UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The effect of anxiety on real life problem solving performance of gifted children in Israel Zoller, Tamar 1991

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1991_A2 Z64.pdf [ 7.3MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093085.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093085-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093085-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093085-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093085-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093085-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093085-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093085-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093085.ris

Full Text

THE EFFECT OF ANXIETY ON REAL LIFE PROBLEM SOLVING PERFORMANCE OF GIFTED CHILDREN IN ISRAEL by TAMAR ZOLLER B.A. H a i f a U n i v e r s i t y ,  I s r a e l 1969  M.A. N o r t h e a s t e r n U n i v e r s i t y , Boston, 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in , THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  Department of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology and S p e c i a l  We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1991 © Tamar Z o l l e r , 1991  Educat  In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department  or by his  or her  representatives.  It is  understood  that  copying or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  DE-6 (2/88)  ii  ABSTRACT  The p u r p o s e o f t h i s of a n x i e t y  on  real  gifted children. country  life  study  was t o e x p l o r e  problem  The s t u d y  solving  was c a r r i e d  i s a real  142 g i f t e d a n d n o n g i f t e d grades p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the T r a i t and (Spielberger, Situation  State  1973),  out i n  Trait anxiety,  of  Israel,  life  a  problems  concern.  subjects  from 4 t h , 5 t h and 6 t h  study.  Anxiety  and  Set (RLPSSS),  effect  performance  i n which the n e c e s s i t y of s o l v i n g r e a l  under c o n d i t i o n s of a n x i e t y  the  a  Inventories  Real  Life  were used t o  State anxiety  and r e a l  for  Children  Problem  assess life  the  Solving subjects'  problem  solving  performance r e s p e c t i v e l y . The  subjects  matched groups  in  each c l a s s  b a s e d on  s u b j e c t s gender and  their  anxiety v i a  two  scores,  the  a c h i e v e m e n t s . One  of  t o be t h e t r e a t m e n t g r o u p a n d t h e  consisted  a combination  elicit  anxiety  anxiety  scores, before  and  into  the nontreatment group. The " t r e a t m e n t "  the  Trait Anxiety  their scholastic  them was r a n d o m l y a s s i g n e d other  were d i v i d e d  in  school and  of d e l i b e r a t e i n d u c t i o n  of elements children.  that are Matched  a f t e r treatment,  nongifted.  Ethical  issues  t-tests  indicated  t r e a t m e n t was e f f e c t i v e i n b o t h p o p u l a t i o n s , the  known  were  the  of to on that  gifted  taken  into  consideration. A n a l y s i s o f RLPSSS i n d i c a t e d t h a t : performed  significantly  counterparts  better  than  (1) g i f t e d  children  their  nongifted  under c o n d i t i o n s o f t r e a t m e n t as w e l l as  c o n d i t i o n of non-treatment;  (2)  under  the performance of a l l  the  iii  groups who  experienced a n x i e t y , was  matched groups conditions;  (4)  under t h e i r  giftedness  anxiety g i f t e d  i m p l i c a t i o n s from t h i s study concern the  r a t h e r than as the  setting  girls  s l i g h t l y b e t t e r than g i f t e d boys.  toward a n x i e t y which should be  consider  natural  found between  under c o n d i t i o n s of  to perform  The  performed  (3) no i n t e r a c t i o n was  and a n x i e t y ; appeared  who  lower than t h a t of t h e i r  d e a l t with as p a r t of  a pathological feature. introduction  of  attitude  anxiety  life,  I t i s suggested scales  into  to test  b a t t e r i e s used f o r the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of g i f t e d c h i l d r e n  and  that special  make p r o v i s i o n s  for  with the necessary s k i l l s  to  programs f o r  the g i f t e d  p r o v i d i n g the g i f t e d students cope  with  life  circumstances.  