A theoretical context for examining students’ preference across ability levels for learning alone or in groups

Walker, Cheryl L.; Shore, Bruce M.; French, L

doi:10.1080/13598139.2011.576082

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Definitions of giftedness vary in practice and in research (Walker, Shore, & French, 2011). In addition, research, debates, and common assumptions related to classroom grouping and learning preferences have ignored the reality that gifted youth are not homogeneous regarding ability, motivation, culture, and support, and that they have complex learning needs, strengths, and weaknesses (Reis & Renzulli, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning and Classroom Preferences of Gifted Eighth Graders

Samardzija

Peterson²

2015

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this phenomenological qualitative study was to explore how academically gifted eighth graders experience learning, with special attention to learning and classroom preferences. Twenty-three students were interviewed individually. The central phenomenon was that their learning preferences were complex, nuanced, and idiosyncratic, and reflected sensitivities associated with giftedness. Fundamental to their learning experience was the classroom teacher's personality, competence, accessibility, and concern for students. Among contributions to the literature are perspectives that gifted youth at this age appreciate being able to hear varied perspectives in groups, their learning preferences are domain-specific, their sensitivities seem to affect classroom preferences and homework needs, they are concerned about public error, and they do not necessarily want teachers to know about their personal lives.Learning style is "the way an individual processes, interacts with, and retains new or difficult information" (Rayneri, Gerber, & Wiley, 2006, p. 105). Here, style refers to preferred learning mode, often organized by scholars and practitioners into three basic categories: auditory, visual, and kinesthetic. According to Lamarche-Bisson (2002), these differences affect "how we learn, how we solve problems, how we work, how we participate in different activities, how we react in a group, and how we relate to others

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning and Classroom Preferences of Gifted Eighth Graders

Samardzija

Peterson²

2015

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Li and Adamson (1992) also found that gifted students prefer individualistic learning, although gifted boys engaged in competitive learning in reference to specific subjects of the curriculum (Maths). Walker, Shore, and French (2011) suggested that gifted students' preference of individualistic learning structures may not represent an inherent tendency of these students, but their reaction to the so called "free-rider effect"; the term refers to situations where gifted students are constantly expected to act as tutors for other students without reciprocity, and to complete most of the work assigned to the group they happen to belong to, without necessarily finding the assignments challenging or interesting.…”

Section: Goal Orientations and Academic Achievement In Gifted Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivational Differences of Greek Gifted and Non-Gifted High-Achieving and Gifted Under-Achieving Students

Agaliotis¹,

Kalyva²

2019

IES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the differences in the motivational profiles of under-achieving gifted students and high-achieving gifted and non-gifted students. In comparison to their high-achieving peers, under-achieving gifted students reported weaker motivational orientations, in both achievement and social goals, as well as in intrinsic motivation. Gifted high achievers reported stronger mastery, competitive, cooperative, and individual orientations than non-gifted high achievers. The findings seem to lend credence to the position that intellectual and motivational giftedness are distinct. The differences in the motivational profiles of the three groups are discussed in relation to the conceptualization of underachievement in gifted students and the differentiated academic needs of this group.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, when students' motivation for collaboration is considered, it is important to take both their motivation for the specific task and the motivation for the specific collaborative settings into account (Walker, Shore, and French 2011). This means that when motivation is applied to collaborative learning situations, it becomes a complex construct, since it can be divided into aspects of task-related motivation as well as aspects of collaborative motivation (Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec 1994), resulting in four related constructs: (1) task-related values, (2) task-related self-efficacy, (3) collaborative values, and (4) self-efficacy for collaborative settings.…”

Section: Students' Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So, to gain a better understanding of students' actual motivation, the context of the collaborative task must be taken into account. In the case of collaboration, it is thus important to consider both students' motivation for working in a collaborative setting and students' motivation for the specific collaborative task (Walker, Shore, and French 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does excellence matter? The influence of potential for excellence on students’ motivation for specific collaborative tasks

Pullen

Griffioen

Schoonenboom

et al. 2017

Studies in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is often assumed that students with a higher potential for excellence are less motivated to collaborate. So far, the question remains whether this is actually the case. This survey study investigated the influence of business students' (N = 389) potential for excellence on their motivation to collaborate on a business-related task. Different aspects of potential for excellence were taken into account, including intelligence, creativity, first-year grade point average (GPA), and personality. A structural equation modeling analysis was applied. The findings demonstrated that only GPA had a negative influence on students' collaborative values, indicating that the assumption that students with a higher potential for excellence are less motivated to collaborate receives limited support. In addition, the findings showed that different aspects of potential for excellence were related to different aspects of motivation to collaborate. This indicates that the relationship between potential for excellence and motivation is more complex than often considered.

show abstract

A theoretical context for examining students’ preference across ability levels for learning alone or in groups

Cited by 19 publications

References 24 publications

Learning and Classroom Preferences of Gifted Eighth Graders

Learning and Classroom Preferences of Gifted Eighth Graders

Motivational Differences of Greek Gifted and Non-Gifted High-Achieving and Gifted Under-Achieving Students

Does excellence matter? The influence of potential for excellence on students’ motivation for specific collaborative tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About