Re-Engagement Nexus Model for Gifted Students

• Disengagement is a growing issue in schools, with almost 60% of gifted students not reaching their full potential, impacting both individuals and society.
• Talent actualization is not guaranteed for gifted students, and concern arises when there is a failure to adequately support re-engagement for those with gifted potential to achieve talent actualization through mastery.
• A model provides a new lens to explore re-engagement opportunities for gifted students, conceptualizing the interrelationship between interconnected constructs.
• Constructs include four engagement dimensions, Neihart and Betts' six profiles of the gifted, and pedagogical approaches aimed at re-engagement.
• The aim is to propose new conceptualizations of interdependent constructs using the (Re) Engagement Nexus Model.
• The model acts as a starting point for personalizing re-engagement opportunities and aims to prevent underachievement and disengagement.
• Keywords include gifted and talented students, student engagement, underachievement, disengagement, re-engagement, profiles of gifted learners, and personalized learning.

Introduction

• Underachievement is a frequently researched topic but is often not well-situated to school pedagogical practices.
• The field is clouded by ambiguous definitions and conceptualizations.
• Underachievement signifies psychosocial and educational features of gifted education pedagogical practices.
• There is an anticipated expectation from students and their teachers that they exhibit sustained evidence of high academic achievement.
• Student engagement is influenced by demographic factors that cannot be changed, but it can be seen as an alterable class of variables.

Gifted and Talented Students

• Gifted students are defined as those whose potential is in the top 10% of age peers.
• In Australia, Gagné's Developmental Model of Giftedness (DMGT) is the most accepted defining model.
• DMGT covers six domains of giftedness under two headings: Mental and Physical.
• Mental giftedness includes intellectual, creative, social, and perceptual aspects, while physical giftedness includes muscular and motor control aspects.
• Giftedness is the possession of outstanding natural abilities in at least one of the ability domains and places an individual in the top 10% of age peers.
• Talent refers to the actual mastery of abilities that have been systematically developed, placing an individual in the top 10% of age peers.
• The article draws on Gagné's conception of giftedness as potential, aiming to re-engage gifted students in learning so they can achieve mastery (talent) through systematic ability development.
• Two concepts of underachievement and disengagement are inherent within Gagné's DMGT, where environmental and intrapersonal catalysts impact on the actualization of talent through the talent development process.
• Environmental catalysts include culture, pedagogy, and relationships, while intrapersonal catalysts include motivation, volition, and resilience.
• Both environmental and intrapersonal catalysts impact on the conceptualization of underachievement and disengagement, influencing the development of giftedness into talent.

(Re) Engaging Gifted Students

• Disengagement is a growing problem in Australian schools, with up to 40% of students identified as being disengaged.
• Almost 60% of gifted students are not achieving their potential, leading to a loss of potential for both the individual and society as a whole.
• Talent actualization is not guaranteed just because a student is gifted, resulting in a heightened concern about the inconsistency between anticipated actualization of talent and actual underachievement.
• Disengagement and underachievement are complex issues with no one root cause, but when students are actively engaged, they learn more effectively.
• Learner engagement is a driver of student learning outcomes.
• Gifted students who are disengaged and underachieve exist in all regions of the globe and are found within culturally diverse populations, communities with low socioeconomic status, and individuals with disabilities.
• Engagement involves behavioral, affective, social, and cognitive dimensions.
• Dimensions feature interrelated and multidimensional conceptualization of engagement.
• Students move within the dimensions, exemplifying different elements depending on activity, interest, and engagement.
• Previous models conceptualized engagement as a continuum, but a cyclical revision is proposed.

Cyclical Model of Student Engagement

• Shows a cyclical continuum, enabling the acknowledgment and reconceptualization of different elements across and within engagement dimensions.
• Reconceptualization is non-sequential, complex, recurrent, and interconnected.
• The cyclical process also recognizes multiple outcomes within each dimension, enabling a more complex exploration of the dimensions and exemplified elements.
• Behavioral engagement relates to school and classroom actions.
• Behaviors exemplified are students participating in activities and class discussions, attending to the teacher and peers, on-task behavior, involvement in school activities, and persevering when challenged.
• Behavioral engagement is often reduced to student attendance data, yet there is much more to engagement.
• Behavioral engagement is often reduced to student attendance data, yet there is much more to engagement.
• Affective engagement focuses on the learner and their emotions during learning.
• Students who are affectively engaged know why they are learning the content of any given lesson.
• Positive affective engagement is strongly connected to behavioral engagement.
• Emotions like happiness, pride, and enthusiasm can drive student learning and connect students behaviorally, affectively, socially, and cognitively to both learning and school.
• A lack of positive emotions can lead to loneliness, sadness, and lack of identification with school and learning.
• Social engagement involves a student's sense of belonging and connectedness to peers and teachers, while a lack of social engagement can cause isolation and loneliness.
• Cognitive engagement embodies mastery and autonomy culmination.
• Students use metacognitive strategies and exhibit agency and preference for challenge, applying higher order thinking processes automatically, demonstrating mastery of learning.