problems  under  all  kinds  of  anxiety  iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract  i i  Table of Contents  iv  L i s t of Tables  ix  L i s t of F i g u r e s  x  Acknowledgment  xi  CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY  1  Immediate Concerns  1  Background  1  Purpose of the study  4  Rationale  6  The  9  Problem  Research Questions  11  Research Hypotheses  12  D e s c r i p t i o n of terms as used i n the present  study  Gifted children  14 14  Background i n f o r m a t i o n Anxiety  14 16  T r a i t Anxiety  17  State Anxiety  17  Induction of A n x i e t y  18  Strangers  19  Real L i f e Problem-Solving  19  Real-Life-Problem-Solving-Situations-Set Performance Score  (RLPSSS)20 21  L i m i t a t i o n s And C o n s t r a i n t s  21  Overview of The Present  26  Study  V  CHAPTER I I :  REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE  27  Introduction  27  Problem-Solving  28  Problem-Solving: Problem-Solving  Definitions Skills  28 29  Problem-Solving:  Experience  31  Problem-Solving:  Transfer of Training  31  Problem-Solving:  Strategies  34  P r o b l e m S o l v i n g : Gender  differences  Giftedness  35 37  Gifted children:  Problem-Solving  G i f t e d n e s s : M o t i v a t i o n and Problem-Solving Anxiety  38 39 41  S t r e s s and A n x i e t y  41  A n x i e t y : O p e r a t i o n a l Approaches  43  Anxiety: Problem-solving  44  Anxiety: g i f t e d vs. non-gifted children  45  Conclusion:  Problem-Solving,  CHAPTER I I I :  A n x i e t y , and Gifted- c h i l d r e n . 5 2  METHODOLOGY  Population  54 54  Target Population  54  Accessible Population  55  Background Information  56  S e l e c t i o n o f t h er e s e a r c h groups  57  Variables  58  Independent V a r i a b l e s  58  Dependent  59  Variable  Instrumentation  59  vi  Anxiety  Real  Inventories  59  Trait Anxiety  Inventory  (TAI) f o r C h i l d r e n  60  State Anxiety  Inventory  (SAI) f o r C h i l d r e n  61  C o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n TAI a n d SAI  62  Administration  62  o f TAI a n d SAI  L i f e P r o b l e m - S o l v i n g Measure  (RLPSSS) :  63  Research Plan  65  I.  Study  65  I I . Main Study  69  Pilot  Stage 1  69  Preparations  f o r TAI a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  Administration  o f TAI  Matching subjects  70  on a n x i e t y  Stage 2 f o r SAI a n d RLPSS A d m i n i s t r a t i o n  Administration  ii.  72 73  Preparation  i.  70  o f S A I a n d RLPSS  Non-treatment groups Treatment Groups  73 74 75 76  Data P r o c e s s i n g  78  Scoring  For Anxiety  78  Scoring  o f t h e RLPSSS  79  Hypotheses  84  Statistical  Method o f A n a l y s i s  85  1. R e g a r d i n g A n x i e t y Level  of S t a t i s t i c a l  85 significance  2. R e g a r d i n g RLPSSS Level Summary  of S t a t i s t i c a l  86 86  Significance  87 88  vii CHAPTER  IV:  ANALYSIS  OF D A T A AND R E S U L T S  90  Introduction  90  Results  90  I.  Anxiety Before After  Study  90  Treatment  90  Treatment  Summary II.  of  the  93 Anxiety  Study  96  Real-Life-Problem-Solving-Study  97  Descriptive  Data  97  Statistical  Hypotheses  Analysis  of  Variance  Research  Hypotheses  1-3:  Research  hypothesis  4  to  be  tested  Results Interpretation  99 102 106  Summary  114  Major  findings  Additional  CHAPTER V :  114  finding  114  S U M M A R Y , D I S C U S S I O N , C O N C L U S I O N S AND RECOMMENDATIONS  115  Summary Results  98  115 and D i s c u s s i o n  Conclusions  and  Recommendation Concluding  Educational for  Remarks  119 Implications  Further Research  130 133 136  BIBLIOGRAPHY  138  APPENDICES  157  AppendixA:Anxiety  measurements:TAI  and SAI 158  Appendix B: Real L i f e Problem S o l v i n g  Set(RLPSSS) . .161  Appendix C: Samples of Students' Responses to Real L i f e Problematic S i t u a t i o n s of the RLPSSS  178  IX  L i s t of Tables 3.1  Summary o f I n f o r m a t i o n  concerning  3.2  Summary o f I n f o r m a t i o n C o n c e r n i n g t h e M a i n S t u d y . . . . 8 4  4.1  Comparison between Treatment and Non-Treatment G i f t e d G r o u p s on T r a i t A n x i e t y  the P i l o t  Study...67  I n v e n t o r y (TAI)  Mean S c o r e s 4.2  Comparison between Treatment and Non-Treatment non-Gifted (TAI)  4.3  91  G r o u p s on T r a i t A n x i e t y  Inventory  Mean S c o r e s  92  Post-Treatment Comparison of t h e State Inventory  Anxiety  ( S A I ) Mean S c o r e s b e t w e e n t h e T r e a t m e n t  and t h e non-Treatment G i f t e d Groups 4.4  Post-Treatment Comparison of t h e State Inventory  Anxiety  (SAI) Mean S c o r e s b e t w e e n t h e T r e a t m e n t  and t h e non-Treatment n o n - G i f t e d 4.5  94  D e s c r i p t i v e data: Real L i f e  Groups  95  Problem S o l v i n g  S i t u a t i o n S e t (RLPSSS) Means (M) a n d S t a n d a r d Deviations  (S.D.) b y T r e a t m e n t , G i f t e d n e s s a n d  Gender 4.6  Analysis of Variance  98 o f Treatment and G i f t e d n e s s  On R e a l - L i f e P r o b l e m S o l v i n g S i t u a t i o n Mean P e r f o r m a n c e  S e t (RLPSSS) 100  X  List  of  Figures  4.1  G i f t e d v s . N o n - G i f t e d by Treatment  4.2  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s  on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  and N o n - G i f t e d under Non-Treatment 4.3  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s  101  Condition  on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  and N o n - G i f t e d u n d e r T r e a t m e n t C o n d i t i o n s 4.4  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s  Non-Treatment  Conditions The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s  105  on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  Boys and G i f t e d G i r l s under  4.5  104  108 on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  B o y s a n d G i f t e d G i r l s u n d e r T r e a t m e n t C o n d i t i o n s . . . 110 4.6  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s  on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  Boys under Treatment and Non-Treatment 4.7  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s Girls  Conditions..112  on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  under Treatment and Non-Treatment  Conditions.113  XI  Acknowledgements I would l i k e to express my s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n t o the f o l l o w i n g people: My a d v i s o r P r o f . S t a n l e y Blank who guided me throughout my graduate s t u d i e s , and i n s p i r e d me t o meet t h i s c h a l l e n g e , i n s p i t e of a l l the d i f f i c u l t i e s a s s o c i a t e d with language, culture, and long d i s t a n c e . P r o f . Walter B o l d t f o r h i s time and a b i l i t y i n conveying h i s c r i t i c i s m s in a most p l e a s a n t s t y l e . His analysis, comments and e x p l a n a t i o n s were most s i g n i f i c a n t i n f a c i l i t a t i n g the completion of t h i s t h e s i s . P r o f . A r t More f o r a s s i s t i n g me always with a warm smile, to understand and accept c r i t i c i s m . H i s encouragement was most meaningful; Dr. E r i c Hampton f o r the wonderful job he accomplished i n e d i t i n g this thesis. Dr. David Ben-Haim for his fruitful d i s c u s s i o n s , h e l p f u l ideas and the g r e a t amount of time he devoted t o h e l p i n g me. Mrs. A v i v a Ya'ar and her wonderful team of t e a c h e r s accomplished a g r e a t job i n o r g a n i z i n g a l l the many d e t a i l s t h a t were i n v o l v e d i n p u r s u i n g t h i s study; Haia and her group of the. u n i v e r s i t y students who served as a s s i s t a n t s ; the team of judges; the E n g l i s h t e a c h e r s ; the t e a c h e r s who were i n v o l v e d i n the P i l o t study; Jody and my school s t a f f who put so much time i n p r e p a r i n g a l l the m a t e r i a l s f o r t h i s study. L a s t but not l e a s t , my husband, Uri, for inspiring me with h i s c r i t i c a l discussions, suggestions and a l o t of understanding d u r i n g the p r o c e s s of w r i t i n g , which enabled me t o b r i n g this thesis to i t s completion. Thank you a l l , I a p p r e c i a t e your e f f o r t s and hope that they were worthwhile.  1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION T O THE STUDY  Immediate Concerns The impact  of  gifted children  anxiety  to s o l v e  on the  real l i f e  responses  of  problems i s  Israeli  the  main  i n t e r e s t of the study. T h i s chapter  includes:  purpose of the study and main problem description  and the  discussion  of the  i t s rationale,  elaboration  on the  research  questions to  of the main terms t h a t  throughout t h i s t h e s i s , and  background,  be  answered,  are r e p e a t e d l y  mentioned  and d i s c u s s i o n  of the  limitations  constraints.  Background The  education  considerable attention demonstrated by  the  of  gifted  in  the l a s t  various  c h i l d r e n ' has  programs  U n i t e d S t a t e s , as a  consequence  O f f i c e of E d u c a t i o n  t o the American  concern i s i n well  the i n t e r e s t s  as i n the l a r g e r  of  those  of the  Congress  the c h i l d r e n  in  is  i n the  r e p o r t by the  children  for qualitatively different  existing  the r e g u l a r  U.S.  (1972).  The  themselves  of s c h o o l ,  such as  emphasi2es approaches  s c h o o l . The  " f l e x i b l e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e arrangements i n and out  instituted  This  as  i n t e r e s t of s o c i e t y .  The concern f o r the g i f t e d s p e c i a l need  two decades.  gained  their from  need i s f o r :  for instruction  special classes,  both  seminars,  2 resource  rooms,  mentorships, centers"  research  field  study,  trips,  student  library,  gifted  potential  these  arrangements w i l l  children  challenge  media,  concern  of  our  and  highly  technological,  problems.  " D e m o c r a c i e s c o l l a p s e o n l y when t h e y  with  to  heed  collapsed"  g r a d u a t e s who  such  a  (Torrance,  warning 1962  can t h i n k c l e a r l y  t h e many c h a l l e n g e s  by  complex  fail  to  use  problems.  Socrates  p . 6 ) . There and cope  (and t h r e a t s )  modern  t o handle  i m a g i n a t i v e methods f o r s o l v i n g t h e i r  Greece f a i l e d  their  degree.  s o c i e t y i s f o r t a l e n t e d people  intelligent,  offered  cultivate  democratic  for  research  the education  them  t a l e n t s to the highest  The  gradually  internships,  (USDE, 1976, p . 1 8 6 6 5 - 1 8 6 6 6 ) .  Only with to  independent  and  is a  need  successfully  presented  in  modern  society. Gifted Education U.S.A  students  are broadly  d e f i n e d i n P.L 97-35,  C o n s o l i d a t i o n and Improvement  the  A c t , p a s s e d by  the  C o n g r e s s i n 1981, a s : C h i l d r e n who g i v e e v i d e n c e o f h i g h p e r f o r m a n c e c a p a b i l i t y i n areas such as i n t e l l e c t u a l , c r e a t i v e , a r t i s t i c , l e a d e r s h i p c a p a c i t y , o r s p e c i f i c academic f i e l d s , and who r e q u i r e s e r v i c e s o r a c t i v i t i e s n o t o r d i n a r i l y p r o v i d e d by t h e s c h o o l i n o r d e r t o f u l l y d e v e l o p s u c h c a p a b i l i t y ( s e c . 582, c i t e d b y C l a r k 1983, p.5) .  There i s the  vast  identification gifted  literature of  d e a l i n g w i t h many a s p e c t s  intellectually-gifted  present,  the  in  selected  forparticipation  of t h e i r  p e r f o r m a n c e on  Israel  are,  children.  f o r the  most  i n s p e c i a l p r o g r a m s on t h e a  battery of  Intelligence  of At  part, basis tests  3  (see:  description  tests  are  regular  of terms - " g i f t e d " ) . The  intended school.  the  than s t r u c t u r e d e x e r c i s e s " is  selected  life yet  situations. to be  The  to use  all many-  school. the  c u r r i c u l a , where  to r e a l  g i f t e d who  the  supposed to  "apply  situations  rather  are  identified  and  s p e c i a l programs designed  capability  to cope with f u t u r e  attainment of t h i s  the  children  to  predict  precisely  identification  participate  programs and  in  for real  long-term goal  their  likelihood  later in l i f e .  have to compromise and  be  existing  (see  Solving) .  In t h i s  and  aware of t h i s g i f t e d who  procedures. The  g i f t e d to s u c c e s s f u l l y  situations  of  However, the  T h i s study d e a l s with the the  process  these s p e c i a l  necessary p r o c e s s e s w i l l take time,  of the  growing  is  seen.  Ideally,  such by  a  the  [p.9].  from the  them i n terms of t h e i r  in  gifted is in  (1977), are  intended t h a t the  w i l l benefit  these  s p e c i a l programs f o r  qualitatively different  f e e l i n g processes  is  gifted  regular  the  g i f t e d , a c c o r d i n g to R e n z u l l i  It  there  c u r r i c u l u m f o r the  emphasis i n  of  achievement  encourage the  from t h a t of the  Much of the  t h i n k i n g and  high  because  need to  their potential,  g i f t e d i s on  predict  However,  awareness of the  cases d i f f e r e n t  to  results  Description  success  should in  the  refinement of  the  i n the meantime  we  constraint. were i d e n t i f i e d  Real L i f e t h a t are  as  ability  problems i n r e a l  of Terms issues  selects  programs  focus i s on the  solve  r e s p e c t the  that  life  Problem-  covered  in  4  the  research  enhancing  literature  deal  mainly  with  aspects  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g c a p a c i t y i n g e n e r a l . These  i n c l u d e : a)  environmental  influences (inside  and  of  issues outside  c l a s s such