<p>The
purpose of this study is to <a>understand</a> achieving
and underachieving honors
students’ perceptions and experiences of their talent development process.
Students currently enrolled in the Honors
College <a>at</a> research-intensive
public university in the Midwest participated in this
study. Gagné’s Differentiated Model of Giftedness
and Talent (DMGT, Gagné, 2009)
was used as a conceptual framework with
a sequential explanatory mixed methods research design. In the quantitative phase, the Academic Talent
Development Factor Survey was redeveloped to measure honors students’ perceptions
and experiences of their academic talent development in terms of four
components of DMGT: gifts, intrapersonal catalysts,
environmental catalysts, and developmental process. A total of 174 honors students were assigned to two
groups: achieving (<i>n</i> = 143) and
underachieving (<i>n</i> = 31) groups. The redeveloped survey showed an acceptable
model fit but should be improved to accomplish reasonable reliability and
validity. The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE, 2011) was used to
determine whether honors students with underachievement are less exposed to
good practices for undergraduate education (Chickering & Gamson, 1999) than
their peers who maintain high academic performance. </p>
<p>In the quantitative phase, discriminant analysis and
chi-square test results did not yield appreciable differences in pre-college
characteristics including gender, ethnicity, and SAT/ACT scores between two
groups. In terms of four components of DMGT, discriminant analysis results
revealed that developmental process, environmental catalysts, intrapersonal
catalysts were statistically significant factors to determine differences
between achieving and underachieving honors students in this study.
Additionally, discriminant analysis results indicated that achieving and
underachieving honors students showed high level of exposure to good practices.
The differences between two groups were significant with good practices
including (a) faculty interest in teaching and student development, (b) quality
of non-classroom interaction with faculty, (c) academic challenge and effort,
and (d) challenging classes and high faculty expectations. </p>
<p> In the qualitative
phase, in-depth
interviews were conducted to investigate similar and different patterns between
achieving and underachieving honors
students. Interview data from eleven achieving students, four
underachieving students, and three honors advisors/staff were analyzed. From
the student interviews, four composite textural themes and four composite
structural themes were identified. From the interviews with staff/advisors, four
composite textural themes and four composite structural themes were identified.
Qualitative analysis results supported the findings from the quantitative phase
and provided detailed picture of participants’ perceptions and experiences.
Both achieving and underachieving students confirmed their natural ability but
understood the importance of effort, task commitment. Honors students in the
achieving group showed clear purpose of being honors students, focused on
benefits, and anticipated opportunities in their academic talent development in
the honors college Underachieving honors students did not share the same
expectations. Honors students in the underachieving group viewed benefits as
either unimportant or as additional work.
Since
few studies exist
related specifically to the talent
development process of honors students, this study adds to the literature and understanding of underachievement
in honors college.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:purdue.edu/oai:figshare.com:article/8020175 |
| Date | 15 May 2019 |
| Creators | Jungsun Kim (5929895) |
| Source Sets | Purdue University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, Thesis |
| Rights | CC BY 4.0 |
| Relation | https://figshare.com/articles/ACADEMIC_TALENT_DEVELOPMENT_PROCESS_OF_STUDENTS_WITH_GIFTS_AND_TALENTS_IN_HONORS_COLLEGE_A_COMPARATIVE_STUDY_OF_ACHIEVING_AND_UNDERACHIEVING_GROUPS/8020175 |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds