Best Practices for Gifted and Talented Students

Teaching Gifted and Talented Students in the Chemistry Classroom

2026

Course Focus Areas

• Provide updated theoretical knowledge about gifted and talented students, with a focus on teaching chemistry in the classroom.
• Develop skills for identifying, teaching, and empowering gifted students in the heterogeneous chemistry classroom.
• Integrate current research into the design of differentiated instructional approaches, including the informed use of artificial intelligence to promote higher-order thinking and tailored instruction.

Session Topics*:

1) Introduction to Gifted and Talented Students

a. Definitions and models for characterizing gifted and talented students in Israel and worldwide

b. Cognitive, emotional, and social characteristics

2) Classroom Diversity: Sector, Gender, and Twice-Exceptionality (2e)

a. Challenges in teaching gifted students within heterogeneous classrooms

b. Teaching gifted and talented students with additional exceptionalities (2e)

c. Teaching gifted girls in science (chemistry)—barriers and opportunities

3) The Socio-Emotional Dimension in Gifted Education

a. Emotional and social challenges experienced by gifted students

b. Well-being in the chemistry classroom: coping with boredom, peer pressure, and social isolation; strengthening a sense of belonging

4) Differentiated Instruction in the Chemistry Classroom

a. Models for developing and nurturing gifted learners in heterogeneous classes

b. Developing higher-order thinking and complex problem-solving

c. Principles of differentiated instruction; adapting learning management and assessment; fostering creativity and meaningful challenge

d. Artificial intelligence in teaching gifted students in the classroom

5) Teacher–Student Interactions with Gifted Learners

a. Defining teacher–student interactions in the heterogeneous classroom

b. Teacher response typologies in interactions with gifted students

c. Empowering interaction strategies—practice via simulation

Teaching in a Heterogeneous Classroom

A personal and research-informed perspective by teachers on their interactions with gifted and talented students in class.

*Session topics are subject to change.

Reading List:

Aboud, F., et al. (2023). A growth mindset intervention for teachers of high-ability students. *Frontiers in Education, 8*, 1088674. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1088674

Baccassino, F., & Pinnelli, S. (2023). Giftedness and gifted education: A systematic literature review. *Frontiers in Education, 8*, 1073007. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1073007

Benny, N., & Blonder, R. (2018). Interactions of chemistry teachers with gifted students in regular classes. *Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19*(1), 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00127D

Bond, M. (2024). A meta-systematic review of AI in higher education: Where are we and what next? *International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21*, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z

Bozkurt, A., et al. (2024). The manifesto for teaching and learning in a time of AI. *Open Praxis, 16*(4), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.4.777

Ford, D. Y. (2013). *Multicultural gifted education* (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315856632

Gagné, F. (2004). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. *High Ability Studies, 15*(2), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000314682

Hodges, C., et al. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. *EDUCAUSE Review*. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Jiang, H., et al. (2024). Examining self-efficacy and outcome expectations in STEM career interests: Gender differences. *International Journal of STEM Education, 11*, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00482-7

Marsh, H. W., et al. (2021). Academic resilience and engagement during COVID-19 school lockdown: A large-scale, multi-cohort study. *Frontiers in Psychology, 12*, 577898. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.577898

Master, A., Cheryan, S., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2021). Gender stereotypes influence children’s STEM motivation. *Child Development Perspectives, 15*(3), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12424

McBee, M. T. (2019). The quantitative implications of definitions of giftedness. *AERA Open, 5*(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419831007

Meoli, A., et al. (2024). Missing women in STEM occupations: The impact of preferences and beliefs. *Research Policy, 53*(9), 104038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2024.104038

Mills, C. J. (2003). Characteristics of effective teachers of gifted students: Teacher background and personality styles of students. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 47*(4), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700404

Ng, C. S. M., et al. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 on children’s mental health: A rapid review. *BMC Pediatrics, 22*, 476. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-022-03528-3

Papadopoulos, D. (2021). Parenting the exceptional social-emotional needs of gifted and talented children. *Children, 8*(11), 953. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8110953

Peters, S. J. (2020). Rethinking how we identify “gifted” students. *Phi Delta Kappan, 102*(4), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720978055

Peters, S. J., et al. (2019). Systemic barriers to identification: A multilevel analysis of gifted program identification. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 63*(4), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219838977

Pfeiffer, S. I. (2021). Identifying and serving twice-exceptional students: A strength-based perspective. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 65*(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986221990217

Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), *Conceptions of giftedness* (pp. 246–279). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.015

Renzulli, J. S. (2020). Research on the Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A comprehensive plan for developing talents in all students. *Gifted Education International, 36*(3), 220–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429420963987

Reis, S. M. (2021). Enrichment and gifted education pedagogy to develop talent in all learners. *ECNU Review of Education, 4*(3), 477–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211046759

