Abstract
Striving toward the best practice and providing evidences of effectiveness of gifted program are the most challenging issues in gifted education (Callahan et al., 2015; Van Tassel-Baska and Brown, 2007). For decades, enrichment program has been widely used in gifted education, but whether the enrichment meets the qualitative requirement has become controversial. Enrichment activities used in gifted education include topic speeches, field trips, independent studies, film appreciation, higher-order thinking skill training, interpersonal interactions, free creation, competitions, debates, product displays, and so on. The purpose of these activities is to provide students with a variety of learning content and processes to expand their vision and develop their talent. However, Worcester and Schaeffer (1956) pointed out that enrichment often appears sporadic, fragmentary, and superficial, and relatively lacking in the system. Stanley (1976) also mentioned that enrichment activities are mostly for providing some special subjects or activities, which are unable to meet the core goal of gifted education. Nevertheless, if the enrichment programs are well designed and accelerated properly, positive learning effects can be found (Kulik and Kulik, 1992). Thus, gifted education teachers are advised to provide systematic enrichment activities with “a specific purpose.” For revitalizing the unique contribution of enrichment program, this special issue invites gifted educators to provide their insights regarding the evaluation and practice of enrichment program. Their main purpose, design, and evaluation model of enrichment programs are briefly described as follows.
In the first article, Chan et al. (2020) introduce the Chinese University of Hong Kong Program for Gifted and Talented Students (PGT) and elaborate how the program was evaluated. PGT mainly adopts the Rimm’s input–process–outcomes model and conducts formative and summative evaluation research annually. The annual reports are compiled to update strategic plans, to report on the annual program performances, and to inform the future development and operation.
In the second article, Chen and Chen (2020) introduce two approaches of enrichment program for Taiwan’s gifted; one with the programs following the Special Education Act, and the other programs initiated by local authorities, private organizations, and researchers. The authors suggest good evaluation can inform decision makers about programs’ strengths and weaknesses, and also guide possible changes that enhance the services provided for gifted students. Besides, the responsive and heuristic criteria of designing and evaluating gifted programs for professional autonomy and development need to be measured by valid and reliable tools and strategies.
In the third article, Tan et al. (2020) emphasize the fidelity of conceptualizing and implementing enrichment programs. As most enrichment programs are after-school add-on programs, they tend to be fragmented and ad hoc in nature, instead of a systematic program designed to challenge gifted and talented students. To effectively meet the needs of the gifted and talented students, the authors point out the necessity to examine the fidelity of the programs. Based on their experiences in Singapore, they generated criteria for schools to assess the implementation and effects of the enrichment programs.
In the fourth article, Sak and Ayas (2020) review the Education Programs for Talented Students (EPTS), its applications in program development, and research carried out on its effectiveness. The EPTS Curriculum is used together with both enrichment and acceleration approaches with the following main components: (1) regular curriculum, (2) enrichment, and (3) acceleration. These three components yield seven regions in total. Assessment of the EPTS includes objective and subjective evaluations, expert evaluations, students’ outcome measures, and students’ evaluations. The EPTS Curriculum Evaluation Rubric and the EPTS Student Evaluation Form used for expert and student evaluation are well introduced.
In the fifth article, Yu et al. (2020) conducted a retrospective survey to understand the students’ feedback on the Bright Mind Project, an enrichment program for socioeconomically disadvantaged gifted students in Taiwan. The Bright Mind Project promoted six sessions of counseling activities from 2004 to 2018 for senior high school participants. Feedback on the camp activities and the effectiveness of Bright Mind Project indicate that participants held a positive attitude toward the project and agreed that it was of great help to their academic performances at school and future careers. They also believed that, with the resources obtained from the project, they have broadened their horizons, enriched their life experiences, and adopted a positive attitude toward life.
In the sixth article, Lo and Feng (2020) use meta-analysis to explore the effectiveness of teaching higher-order thinking skills to gifted students in Taiwan. The author found that the effect sizes ranging from 0.26 to 2.01, with a mean of 0.78 and standard deviation of 0.39, showed moderately large effect sizes of these intervention, which can be interpreted as evidence for general effectiveness.
Surmounting the challenges of enrichment program, we will enrich abundant possibilities for effectiveness of gifted education. With the hope that gifted educators will benefit from this special issue, we are looking forward to a new era of enrichment program for gifted and talented learners.