredom? Gifted students’ views on their schooling. Roeper Review, 19(3), 132–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199709553808
Gallagher, J. J. (1994). Current and Historical Thinking on Education for Gifted and Talented Students. National Excellence: A Case for Developing America’s Talent., 83–107.
Gordon, W. J. J., & Poze, T. (1980). SES Synectics and Gifted Education Today. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24(4), 147–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628002400402
Gross, M. U. M., & Smith, S. R. (2019). Put Them Together and See How They Learn! Ability Grouping and Acceleration Effects on the Self-Esteem of Academically Gifted High School Students. Springer International Handbooks of Education, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3021-6_17-1
Grouws, D. A., Howald, C. L., & Colangelo, N. (1996). Student Conceptions of Mathematics: A Comparison of Mathematically Talented Students and Typical High School Algebra Students. Paper Presented at the American Educational Research Association, New York. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED395783
Harkness, J. (1988). College studies for the gifted: An academic approach for meeting the needs of gifted, talented, and creative students. Roeper Review, 11(2), 77–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198809553170
James, S. (2013). Participant Observation. Rinehart & Winston Publish.
Jones, K., & Day, J. D. (1996). Cognitive similarities between academically and socially gifted students. Roeper Review, 18(4), 270–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199609553757
Kim, K. H., Kaufman, J. C., John, B., & Sriraman, B. (2013). Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students. In Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-149-8
Lapointe, J. M., Legault, F., & Batiste, S. J. (2005). Teacher interpersonal behavior and adolescents’ motivation in mathematics: A comparison of learning disabled, average, and talented students. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(1–2), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.03.005
Lee, K. M., Jones, M. K., & Day, S. X. (2017). The impact of academic competency teasing and self-concept on academic and psychological outcomes among gifted high school students. Learning and Individual Differences, 56, 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.10.020
Lee, S., Matthews, M., Shin, J., & Kim, M. (2018). Academically gifted adolescents’ social purpose. High Ability Studies, 00(00), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2018.1533452
Lupart, J. L. (1991). Issues in identifying gifted students: How Renzulli's model stacks up. Roeper Review, 14(2), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199109553386
Majida, R. A., & Alias, A. (2010). Consequences of risk factors in the development of gifted children. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.010
Maksić, S., & Iwasaki, K. (2009). The perfectionism of Academically Gifted Primary School Students: The Case of Japan. Gifted and Talented International, 24(2), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2009.11673529
Martin, C. (2002). Serving gifted students through inclusion: A parent’s perspective. Roeper Review, 24(3), 127. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554152
Mason, J. (2014). Qualitative Researching (2nd ed., p. 59). Sage Publication.
McCoach, D. B., Kehle, T. J., Bray, M. A., & Siegle, D. (2004). The Identification of Gifted Students with Learning Disabilities: Challenges, Controversies, and Promising Practices. Students with Both Gifts and Learning Disabilities, 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9116-4_3
McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2003). The structure and function of academic self-concept in gifted and general education students. Roeper Review, 25(2), 61–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190309554200
McHatton, P. A., Boyer, N. R., Shaunessy, E., Terry, P. M., & Farmer, J. L. (2010). Principals’ Perceptions of Preparation and Practice in Gifted and Special Education Content: Are We Doing Enough? Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 5(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/194277511000500101
Mills, C. J. (1993). Personality, learning style and cognitive style profiles of mathematically talented students. European Journal of High Ability, 4(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/0937445930040108
Moen, K., & Middelthon, A. L. (2015). Qualitative Research Methods. In Research in Medical and Biological Sciences: From Planning and Preparation to Grant Application and Publication. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-799943-2.00010-0
Mulhern, J. D. (1978). The gifted child in the regular classroom. Roeper Review, 1(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783197809552340
Neihart, M. (2008). Identifying and Providing Services to Twice-Exceptional Children. Handbook of Giftedness in Children, 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74401-8_7
Özarslan, M., & Çetin, G. (2018). Effects of biology project studies on gifted and talented students’ motivation toward learning biology. Gifted Education International, 34(3), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429417754203
Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2009). The translation of teachers’ understanding of gifted students into instructional strategies for teaching science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(4), 333–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9138-7
Perez, G. S. (1980). Perceptions of the young, gifted child. Roeper Review, 3(2), 9–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198009552508
Peterson, J. S., & Lorimer, M. R. (2012). Small-Group Affective Curriculum for Gifted Students: A Longitudinal Study of Teacher-Facilitators. Roeper Review, 34(3), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2012.686423
Pfeiffer, S. I., & Stocking, V. B. (2000). Vulnerabilities of Academically Gifted Students. Special Services in the Schools, 16(1–2), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v16n01
Pollet, E., & Schnell, T. (2017). Brilliant: But What For? Meaning and Subjective Well-Being in the Lives of Intellectually Gifted and Academically High-Achieving Adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18(5), 1459–1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9783-4
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Reexamining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180.