Disengagement and Underachievement

• The four interrelated engagement dimensions have key implications for supporting gifted students at risk for underachievement and sustaining re-engagement.
• Gifted students often experience early cognitive engagement, demonstrating early mastery of content, which can lead to early disengagement and subsequent underachievement if unmet.
• Challenging learning opportunities are needed for behavioral, affective, social, and cognitive engagement.
• Behavioral, affective, and social engagements may be misleading since their assessments need may not indicate evidence of disengagement.
• Student underachievement is measured by the difference between a gifted student's ability and their performance and achievement.

Engagement Dimensions and Gifted Student Profiles

• A useful framework of gifted students is to explore concepts in connection with Neihart and Betts' Revised Profiles of the Gifted and Talented.
• Gifted students should not be defined by these six profiles, as their characteristics, personalities, and needs vary.
• Neihart and Betts' gifted profiles are valuable in understanding disengagement and underachievement for gifted students: Profile I Successful Learner, Profile II Creative, Profile III Underground, Profile IV At-Risk, Profile V Twice-Exceptional, and Profile VI Autonomous Learners.
• Some learners share common characteristics directly related to the four engagement dimensions.

Learner's Examples

• Low self-esteem connects to affective and social engagement, lack of intrinsic motivation connects to affective engagement, erratic attendance connects with behavioral engagement, limited self-regulation connects to cognitive engagement, and lack of sense of belonging connects to social engagement.

• High motivation is key for successful gifted learners, but is it often extrinsic and related to pleasing the teacher.

• Important to develop intrinsic motivation, so students are aware of why they are learning the topic.

• Students with creative profiles can often have negative reactions to teachers, peers, academic activity, and school, which connects specifically to the affective engagement dimension and potentially fatigues student learning.

• Students with underground profiles are frequently socially engaged, but it can lead to underachievement and affective and cognitive disengagement.

• Students who display at-risk characteristics may be physically present in the classroom, but affectively, socially and cognitively they have become disengaged and disconnected from learning.

• Students exhibiting twice-exceptional characteristics, can influence reduced resilience, coping strategies, and decreased engagement.

• Gifted students who predominantly exhibit characteristics of the autonomous profile are mostly engaged across the cyclical model and recognized for their ability to perform well in school through self directed and often well respected traits.

Pedagogical Opportunities For (Re) Engaging Gifted Students

• The six gifted profiles present opportunities for educators to individually re-engage students and attempt to address disengagement and underachievement.
• Examples of pedagogical approaches specific to each learner profile have been provided along with specific connections to relevant dimensions of learner engagement.
• This highlights the critical connection between these three components (engagement dimensions, learner profile characteristics, and pedagogical approaches).
• The following methods include personalized experiences where freedom, extended time, and risk taking exercises are used.
• Activities to promote collaboration and self-awareness are also used so students can become re-engaged learners.
• Freedom, well being and encouragement are also used for the at-risk students.
• Students' efforts and encouragement are supported, and there is encouragement for cognitive training for exceptional students.
• Mentoring and regular engagement are used for more autonomous students.

Student Self Regulation

• The common theme across the pedagogical approaches is that many foster opportunity for the development of student self regulation.
• Self-regulated learning involves students being cognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally engaged, actively participating in academic tasks, and involved in school-related activities.
• Students need to be prepared and oriented to engage with challenges, learn to set goals, and be supported to assess their own learning.
• Educators need to monitor and support students in developing requisite skills and strategies for engaging with learning.
• Opportunities for learner self-reflection need to be embedded in the approaches.
• Through pedagogical approaches can educators be empowered to foster gifted students' abilities to set goals and also support them in recognizing when to use the different strategies they have developed.
• Developing self-regulation strategies enables gifted students to be actively participating in their own learning, which in turn facilitates the development and practice of elements across four engagement dimensions.
• It is critical to leverage pedagogical approaches in a personalized way, so each student receives targeted support for re-engagement.
• Teachers already apply differentiated instruction to suit gifted learners, however, the ultimate aim of re-engaging is to personalize their learning.
• Personalized learning focuses on the needs of individual gifted students, rather than from a broad curriculum.
• Skilled teachers can target specific re-engagement opportunities based on individual needs of each gifted learner and personalized learning can target self-regulation and develop learner autonomy.

Personalizing Learning Experiences

• Targeted personalized learning approaches for each gifted student differ vastly to individual learning, which can lead to social and behavioral disengagement.
• Personalized learning tailors to the individual abilities, interests, aspirations, and needs.
• Every student can monitor his or her own progress towards mastery of specific curriculum that is taught during their schooling.
• Awareness of the four engagement dimensions, the learner profile, and pedagogical approaches will support learning experiences for students.
• A nexus should be formed for supporting re-engagement and addressing gifted learners needs for all kinds of skills.
• The (Re) Engagement Nexus Model suggests a conceptualization of the interrelationship between the three components: the engagement dimensions; gifted learner profiles; and personalized pedagogical approaches.
• Exploration of the interrelationships between three components highlights the important need for teachers and research to consider how guides teaching and learning decision for re engaging learners.
• Drill down approaches are needed to explore what is meant in terms of actual classrooms practices for addressing gifted learners, underachievement and disengagement.
• More research is needed to support efforts toward re-engaging students and preventing underachievement and disengagement before it becomes entrenched.