Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop self-observation assessment metrics and rubrics for teachers in gifted education, with a particular emphasis on nurturing creativity. The objective of the developed metrics and rubrics is to facilitate systematic self-evaluation, promote reflective practice, and support continuous instructional improvement. A total of 65 metrics with preliminary expert validation, organized into three instructional stages (Preparation, Implementation, and Evaluation), were generated through a multi-phase process that included a comprehensive literature review, expert review, and iterative tool refinement. Based on these metrics, three tools were developed: a self-assessment checklist, an observer checklist, and a rubric. These tools are designed to support gifted education teachers in understanding student diversity, implementing differentiated instructional strategies, and enhancing creative instructional practices. This framework offers a structured model informed by theory and expert input, with the potential to contribute to instructional development for teachers and the creative growth of gifted learners. While the tools showed promising usability in a small-scale pilot study, further research is needed to conduct full psychometric validation and to examine their long-term impact on teacher effectiveness, student creativity, and applicability across diverse educational settings.

Keywords

self-observation assessment rubrics teacher competency gifted education reflective practice creativity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

J. R.

Lee

S. B.

(2013). A study of designing qualitative evaluation for identifying young gifted children. Journal of Children’s Literature and Education, 14(3), 413–432.

Brulles

Saunders

Cohn

S. J.

(2010). Improving performance for gifted students in a cluster grouping model. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(2), 327–350.

Choi

(2022). A study on the social and emotional issues of gifted individuals. Journal of Future Convergence Education, 3(1), 23–42.

Design-Based Research Collective . (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005

Gilson

C. M.

Lee

L. E.

(2023). Cultivating a learning environment to support diverse gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 46(4), 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231186454

Han

K. S.

(2006). Current status and future prospect of gifted education programs. The Journal of the Korean Society for Gifted and Talented, 5(1), 114–135.

Jang

J. E.

Kim

S. W.

(2014). Developing the rubric for measurement in levels by areas for the characteristics of task commitment shown in the science gifted. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 34(7), 657–666. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.7.0657

Jeong

H. C.

Seo

H. A.

(2008). Meta-evaluation for evaluation of science gifted educational institutions affiliated with universities. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education Research, 18(2), 313–341.

Jeong

H. S.

Hwang

S. H.

(2024). Development of a rubric for evaluating the creativity of secondary science gifted students. Korean Association For Learner-Centered Curriculum And Instruction, 24(4), 869–883. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2024.24.4.869

10.

Kaplan

(1994). Differentiation core curriculum and instruction to provide advanced learning opportunities. California Association for the Gifted.

11.

Kim

J. H.

Hwang

W. H.

(2010). Assessment study on educational programs for the gifted students in mathematics. Communications of mathematical education, 24(1), 235–257.

12.

Lee

J. S.

(2001). Research methods 21: The Delphi method. Kyoyook Kwahaksa.

13.

Lee

K. H.

(2009). SIGT creativity education program for gifted students. The Journal of the Korean Society for Gifted and Talented, 8(2), 31–51.

14.

Lynn

M. R.

(1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017

15.

Nicholas

Skourdoumbis

Bradbury

(2024). Meeting the needs and potentials of high-ability, high-performing, and gifted students via differentiation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 68(2), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862231222225

16.

Park

Seo

(2007). Exploration on the elements of teacher's professionalism in gifted education. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 17(1), 77–98.

17.

Peters

S. J.

Gates

J. C.

(2010). The teacher observation form: Revisions and updates. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210369258

18.

Renzulli

J. S.

(2011). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(8), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200821

19.

Ribeiro Piske

F. H.

Henry Collins

de Cássia Nakano

(2023). Teaching strategies and the role of creativity in gifted education: Perceptions of students, families, and educational professionals. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 11(1), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.7202/1115430ar

20.

Ryu

J. Y.

Jeong

H. C.

(2010). Identification model development for gifted students based on class observations and nominations. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 20(1), 257–287.

21.

Ryu

W. S.

Hong

K. H.

(2005). Research for program cultivation and assessment for “Creative-Problem Solving Abilities” in science gifted-education of secondary. Explorations into Future Education, 26(1), 67–90.

22.

Scarparolo

(2025). Gifted students' learning experiences in mixed-ability (inclusive) classes in Australian primary schools. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 34(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.21505/ajge.2025.0004

23.

Schön

D. A.

(2017). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473

24.

Sharma

Kudei

(2024). Opportunities and challenges of working with gifted learners: A systematic review. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 37(6), 491–501. https://doi.org/10.9734/jesbs/2024/v37i61360

25.

Tomlinson

C. A.

(2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

26.

VanTassel-Baska

Quek

Feng

(2005). Classroom observation scale-revised User’s manual. Center for Gifted Education, College of William and Mary.

27.

VanTassel-Baska

Stambaugh

(2005). Challenges and possibilities for serving gifted learners in the regular classroom. Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_5