Merits of General Observation as a Strengthening Measure in Identifying Gifted Students

(First published in VirTEC Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, 2002)

Inderbir K Sandhu, PhD
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia (2002)

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses part of a study in the identification method of gifted students in Malaysian secondary schools. The main methods used in the study to derive a sample of gifted students are by means of an intelligence test, teacher nomination, and peer nomination. As a means of strengthening the reliability of the main methods used, general observation method was employed using a checklist of characteristics distinct to gifted students. It was found that all students identified using general observation were already pre-selected as subjects in the study by other identification means, which shows that general observation could possibly be used as another method to screen gifted students. Examples of the apparent gifted behaviours are also discussed. Therefore, it is concluded that general observation could be considered as a strengthening method or a method on its own to identify gifted students in the classroom.

Introduction

General observation as a method of identifying gifted students has been used for many years. This method, however, has been heavily criticised for its subjectivity, hence normally not used as a method on its own in research studies (Pegnato and Birch, 1959; Walton, 1961; Gallanger, 1966; Gear, 1975;; Callahan, 1981). In the current study, in an attempt to determine to what extent general observation can be used in identifying gifted students, this method was employed.

To increase objectivity in general observation, a checklist was used as a guide. The use of a checklist to identify gifted students has been very wide spread, but at the same time, it encounters many criticism of its reliability as a means to screen able students, mainly due to the subjectivity of its nature. According to Denton and Postlethwaite (1982), in their study, a checklist was used as an aid for identification purposes, but other views suggest that the checklist actually defines a subject in its broader sense. This shows that careful application of a checklist to identify gifted students could be a very useful means of identification. However, in this study, the checklist is used as an aid to strengthen the reliability of other methods and is by no means a separate method on its own.

During the pilot study, an informal observation was carried out in the classrooms and some of the students screened were noted to have certain traits associated with giftedness. Therefore, as an additional form of identification and especially to strengthen the reliability of other methods employed, the general observation method was designed based on notable traits of the gifted with the use of a checklist of gifted characteristics. However, it should be noted here that this method was only used as a method to strengthen the reliability of other methods used, and was not singly used to screen gifted students.

Methodology

Purpose of the study

This study was carried out to determine if general observation can be used effectively as a method to identify gifted students apart from the standardised methods currently used, such as tests and nominations. For the purpose of this study, general observation was used as a strengthening measure.

Subjects

The subjects in this study comprised 68 students from three randomly chosen schools, which were obtained from the target population of 652 fourth formers (16/17 year olds in Secondary Four) of mixed ability, race, and gender. The schools were restricted to national regular schools within Kuala Lumpur and Selangor, which excludes residential, private and international schools.

Procedure and instrumentation

General observation was carried out systematically over a period of six weeks. This was done by observing distinct gifted behavioural characteristics of the students in the classroom. Each class was observed for at least four teaching periods, and the rest included other non-teaching periods for observation outside the classroom setting. For this purpose, a checklist was used as an instrument to screen the students. This checklist was used in the pilot study and was found to be reliable. The checklist was constructed by the researcher with guidance on gifted behavioural characteristics from Lowenfeld (1957), Cattell (1971), Marland (1971), Reynolds and Birch (1977), Renzulli (1978), Clark (1992), Feldhusen and Jarwan (1993). The characteristics that were observed are as in the following table:

Table: Observerable Characteristics of Gifted Students

Characteristics	Description
Variety of Interests	Obvious varied interests, large accumulation of information, avid reader
Unusual Curiosity	Asks many questions, usually for in-depth knowledge on a certain subject, sense of wonder and intrigue
Persistence in Attacking Difficult Mental Tasks	Non-quitting attitude, ability to accomplish a task without giving up, self-confidence
Creativity/Divergent Thinking	Ability to think differently from others, suggest interesting ideas
Leadership Qualities	Ability to lead, social skills
Above Average Language Development	Vast use of vocabulary, ability to speak with a good flow of communication skills
Unusual Emotional Depth and Intensity	Strong feelings on a certain area, for instance, world famine, and other life endangering (human, animals, trees) issues, empathy
Heightened Sensitivity	Heightened self-awareness, unusually vulnerable to criticism of others
Sense of Justice	Idealism, stands up for issues on fairness, human rights, political justice, advanced levels of moral judgement

Observation of the distinct characteristics was done on a checklist sheet (please refer to the Appendix for a sample sheet) where each characteristic observed (indicated in numbers from one to nine) is ticked against the students’ names. All students in the class were observed based on the characteristics on the checklist, noting which student behaved in which ways. There was also a column for any possible comments. Observation was not restricted to the classroom only; students’ behaviours were also observed in less formal and relaxing environments such as, the canteen, during sporting activities, in the library and other such spots in school. Multiple observations of the same characteristics in at least three different timings qualify a student in the selection.

