ABSTRACT
Important issues and practices relative to identification of gifted and talented students in the visual arts are introduced in this paper. As many of the issues and practices discussed are complex and often misunderstood or misapplied, they are examined critically in terms of their research implications and applications. Problems of definition, identification, and recommended practices are addressed based on past and current research about education of artistically gifted and talented students.
Issues are discussed relative to the apparent lack of agreement upon definition of talent in the arts and the role of culture, student characteristics, creativity, skills, cognitive abilities, affective abilities, interest and motivation, potential and processes contrasted with performance and products, art specializations, and distribution of arts talents in the general school population. Each issue is examined in light of complexities that have confounded definitions of talent in the arts and practices used in identification programs.
Issues relative to identification of gifted and talented students in the arts are then examined in relation to the use of outcomes derived from standardized art, intelligence, achievement and creativity test, factors of students' backgrounds, personalities, values, ages, and use of multiple criteria identifications systems. Various aspects of these issues are discussed in regard to their uses and misuses in current gifted and talented visual arts programs in relation to identification procedures.
Examination of current practices and critical reviews of their advantages and disadvantages, based on issues of definition and identification of art talent, are reported in regard to non-structured nominations, structured nomination, group IQ, achievement tests, academic records, standardized arts and creativity tests, informal art instruments, portfolio and performance reviews, interviews, and observations. These practices are hierarchically arranged as steps in an identification program and in terms of their most appropriate age/grade applications.
Conclusions are drawn about future applications of issues and practices that are critiqued. Multiple criteria identification systems are recommended and future research about definition and identification of gifted and talented students in the visual arts is strongly encouraged.