Reis, S. M., Baum, S. M., & Burke, E. (2014). An operational definition of twice-exceptional learners: Implications and applications. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 58*(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214534976

Rinn, A. N., et al. (2024). A critique of the misapplication of Dabrowski’s theory in gifted education. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 68*(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862231197780

Ronksley-Pavia, M. (2020). A model of coexisting exceptionalities: A conceptual framework for twice-exceptionality. *Gifted Child Quarterly, 64*(2), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220942468

Siegle, D. (2023). A role for ChatGPT and AI in gifted education. *Gifted Child Today, 46*(4), 253–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168443

Siegle, D. (2024). Using AI to support the three legs of talent development. *Gifted Child Today, 47*(3), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175241242495

Smeets, K., et al. (2023). Teachers’ knowledge and attitudes about giftedness and their identification practices. *Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 22*(2), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2023.2237553

Sternberg, R. J. (2017). ACCEL: A new birthright theory of giftedness. *Roeper Review, 39*(3), 152–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2017.1318658

Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. *Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12*(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056

Contact:

Dr. Naama Benny

Phone: 054-4503026

Email: naama.benny@gmail.com

Upon successful completion of the course, the student will be able to:

1. Discuss the different definitions of gifted children, and how to recognize gifted students in their classes.
2. Demonstrate proficiency in theories regarding how gifted students learn and main teaching strategies in gifted education.
3. Use their knowledge of the unique ways that GT students think including creative thinking to design stimulating science lessons.
4. Integrate the knowledge about GT students to design a teaching model for GT students in their class.

1. Cross, T. L. C., L.J. . (2005). Being Gifted in School: An Introduction to Development, Guidance, and Teaching (2nd Ed ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
2. Karnes, F. A. B., S.M., Eds. (2004). Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
3. VanTassel-Baska, J., Little, C.A. Ed. (2003). Content-Based Curriculum for High-Ability Learners. Waco, TX Prufrock Press, Inc. Book section and articals:
4. Akin, C. A. (2005). Academic Asynchrony. Gifted Child Today, 28(2), 60-66.
5. Erez, R. (2004). Freedom and Creativity: An Approach to Science Education for Excellent Students and Its Realization in the Israel Arts and Science Academy?s Curriculum. The Journal Of Secondary Gifted Education 15(4), 133-140. doi: DOI: 10.4219/jsge-2004-461
6. Haier, R. J., & Jung, R. E. (2008). Brain Imaging Studies of Intelligence and Creativity: What is the Picture for Education? Roeper Review, 30(3), 171-180. doi: 10.1080/02783190802199347
7. Johnsen, S. (2004). National Standards for Teachers of Gifted and Talented Students: Becoming Involved. Gifted Child Today, 27(3), 5-5.
8. Newman, J. L. (2005). Talents and Type IIIs: The Effects of the Talents Unlimited Model on Creative Productivity in Gifted Youngsters. Roeper Review, 27(2), 84-90.
9. Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The Underachievement of Gifted Students: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(3), 152-170. doi: 10.1177/001698620004400302
10. Reis, S. M., and Renzulli, J. S. . (2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 119?130. doi: doi: 10.1002/pits.10144
11. Renzulli, J. S. (1998). The three-ring conception of giftedness. In S. M. Baum, Reis, S.M., & Maxfield, L.R. (Ed.), Nurturing the gifted and talents of primary grade students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
12.  Sak, U. (2004). About Creativity, Giftedness, and Teaching the Creatively Gifted in the Classroom. Roeper Review, 26(4), 216-222.Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E.L., Jarvin, L. (2006). Identification of the gifted in the new millennium: Two assessments for ability testing and for the broad identification of gifted students. KJEP, 3(2), 7-27.
13. Torrance, E. P. (2003). The Millennium: A Time for Looking Forward and Looking Back. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15.
14. Treffinger, D. J., & Isaksen, S. G. (2005). Creative Problem Solving: The History, Development, and Implications for Gifted Education and Talent Development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(4), 342-353. doi: 10.1177/001698620504900407
15. Treffinger, D. J., saksen, S. G. (2005). Creative Problem Solving: The History, Development, and Implications for Gifted Education and Talent Development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(4), 342-353. doi: 10.1177/001698620504900407
16. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2003). Selecting instructional strategies for gifted learners. focus on exceptional children, 36(3), 1-11.
17. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2006). NAGC Symposium: a Report card on the State of Research in the Field of Gifted Education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(4), 339-341. doi: 10.1177/001698620605000406
18. VanTassel-Baska, J., Brown, E. F. (2007). Toward Best Practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 342-358. doi: 10.1177/0016986207306323
19. VanTassel-Baska, J., Quek, C., Xuemei Feng, A. (2007). The development and use of a structured teacher observation scale to assess differentiated best practice. Roeper Review, 29(2), 84-92.