as, i n t e r a c t i o n with parents, t e a c h e r s , peers other p e r s o n s ) . personality  b)  Cognitive  characteristics,  a b i l i t y and such  style,  as  and  and  c)  self-esteem,  s o c i a b i l i t y and s e l f - m o t i v a t i o n (Torrance, 1980). L i t t l e r e s e a r c h has  been done concerning the  factors  t h a t might i n h i b i t the  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance of  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n . Thus,  i t seems important  l i n e of  in  investigation,  t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e one  r e s p e c t of  should be able  o b s t a c l e s , such as a n x i e t y t h a t may  some  t o pursue a  this capacity. to a n t i c i p a t e  be  new From  related  encountered.  Purpose of the study The purpose of t h i s study i s to i n v e s t i g a t e the  manner  i n which g i f t e d c h i l d r e n under c o n d i t i o n s of a n x i e t y  attempt  to  solve r e a l l i f e The  in  problems.  l i t e r a t u r e on the i n f l u e n c e of a n x i e t y on performance  problem-solving  does  not  s p e c i f i c a l l y . S i m i l a r l y , the of  gifted children  t h i s context.  deal  with  l i t e r a t u r e on  does not adequately  problem-solving  examine a n x i e t y  a n x i e t y of g i f t e d c h i l d r e n with t h a t of others i n t h e i r  age  specifically  not  discuss  real  that  in the  does  the l i t e r a t u r e  children  compares  groups  Further,  gifted  life  problem-solving  (see: L i t e r a t u r e Review Chapter I I ) .  5  In view of these d e f i c i e n c i e s , concerned with  the  impact  the f o c u s i n g  of a n x i e t y  on  on  the  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance of g i f t e d c h i l d r e n  issues  real  life  i s a valuable  undertaking. Having determined the e f f e c t of a n x i e t y on the problemsolving  performance of t h e g i f t e d ,  d i r e c t l y f o r two p r a c t i c a l a)  one c o u l d use the r e s u l t s  purposes:  The improvement of the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n process of the  g i f t e d : As  a  possible to  result  of  re-examine  real l i f e  the g i f t e d .  insight,  c u r r e n t procedures  recommendations concerning identify  additional  the  and  b a t t e r y of  The i n c l u s i o n  i t may make  tests  some  used  of a n x i e t y - t e s t i n g  oriented problem-solving  testing  be  to and  might be a  real  possibility. b) children: either  Developing a p p r o p r i a t e The  have  order t o h e l p  development/design  the g i f t e d  levels  of  t o d e a l with  strategies  which  will  anxiety,  in  t h i s kind  of  f o r r e d u c i n g the  level  the p r e s e n t study i s e x p l o r a t o r y , i n  f i n d i n g s may l e a d  r e s e a r c h . The nature are  learn  programs  gifted  anxiety. Essentially,  its  of  predesignated b u i l t - i n  emotion, or w i l l i n c l u d e of  programs f o r the  depended  research.  on  t o the development of and d i r e c t i o n  the  actual  of any  findings  in  a new l i n e  that of  recommendations this  line  of  6  Rationale Life  i s essentially  solving. degrees  This process of s t r e s s .  unbalanced and  is  result  in  A problem-solving  of  the balance  various  i s thus  stress  to find  problem-  with  situation  i n which  involved strives  restoring  process  often associated  dynamic s i t u a t i o n ,  the i n d i v i d u a l  will  a continuous  is  created,  a solution  and  an  which  relieving  the  stress. Stress  situations  Each i n d i v i d u a l to  is  responds  t h e same s t r e s s f u l An the  elicit  important  with  anxiety  a different  situation.  a s p e c t when  confrontation with  i n the  taken  facing  the  a problematic  unknown  t o s o l v e problems  (Nezu,  unknown p l a y s  development  of  conditions.  The  decision w i l l  a  anxiety person  solve  to  be  the problem, that  i t , so  detrimental  consequences. Therefore,  problem-solving  seriously  in  process  real  life  i n terms  of  situations i n  Consequently, under  the such  be s u r e  i f his  i f i t will  further  may  end  up  with  life  situations of anxiety  should (or fear)  performance.  A n x i e t y c a n be (Sarason,  and  any r e s e a r c h t h a t d e a l s  consider the p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s  on p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  scales  the  D e c i s i o n s made  not  or  situation The  expected  i n v o l v e d may  complicate  with  real  major r o l e .  