Results and Discussion

Many studies have shown that gifted students are different from non-gifted students based on certain traits and characteristics that are more prominent in gifted individuals (e.g., Cattell, 1971; Marland, 1971; Reynolds and Birch, 1977; Renzulli, 1978; Clark, 1992; Feldhusen and Jarwan, 1993. Areas of giftedness may include general intellectual ability, specific academic aptitude, creative or productive thinking, leadership ability, visual or performing arts and psychomotor ability (Marland Report, 1971). Even though there is no entirely sufficient composite of characteristics of the gifted individual, there are several compilations that can provide a basis for one to screen gifted students from the non-gifted.

The findings from this study revealed characteristics that are most commonly associated with gifted students in Malaysian secondary schools. A total of 43 subjects (65.2% of the total sample of 68 students in the main selection that were identified using the intelligence test, peer nomination and teacher nomination) were identified through the use of this method. After selecting the sample using the intelligence test cut-off score, peer and teacher nomination, the list of students’ names was compared to the list of students screened using the checklist. It was noted that all the 43 subjects listed using the observation checklist were already listed in the main selection. Hence, there was no subject observed to have gifted characteristics that was not in the main selection. Therefore, the checklist was considered useful in strengthening the validity of the other methods employed.

The sample also showed some distinct traits from the nine characteristics on the checklist associated with gifted behaviour, such as (from the most frequently observed to the least) unusual curiosity, above average language development, persistence, wide variety of interest, leadership qualities, creativity and talent, heightened sensitivity, sense of justice, and unusual emotional depth and intensity.

Unusual curiosity was one of the most distinct behavioural characteristics noted compared to other characteristics in the checklist. Students who showed this trait would normally ask a lot of questions during a lesson. There were a lot of questions on “why” and “how”. Sometimes, the questions dragged on until it may not even be relevant to the lesson anymore and some teachers appeared to get rather annoyed. This causes frustration to both students and teachers. According to the teachers, it was not possible for them to answer all the questions as it took too much lesson time, which was just about 35 minutes per lesson.

Based on the types of questions asked, it was noted that there were three categories of questioning by the students. The first category involved questioning for the reason of clarity, for instance, questions to enable understanding of a certain issue. The second one related to the lesson taught, to gain depth of knowledge in the subject area. The third category of questions did not relate much to the subject area, and normally the answers were known to the questioner, who sometimes asked irrelevant questions. These kinds of questions (the third category of questions) were asked mostly out of sheer curiosity, and some just for the sake of asking, sometimes to ridicule the teachers. This was evidenced by one of the teachers who commented on the reason for this type of questioning, “… to make us look stupid when we can’t give the answers they want to hear“. This is linked to the possible problems that may be associated with characteristic strengths of gifted students (inquisitive attitude, intellectual curiosity) that may lead to the subject asking embarrassing questions, resisting direction, and having excessive interest in a particular area (Clark, 1992). According to Zi-Xiu (1985), the findings of a research study in China showed that intellectual curiosity was one of the most common qualities of gifted children. Ordinary observation methods were used by the researchers in the course of their investigation, which showed that this trait was rather distinct and easily observable.

The next distinct characteristic observed was the above average language development. Students with above average language development were expected to have extensive vocabulary, heightened sensitivity to language and grammar in general, insistence on the precise meaning of words and delight in using technical terms. These students were apparently able to start a conversation anytime, and their command of any language used was well above average. They were also expected to be able to differentiate and use forms of language appropriate for different situations and settings. These traits were observed in a few students in the schools, who stood out when they spoke in comparison to their peers. When answering or asking questions, their language was well formed and grammatically correct. With their friends, they were able to switch to a language mode that is more informal and easily understood by their peers. They also appeared to speak more confidently when answering questions or making a conversation. It was noted that the main difference between students with average language development and those with above average ability is that the above average students are normally able to answer questions or make comments regardless of whether they know the answer, whereas average students may not be able to answer at all. In other words, in terms of verbal ability, gifted students were observed to be able to say something acceptable even if they were unprepared. This attribute was quite distinct among some of the students. When a comparison was made after the selection of students, these students were found to be among those selected as gifted.

It was also noted that students who are considered gifted are often very persistent when it comes to confronting difficult mental tasks. This was apparent among some of the students, who were later selected as the sample in the study. These students have non-quitting attitudes when challenged with difficult tasks.