Rogers, K. B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207306324
Ruban, L. M., & Reis, S. M. (2005). Identification and assessment of gifted students with learning disabilities. Theory into Practice, 44(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4402_6
Sak, U. (2004). About Creativity, Giftedness, and Teaching the Creatively Gifted in the Classroom. Roeper Review, 26(4), 216–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554272
Scholz, R., & Tietje, O. (2012). Embedded Case Study Methods. In Sage Publication. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984027
Scot, T. P., Callahan, C. M., & Urquhart, J. (2008). Paint-by-number teachers and cookie-cutter students: The unintended effects of high-stakes testing on the education of gifted students. Roeper Review, 31(1), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190802527364
Scott, S., Scott, D. E., & Longmire, L. (2016). Leading Assessment for Gifted and Talented Students: The Pursuit of Mediocrity of Excellence? Leadership of Assessment, Inclusion, and Learning, 243–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23347-5
Sisk, D. (1972). Relationship between self concept and creativity: Theory into practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 16(3), 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698627201600305
Stewart, E. D. (1981). Learning Styles among Gifted/Talented Students: Instructional Technique Preferences. Exceptional Children, 48(2), 134–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298104800206
Swartz, C. W. (1993). Writing strategy instruction with gifted students: Effects of goals and feedback on self-efficacy and skills. Roeper Review, 15(4), 225–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199309553512
Syafril, S., Yaumas, N. E., Ishak, N. M., Yusof, R., Jaafar, A., Yunus, M. M., & Sugiharta, I. (2020). Characteristics and educational needs of gifted young scientists: A focus group study. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 947–954. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.691713
Taslim, P. L., & Jabar, C. S. A. (2019). Evaluation of Acceleration Program Termination for Gifted Children Learning Needs. International Conference on Special and Inclusive Education, 296, 114–119. https://doi.org/10.2991/icsie-18.2019.22
Tyler‐Wood, T. L., Mortenson, M., Putney, D., & Cass, M. A. (2000). An effective mathematics and science curriculum option for secondary gifted education. Roeper Review, 22(4), 266–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554050
Van Tassel-Baska, J., Landrum, M. S., & Peterson, K. (1992). Cooperative learning and gifted students. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2(4), 405–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00952357
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2005). Gifted programs and services: What are the nonnegotiables? Theory into Practice, 44(2), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4402_3
Villatte, A., Hugon, M., & De Léonardis, M. (2011). Forms of self-concept in gifted high school students enrolled in heterogeneous classes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 26(3), 373–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0055-8
Vogelaar, B., & Resing, W. C. M. (2018). Changes over time and transfer of analogy-problem solving of gifted and non-gifted children in a dynamic testing setting. Educational Psychology, 38(7), 898–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1409886
Vogelaar, B., Resing, W. C. M., Stad, F. E., & Sweijen, S. W. (2019). Is planning related to dynamic testing outcomes? Investigating the potential for learning of gifted and average-ability children. Acta Psychologica, 196(February), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.04.004
Wahab, R. (2005). Peranan Orang Tua dan Pendidik Dalam Mengoptimalkan Potensi Anak Berbakat Akademik. Seminar Keberbakatan, 14.
Waldrop, P. B. (1990). A structure for affective education for young, gifted children. Early Child Development and Care, 63(1), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443900630115
Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2003). The gifted student in science: Fulfilling potential. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(3), 46–53.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. In SAGE: Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment.
Yusof, R., Mokhtar, M., Ain Sulaiman, S. N., Syafril, S., & Mohtar, M. (2020). Consistency between personality career interest with sciences field among gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(3), 1147–1161. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.667323
Zhbanova, K. S., Rule, A. C., & Stichter, M. K. (2013). Identification of Gifted African American Primary Grade Students through Leadership, Creativity, and Academic Performance in Curriculum Material Making and Peer-Teaching: A Case Study. Early Childhood Education Journal, 43(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-013-0628-z.