is  anxiety  1986).  may be c r u c i a l  the p o s s i b l e consequences i n c e r t a i n which the  of  (Cox, 1978) .  unknown i s t h r e a t e n i n g f o r most p e r s o n s . actions  level  individual.  e s t i m a t e d by  1960;  using e x i s t i n g  Speilberger,  1973).  The  anxiety scales  7 estimate the  extent  to  which  anxiety  level  varies  from  person* t o p e r s o n . The Male  distinction  (1981),  made b y M i l g r a m  regarding  f a i l u r e and s t r i v i n g gifted  students  portion  of  the  difference  f o r success, also  who f e a r  their  (1976) a n d P e r r o n  failure  energy  to  between suggests  will  overcome  use  a  will to  a c t s p e c i f i c a l l y t o reduce  avoid  willing  failure to  and  to restore  take r i s k s  "survival". a problem  They w i l l as  their  beyond what  possible,  that  of  non-  fear.  These  and t h e r e f o r e  anxiety. Their goal i s  balance.  They  i s required  t r y to avoid direct  much a s  fear  substantial  this  s t u d e n t s a r e i n an a n x i e t y - i n d u c i n g s i t u a t i o n ,  and  are for  not their  confrontation with  i n order  to  escape  the  consequences of f a i l u r e . On t h e o t h e r h a n d ,  gifted  more s u c c e s s f u l i n m e e t i n g more  willing  to  take  s t u d e n t s who a r e  relatively  a c a d e m i c c h a l l e n g e s , a p p e a r t o be  risks  in  solving  problems  left  unanswered. The  question  non-academic r e a l  i s , how w o u l d t h e g i f t e d life  t h r e a t which  elicits  perform  under  a  problem-solving  situations. The  p r e s e n t s t u d y was  characterized s o c i e t y which t h a t have security, few).  to  by  strives  highly  with  i n Israel, a  technological  to retain  be d e a l t  social  Thus,  a  conducted  and  i t s d e m o c r a c y . The a r e enormous  (the  country stressful problems economic,  i n t e g r a t i o n and e d u c a t i o n , t o mention b u t a  t h e r e i s an  urgent need f o r  a very  talented  8  l e a d e r s h i p , capable of performing w e l l and e f f i c i e n t l y  under  c o n d i t i o n s of g r e a t s t r e s s . Awareness of t h i s need has l e d t o the e s t a b l i s h m e n t s p e c i a l c l a s s e s f o r g i f t e d c h i l d r e n , s t a r t i n g i n the grade of  the  elementary  programs have  t o take  s c h o o l . The  r e s p o n s i b i l i t y at  years) f o r p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g with  and  of  a young  decision-making,  (18  starting  matters  these d e c i s i o n s a r e being made  s i t u a t i o n s of g r e a t s t r e s s t h a t in  in  age  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . T h e i r d e c i s i o n s may very o f t e n be death, and  later,  these  civic  l i f e and  service,  and  fourth  their  of  army  graduates  of  could give r i s e to  in  anxiety  any human b e i n g . F o r example: A s i t u a t i o n i n which an 18-  y e a r - o l d , engaged i n h i s compulsory  army s e r v i c e , i s being  a t t a c k e d by young c h i l d r e n throwing stones of a s i z e and i n such manners as t o be l i f e t h r e a t e n i n g . No communication can be  established  with  these  c o n f r o n t e d with the problem  children.  This  youngster  of how t o respond e f f e c t i v e l y i n  order t o p r o t e c t h i m s e l f and the other young s o l d i e r s his  under  command, without h u r t i n g the c h i l d r e n . For  of  is  t h i s reason alone, a study d i r e c t e d to the  a n x i e t y on r e a l  l i f e p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance  effects of the  g i f t e d i n I s r a e l i s both r e l e v a n t and u r g e n t l y needed.  9  The Problem The  essential  concerned i s  problem  whether  the  with which  presence  meaningful d i f f e r e n c e s i n the way real  life  of  this  study  anxiety  is  generates  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n deal  with  problems.  Whenever  an  individual  p s y c h o l o g i c a l disharmony s t r e s s f u l the  confronts  a  problem,  i s a l i k e l y consequence.  