For instance, this characteristic was very obvious during the Mathematics and Chemistry lessons. During one Additional Mathematics lesson, the teacher wrote down a task on the board and some students were asked to solve the problem. Many students tried but failed. However, there were a number of students who did not give up and kept trying to solve the problem, appearing rather selfish, as they were very reluctant to allow others to try as well. These students were very persistent and believed in their abilities to solve the problem. When the lesson was over, the problem was still not solved, and they were asked to think over the problem and discuss it the next day. Since it was recess time, most of the students had left the classroom, but there were five who stayed behind and were still discussing and trying to solve the problem. Two of the students were sitting in a corner on their own and trying to deal with the problem, whilst another three were discussing it together. Somehow, the three who were discussing and one who was on his own managed to solve the problem. By that time, recess time was over and most of the students were back in the classroom. Most of the students just copied the answer, while a handful still attempted to solve the problem. The one student who still did not manage to solve the problem was still trying and refused to get any help (this student managed to solve the problem eventually before the school period ended on that day). This shows the level of persistence of some students compared to others.

The five students who stayed on in the classroom and missed their break were later identified as gifted students and selected in the sample. Being persistent is among the attributes of gifted students who are very focused and practically work their way to complete a given task successfully. The others may have worked on the problem but the persistence of these five students who were challenged to solve the task made them different from the rest of the class. It was also noted that all the five students in this case were males. This trait was also found in gifted children in a research study done in China in 1974, using ordinary observation method (Zi-Xiu, 1985).

Apart from persistence, gifted students are different from their non-gifted counterparts in terms of variety of interests. This was observed in their vast knowledge of different areas, such as politics, social, environment economics, sports, and so on when they have discussion groups. This quality also enables these students to write good essays in language lessons.

An example of this observed behaviour was on one occasion when the class teacher was absent and students were required to go to the library (this was a usual practice for most schools to encourage students to read in their free time). Most of the students would be doing their homework or studying for forthcoming tests. However, there were a number of students who used the library facilities to look for materials totally unrelated to the subjects they learn at school. These were books on mysteries (books on unexplained mysteries such as ghosts, unidentified flying objects, dinosaurs and unsolved mysteries, were noted to be of particular interest to them), sports and games, general knowledge, encyclopaedias, books on “do-it-yourself” (D.I.Y.), world history and biographies. There were also two male students who were extremely interested in cookbooks!

Another attribute that is linked to giftedness is leadership qualities. Gifted students are sometimes associated with born leaders. They are some students who have a natural talent to lead others. In this study, most of the students who were seen to have leadership qualities were actively involved in the co-curricular activities and were also often society presidents or chairpersons. They were also the ones who showed the ability to organise activities or games.

These students were quite easily identified as they clearly stood out from the rest. For instance, on one occasion when there was no teacher in the classroom (the library could not be used due to oral examinations that were being held there), some students were getting restless and being rather disruptive and noisy. At this point, when the class was getting out of control, one of the students (who was not the head of the class) tried to calm things down by suggesting a quiz game whereby students were required to write down the answers on the chalkboard. This very quickly calmed down the class and everyone started paying attention and were in fact, quite eager to take part in the game. For the rest of the period, the students played along and listened to this student who was later assisted by two others. After the selection was made, it was noted that this particular student was largely nominated by his peers even though he did not qualify as gifted according to the cut-off point on the intelligence test.

Gifted students are also noted to be creative and this characteristic seems apparent in all areas of endeavour. They are able to generate original ideas and solutions in a task. This can be seen in the way they get things done, for example, during group discussions, some students were notably more creative than the others in the manner they approached certain topics and issues. Creativity was observed during science lessons, which involved more than just memorising certain laws and formulas to obtain the required results. A creative student would always resort to other methods to get a lab experiment done instead of giving up when a step by step experiment did not provide the required results, which was obvious in some of the students observed to be gifted. Creativeness is also associated with nonconformity. According to Milgram (1990), gifted students in general tend toward nonconformity in terms of thought, attitudes, and behaviour. This trait was apparent in at least three students from two different schools who were very interested in poetry writing and wrote very good poems for their age group. Their poems showed depth in thoughts with divergent thinking qualities. These students were seen to use up most of their spare time writing poems in school. All the students identified as having this characteristic were later identified as samples for the study.

