Connecting Theory and Practice: Why the Conceptual Foundations Network Matters for Gifted Education

The Conceptual Foundations Network centers on the ideas that shape the field of gifted education itself—the theories, philosophies, and historical perspectives and the individuals who have given shape to these ideas. Conceptual foundations undergird daily decisions made regarding models and frameworks that guide effective teaching and support how we identify and teach gifted learners.

For practitioners, this may raise an important question: What does “conceptual foundations” mean for my day-to-day work? This article aims to clarify that purpose and demonstrate how conceptual foundations’ work directly supports effective practice in classrooms, schools, and districts.

Understanding the Purpose of the Conceptual Foundations Network

The Conceptual Foundations Network exists to study, express, and safeguard the practical, theoretical, philosophical, and historical bases of gifted education. Conceptual Foundations asks:

• What do we mean by the term, gifted and “giftedness”?
• Historically, how has the term, gifted, evolved over time?
• What are the theories that have emerged in gifted education and talent development?
• How should these theories and concepts impact daily classroom and school decisions?

Answers to these questions influence daily decisions made in the classroom and in schools:

• How should students be identified?
• What connections should there be between a definition of gifted, identification, and the curriculum chosen
• What are the needs of the gifted learner?

The Conceptual Foundations Network also endeavors to commemorate and document the contributions of significant scholars and practitioners, ensuring that current research and writing, classroom and school practices stand on a well-established and provenfoundation. Remembering and acknowledging the originators of models, strategies, techniques and concepts used in our classrooms is central to the work of the Conceptual Foundations Network. Share with your students the names behind the techniques used in your classroom. Empower your students to become familiar with and knowledgeable of the developers of thinking strategies and approaches used in the classroom. Just as teachers introduce students to authors of literary works and the scientists who created the formula for a particular equation, the names of Benjamin Bloom, Hilda Taba and Joe Renzulli and others should be recognizable to our gifted students.

The Conceptual Foundations Network ensures that the field does not lose sight of the foundational ideas that guide it and those who led the way in developing principles that we use today. For practitioners, this means having access to a deeper understanding of the “WHY” behind what we do, understanding how “WHAT we DO” can be enhanced and understanding what it means to meet the needs of the gifted.

Why Conceptual Foundations Matter for Practice

Leaving conceptual foundations behind can result in the use of practices which are contradictory, biased, or out of line with accepted concepts and practices supported by research. For example, a school considering identification may perceive giftedness only as those possessing high intelligence and therefore leave behind the vast array of other domains of giftedness and accepted approaches to identification. The foundational work of J. P. Guilford, Donna Ford, Calvin Taylor and others remind us how definitions of giftedness impact identification, curriculum, instruction, nature and needs of the gifted, and issues of perfectionism, asynchronous development, motivation, engagement, Social-emotional needs, and equity and access.

Reflecting on conceptual foundations will support practitioners as they make decisions regarding identification and the selection of teaching strategies. The selection and use of teaching strategies appropriate for the gifted student should be based on theoretical underpinnings which support how gifted children learn. Characteristics of teaching models in gifted education consistently support how gifted students learn. George Betts’ Autonomous Learner Model, Jerome Bruner’s Structure of a Discipline Model, Sidney Parnes’ Creative Problem-Solving Model or Joseph Renzullis Enrichment Triad Model are examples which come to mind.

The continued growth and development of the field of gifted education will demand even more robust conceptual foundations. Issues such as access and opportunity, inadequate curriculum, social-emotional development, and talent development require looking back at research and history. The field of gifted education will need to draw on and accept all that is known in the creation of new and different solutions.