s i t u a t i o n , the  more urgent  The  the c a l l  more for  a  s o l u t i o n and the r e s t o r a t i o n of the balance r e - e s t a b l i s h e d . I t i s reasonable t o tends t o arouse and who  a n x i e t y i n people  who  the  presence  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the real l i f e  of  way  the need to  anxiety  is  from  different  the hope  special  areas  of  emphasis  understanding performance  the  programs  national  r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the way stronger  that  problems  should effect  many of will  is  the  become and  hence  comparisons  resolve crucial,  gifted  who  leaders  in  will  be  are handled and s o l v e d .  anxiety  be on  placed  between the  A on  problem-solving  of the most a b l e i n our s o c i e t y . The  p r o v i d e s some  what  noteworthy  attempt t o  therefore of  examine to  t h i s issue  life,  problems  (see: D e s c r i p t i o n  generates  gifted children  problems. Understanding  because t h e r e graduate  There i s  situation  are f a c i n g  must contend w i t h the consequences  of Terms: Anxiety) . extent  assume t h a t a s t r e s s f u l  anxiety  literature levels  of  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n and t h e i r n o n - g i f t e d p e e r s . The r e s e a r c h  in  g e n e r a l suggests t h a t g i f t e d c h i l d r e n have the same or lower l e v e l s of a n x i e t y when compared with t h e i r n o n - g i f t e d  peers  10  (Milgram,  1976;  Connell,  Reynolds  1985; a n d C h i n  The  and  Bradley,  L i Tzeng,  1983;  notion that gifted children  i n general  solvers than i s the general  population  1980;  Sternberg,  1984).  Perrone  However, t h e r e a n x i e t y on  the  life  Thus,  Male,  1981;  i ti s important in  the  of the  problem-solving  i n v e s t i g a t i o n be . p u r s u e d  supports  are better  a p p e a r s t o be no s t u d y  real  gifted children.  and  and  1981).  l i t e r a t u r e that deals with the g i f t e d  (Torrance,  Davis  order  problem-  non-gifted.  Davidson  on t h e i m p a c t  of  performance  of  that this  to  provide  line a  i n s i g h t i n t o t h e way i n w h i c h c u r r i c u l a o r s p e c i a l for in  the g i f t e d  should  be  d e s i g n e d . Such a s t u d y  a b e t t e r understanding  o f who a r e  and  of  deeper programs  may  result  the gifted that  will  s u c c e e d i n t h e s p e c i a l l y d e s i g n e d p r o g r a m s , a n d l a t e r become successful problem-solvers  i n real  life.  One may  t h a t t h e main c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s e x p l o r a t o r y e f f e c t of  a n x i e t y on  the  performance of  faced w i t h t h e problems of d a i l y As was m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r ,  reiterate  study  gifted  i s the  children  life.  t h e s p e c i a l programs d i r e c t e d  t o g i f t e d c h i l d r e n a r e many a n d v a r i e d . M o s t o f t h e p r o g r a m s emphasize  the  importance  avoidance of the  of  a  relaxed  t e n s i o n sometimes  Situations requiring gifted  students  atmosphere  occasioned t o produce  by  testing. solutions  even i n s i t u a t i o n s o f s t r e s s , such as w o r k i n g t o s t r i c t limits, not  being  fulfilled,  and  time  p e n a l i z e d a s a r e s u l t o f commitments t h a t were and t a k i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  f o rdecisions  made  11 etc.  have t o  be s t u d i e d and e v a l u a t e d .  One may hope  the data from t h i s study w i l l p r o v i d e a s t a r t i n g which t o search children  to  f o r e f f e c t i v e methods  meet  the  challenges  f r e q u e n t l y dangerous world. life  situations  should s t a r t  of  point  of p r e p a r i n g a  that from gifted  complicated  This preparation  t o cope  g r a d u a l l y i n the  and with  elementary  school.  Research Questions The  following  i n v e s t i g a t e more problem of  enable the r e s e a r c h e r  s p e c i f i c a l l y the  the e f f e c t  performance of g i f t e d each of  questions  of a n x i e t y  issues involved  i n the  on the problem  solving  students i n I s r a e l .  these q u e s t i o n s  to  i s rephrased  (In Chapter  as a  null  III  research  hypothesis). 1. I s  there a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the r e a l  life  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance of g i f t e d and n o n - g i f t e d groups? 2.  Is there  a significant difference  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance  by  induced  i n real  anxiety  life  and non-  induced a n x i e t y groups? 3.  I s there  problem-solving interaction A  a significant difference  performance  that  is  i n real  produced  by  life the  of g i f t e d n e s s and anxiety?  