Special talent, which refers to outstanding performance in specific skills namely arts, music, mathematics, science or other aesthetic or academic areas was also one of the characteristics noticed in gifted students. Most of the selected students seemed to have certain specific skills. There were quite a number of students in the selected group who could sing and play music very well and at least two of them could also compose lyrics. Another student was extremely talented in modifying cars and had actually done some modifications to friends’ cars. There was also one student who was very disruptive in the classroom, frequently skipped classes, and appeared to have interest only in Mathematics. This student had superior skills in solving mathematical problems. He was also extremely skilled in playing snooker. Often, in the classroom he was seen using a long ruler and pretending to play snooker on the student desk, sometimes even when the teachers were teaching. However, he was underachieving in most subjects and was very unpopular with the teachers, thus ignored by his teachers. He would have not been identified as gifted at all by the school. Fortunately, this subject was screened through peer nomination and was found to have above average skills in figural creativity. Therefore, general observation strengthened the fact that this subject was indeed gifted based on the qualities he possessed.

Other noticeable characteristics were heightened sensitivity, sense of justice, and unusual emotional depth and intensity. For heightened sensitivity, some of the students were found to be unusually vulnerable to the criticism of others, especially teachers. These students became very upset if they did not do well in the school tests and particularly so if the teachers commented on their results. Another student indicated a very strong sense of justice when he felt that the school was being unfair in forming a new class that separated most of the students who had been together in the same class for years. He strongly felt that there was no reason to separate those who were not willing, as there were many others who did not mind at all. This matter was getting out of hand until his parents were forced to become involved. Finally, he managed to fight for his right (to allow some of the students to remain together in the same class) and was very contented and felt justified. What made him different from the rest was that he did not give up and went all out (he could have been suspended for disobeying the principle after many warnings) as he felt that justice was not served fairly. There was another case of a student showing intense emotions for a little girl who needed to raise money for a hole in the heart surgery. She was trying her best to get donations from all sources within her reach and was rather upset when her friends did not give her the support she needed as the school exams were just around the corner. This showed a very selfless attitude due to intensity of emotions. This student was identified later as she qualified according to the cut-off point on the intelligence test, had many nominations from her peers and was also nominated by her teachers.

Conclusion

Gifted students are different from their non-gifted counterparts based on distinct characteristics that they portray. From this study, it can be concluded that the characteristics demonstrated by the selected students are among the common characteristics of gifted individuals. Thus, the general observation method was found to provide a helpful and useful source of recognising certain qualities of gifted students, which reinforced other methods used in the main selection of this study. It must also be noted that the use of a checklist is very important as it enables systematic observation with enhanced objectivity. This study has proven the merits of general observation as an effective tool to screen gifted students. In short, the merits of general observation should not be ignored and especially with the help of a checklist, this method has proved very helpful in strengthening the main methods of identification used. Furthermore, this method can be used rather easily by any teacher to identify gifted traits of their students, preferably over a period of time.

References

CALLAHAN, C.M. (1981) Superior abilities. In KAUFMANN, J.M. & HALLAHAN, D.P. Handbook of Special Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
CATTELL, J.M. (1971) Abilities: Their Structure, Growth, and Action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
CLARK, B. (1992) (4^th ed.) Growing Up Gifted. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
DENTON, C. & POSTLEWAITE, K. (1982) The Identification of More Able Pupils in Comprehensive Schools: Final Report Part 1 & 2. U.K.: Oxford Educational Research Group.
FELDHUSEN, J.F., & JARWAN, F.A. (1993) Identification of Gifted and Talented Youth Educational Programs. In HELLER K.A., International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
GALLANGER, J.J. (1966) Research Summary on Gifted Child Education. Department of Program Development for Gifted Children, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction: Illinois.
GEAR, G. (1975) Identification of the potentially gifted. In Callahan, C.M. (1981) Superior ability. IN KAUFMANN, J.M. & HALLAHAN, D.P. Handbook of Special Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
LOWENFELD, V. (1957) Creative and Mental Growth. New York: Macmillan.
MARLAND, S.P. (1971) Education of the Gifted and Talented. Report to the Congress of the US by the Commissioner of Education, Washington, D.C: US Government Printing Office.
MILGRAM, R.M. (1990). Creativity: An Idea Whose Time Has Come and Gone? In RUNCO, M.A. (1993) Divergent Thinking, Creativity, and Giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37 (1): 16-22.
PEGNATO, C.W. & BIRCH, J.W. (1959) Locating gifted children in junior high schools. Exceptional Children, 25 (7), 300-304.
RENZULLI, J.S. (1978). What Makes giftedness? Re-examining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60: 180-184.
REYNOLDS, M.C. & BIRCH, J.W. (1977). Teaching Exceptional Children in All America’s Schools. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
WALTON, G. (1961) Identification of the intellectually gifted children in the public school kindergarten. In Callahan, C.M. Superior ability. In KAUFMANN, J.M. & HALLAHAN, D.P. (1981) Handbook of Special Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
ZI-XIU, Z. (1985). The Psychological Development of Supernormal Children. In FREEMAN, J. (Ed.) The Psychology of Gifted Children. Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.