When assessing if students are showing creative/productive gifted behaviors you can refer to the Three Ring Concept of Giftedness and consider students personality, attitude, behaviors, and interests.
Three Ring Concept of Giftedness state that giftedness is a behavior that can be nurtured, and educators must consider the students’ environments, personality, educational opportunities, support, and life experiences. The Three Ring Conceptualization of Giftedness (Renzulli & Reis, 2018) identifies three human traits, above-average ability, task commitment, and creativity, that interact with each other to develop “creative/productive giftedness” (p. 186).
Students with above-average abilities have high performance or high potential (roughly the top five percentile range) within general and specific abilities. Examples of general abilities include processing information, numerical reasoning, and spatial awareness. Specific abilities can be defined as skills, performance, or knowledge in any specific area such as math or drama. These areas can be further broken down into more specific areas and skills like algebra or mask work (Renzulli & Reis, 2018).
Task Commitment is the student’s motivation to focus on a specific problem or performance area (Renzulli & Reis, 2018). Often students with creative/productive gifted behaviours will have what Duckworth et al. (2007) coined as grit. Grit is the perseverance, dedication, and passion with which an individual tackles a task.
Creativity. Expanding on Renzulli and Reis’s (2018) theory, creativity can be nurtured and may lead to students producing influential creative works and innovations. As a concept, creativity has been studied, debated, and has captured the attention of artists, philosophers, teachers, and researchers for centuries. It is important to consider creativity theories when expanding on the definition and educational services required to support creative/productive gifted behavior in students.
Use a multi-method approach with a combination of formal assessment, nomination, and performance-based / portfolio assessments. Renzulli and Renzulli (2010) recommend creating a talent pool consisting of the top 10 -15 percentiles of high-ability students. Selecting from a larger group of students lowers the risk of missing potential candidates such as minority students, twice-exceptional students, and students who do not score in the top 5% of IQ tests.
Formal Assessments
Formal assessment are standardized tests which have been developed and tested by many over time. Measuring divergent thinking has been the primary assessment tool for measuring creativity for decades (Kaufman et al., 2012). One of the longest-running and influential creativity tests is the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT). The TTCT measures divergent thinking in verbal and non-verbal tasks, measuring the same three qualities: fluency, flexibility, and originality (Ambrose & Machek, 2015; Kaufman et al., 2012; Rimm et al., 2019). Benefits of using the TTCT include standardized divergent thinking scores which provide educators with a straightforward, reliable scoring system (Kaufman et al., 2012).
Considerations
Some limitations of standardized testing include excluding minority students and students with disabilities otherwise known as twice exceptional.
The TTCT can only be conducted by a psychologist or specially trained individuals. This test is not practical for teachers as they cannot administer the test themselves unless they receive and pay for specific training.
The TTCT also does not consider student’s environment, temperament, or motivation (external and internal).
- Only considering divergent thinking may not capture the true nature of a creative mind (Kaufman et al., 2012).
Nomination
A more effective way of recognizing and reaching more students during assessment would be including teachers, parents, peers, or student’s nomination. Nominating individuals who demonstrate creative/productive gifted behaviours may reach more students and cast a wider net during an assessment. Identification can be formal, using creativity checklist and or behavior rating scales or informal such as students signing up or being casually nominated to participate in gifted programs (Kaufman et al., 2012; Renzulli & Reis 2018; Rimm et al., 2017). Individual identification is more flexible than divergent thinking assessments and is beneficial as it uses a broader definition of creativity and creative/productive gifted behaviors.
Creativity Checklists and behaviour rating scales
The Scales for Rating Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students (SRBCSS) created by Renzulli et al. (2013) is one useful tool for educators or parents. This guide can be purchased for under $100 and is easy for educators to use.
Parental nominations can be particularly useful for children in elementary schools, as parents observe behaviors that their child may not showcase in the school environment (Rimm et al., 2017).
Peer nomination can be presented as a game whereby students nominate students other than those in their exclusive friend group.
At the high-school level, self-nomination allows highly motivated students the opportunity to join specialized programs and while identifying which programs or services they need (Kaufman et al., 2012; Rimm et al., 2017).
Performance-based and portfolio assessments
Use performance-based and portfolio assessment tools to recognize student’s performance and work within the school, community, and in the student’s area of interest. Assessment can entail reviewing the process, quality, depth, and innovation reflected in the student’s work (Ambrose & Machek, 2015; Rimm et al., 2017). One assessment tool you can use is The Creative Products Semantic Scale (CPSS), created by Dr. S Besemer. The CPSS assesses products in novelty, resolution and elaboration, and synthesis (Ambrose & Machek, 2015; Besemer, 1998). Using a Likert-style rating scale, evaluators examine student work’s, originality, innovation, and newness. When evaluating the resolution of students’ work, evaluators consider the usefulness, practical needs of a problem, and whether the project makes sense. When assessing the elaboration feature, evaluators rate the style and craftsmanship of the students’ work (Besemer, 1998).
When assessing potential students with creative/productive gifted behaviors, educators can identify student’s preferred expression styles (Kettle et al., 1998) and learning styles. This will provide insight on student’s areas of strengths, increase student’s awareness of their strengths and help educators decide which programs to implement. Students can complete these inventories alone or with a teacher