Page 45 - Kukanja Gabrijelčič, Mojca, and Maruška Seničar Željeznov, eds. 2018. Teaching Gifted and Talented Children in A New Educational Era. Koper: University of Primorska Press.
P. 45
Exploring Dutch Students’ Implicit Theories of an Intelligent Person
Table 4 Significant Differences in Rating of Talents and Characteristics between Boys
and Girls Characteristics and Talents
Characteristics and talents Rating boys Rating girls df t p
M SD M SD
Technical skills . . . . . .
Talented in computer sciences . . . . . .
Liked by others . . . . . .
Cooperative . . . . . .
Making friends easily . . . . . .
Table 5 Significant Differences in Ratings Based on Language Spoken at Home
Characteristics and Talents
Characteristics and talents Other (n = ) Dutch (n = ) df t p
M SD M SD .
.
Hardworking . . . . . –. .
.
Persistent . . . . –. .
Talented in Languages . . . . . –.
Liked by others . . . . –.
Cooperative . . . . –.
the rating of ‘technical skills’ detected. Participants who attended ‘Full Time
Gifted Education’ (M = 5.21, SD = 1.01), rated technical skills higher than partic-
ipants who attended a Pull-out-Program (M = 4.72, SD = 1.33), t(60.04) = –2.21,
p = 0.039.
Comparing ratings of participants living in the city with participants living
in a rural area a significant difference was detected. Participants living in a
city (M = 4.15, SD = 1.6) rated ‘liked by others’ higher than participants living
in a rural area (M = 3.62, SD = 1.5), t(216) = 2.44, p = 0.016.
Comparing ratings of participants who only spoke Dutch or English at
home with ratings of those speaking (partly) another language at home, sig-
nificant differences were detected. The characteristics ‘hardworking,’ ‘persis-
tent,’ ‘liked by others,’ ‘cooperative,’ and ‘talented in languages,’ were all rated
higher by those, who spoke another language at home, see Table 5.
Though analysing pictures usually requires interpretation, pictured Ein-
steins, glasses, formulae and smiles, were identified without any problem
concerning interpretation (see Table 6). Of the 91 smiles drawn, 28 were
drawn by participants who attended ‘Traditional Education’ (36.8), 41
(43.2) were drawn by participants who attended a pull-out program and
11 (34.4) were drawn by participants who attended ‘Full time Gifted Edu-
43
Table 4 Significant Differences in Rating of Talents and Characteristics between Boys
and Girls Characteristics and Talents
Characteristics and talents Rating boys Rating girls df t p
M SD M SD
Technical skills . . . . . .
Talented in computer sciences . . . . . .
Liked by others . . . . . .
Cooperative . . . . . .
Making friends easily . . . . . .
Table 5 Significant Differences in Ratings Based on Language Spoken at Home
Characteristics and Talents
Characteristics and talents Other (n = ) Dutch (n = ) df t p
M SD M SD .
.
Hardworking . . . . . –. .
.
Persistent . . . . –. .
Talented in Languages . . . . . –.
Liked by others . . . . –.
Cooperative . . . . –.
the rating of ‘technical skills’ detected. Participants who attended ‘Full Time
Gifted Education’ (M = 5.21, SD = 1.01), rated technical skills higher than partic-
ipants who attended a Pull-out-Program (M = 4.72, SD = 1.33), t(60.04) = –2.21,
p = 0.039.
Comparing ratings of participants living in the city with participants living
in a rural area a significant difference was detected. Participants living in a
city (M = 4.15, SD = 1.6) rated ‘liked by others’ higher than participants living
in a rural area (M = 3.62, SD = 1.5), t(216) = 2.44, p = 0.016.
Comparing ratings of participants who only spoke Dutch or English at
home with ratings of those speaking (partly) another language at home, sig-
nificant differences were detected. The characteristics ‘hardworking,’ ‘persis-
tent,’ ‘liked by others,’ ‘cooperative,’ and ‘talented in languages,’ were all rated
higher by those, who spoke another language at home, see Table 5.
Though analysing pictures usually requires interpretation, pictured Ein-
steins, glasses, formulae and smiles, were identified without any problem
concerning interpretation (see Table 6). Of the 91 smiles drawn, 28 were
drawn by participants who attended ‘Traditional Education’ (36.8), 41
(43.2) were drawn by participants who attended a pull-out program and
11 (34.4) were drawn by participants who attended ‘Full time Gifted Edu-
43