t a n g e n t i a l q u e s t i o n concerns  gender performance of g i f t e d :  the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  12 4.  Is there a s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n r e a l  problem-solving  performance of g i f t e d g i r l s  life  and g i f t e d  boys  when a n x i e t y i s i n d u c e d ?  Research Hypothesese 1. life  G i f t e d c h i l d r e n have a b e t t e r a b i l i t y  t o solve  real  problems compared w i t h n o n - g i f t e d c h i l d r e n o f t h e  same  age. Although  t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e f l e c t s many u n s o l v e d  concerning  the definition  assessment  of  a g r e e m e n t on  their  their  are considered  r e s o u r c e f u l , capable  performance,  seems t h a t t h e s e  to  be  clear  of applying  to find  i s a  (Clark,  and  the  general  1983; Howley,  quick  1983;). thinkers,  i n d u c t i o n and d e d u c t i o n  when t h e y  for  in  achievement.  are faced with  real  and t h e i r m o t i v a t i o n  more a l t e r n a t i v e s  given problem than t h e i r n o n - g i f t e d 2.  and  enable the g i f t e d c h i l d r e n  problems. Their resourcefulness e n a b l e them  there  high motivation  qualities  function effectively  children  1986; M a k e r , 1982; R e n s u l l i ,  t h e i r t h i n k i n g , and having It  gifted  characteristics  Howley and P e n d a r v i s , They  of  problems  as s o l u t i o n s  to life  should to  a  counterparts.  Anxiety decreases performance of r e a l  life  problem  solving. I t i sreasonable anxiety state  to  uses p a r t  assume t h a t a p e r s o n who i s i n a n of  h i s energy  t o cope  with h i s  a n x i e t y , and c a n n o t devote a l l h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l and resources  t o d e a l w i t h t h e p r o b l e m he i s f a c i n g .  mental  Therefore,  13 anxiety  should  decrease  performance  in  solving  life  problems. 3.  An  i n t e r a c t i o n may  e x i s t between g i f t e d n e s s  and  anxiety. No  evidence could  Speculations one  can  be  investigated  carefully,  and  be  confirmed here.  is  found f o r  based  o n l y by  The on  two  b)  of the  research  Bradley,  counterparts  literature:  1983) . I f t h e s e two  compared t o  different  results  as  performance under a n x i e t y 4.  There i s  gifted girls  far  as  and  non-gifted,  the f i n d i n g s r e p o r t e d  under  part  Reynolds  and  perhaps  consequently  produces  way  g i f t e d boys  anxiety.  and  anxiety. i n the  literature  (Perrone  tends to questions  e x i s t s a g e n d e r d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e way problems  in  then  g e n d e r d i f f e r e n c e s i n many a r e a s o f l i f e ,  life  compared  i s concerned.  a d i f f e r e n c e i n the  O ' T u e l , 1 9 8 9 ) , one  gifted  real-life-problem-solving  cope w i t h problems under  B a s e d on  1976;  very  a)  ( b a s e d on r e p o r t s  assumptions hold/  interacts with anxiety,  the  stated  assumptions:  Milgram,  giftedness  real  is  s u c h as  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n have l o w e r l e v e l s of a n x i e t y  to t h e i r non-gifted  1981;  conjecture.  study  question  c h i l d r e n are b e t t e r problem-solvers and  a  this  and  on  Male,  whethere  there  gifted children  solve  14  Description of Terms as Used in the Present Study Gifted children Gifted children referred to i n this  study,  are  Israeli  c h i l d r e n , who: a) w e r e recommended b y t h e i r t e a c h e r s  and e d u c a t i o n a l  as h i g h a c h i e v e r s a n d a s h i g h l y m o t i v a t e d b)  were  identified  administered  as  gifted  by  a  staff  s t u d e n t s , and battery  i n I s r a e l t o t h i r d grade students  of  tests  i n elementary  s c h o o l , and c) h a v e r e c e i v e d t h e i r p a r e n t s '  a g r e e m e n t t o be a s s i g n e d  to  special gifted classes.  Background information Interest started  programs f o r  i n the early seventies.  offered courses high school courses  i n special  i n mathematics  students.  The  and p h y s i c s t o young rationale for  are disrupted at the  m a n d a t o r y army s e r v i c e (boys f o r a minimum o f 2 y e a r s  Yakimovski  fruitful  years  and h i s  Israel  f o r a minimum  Aviv  bright  offering  these  Israeli  age o f 18  high  due t o t h e  of 3 years  and  of s e r v i c e ) .  Members o f t h e M a t h e m a t i c s f a c u l t y (Prof.  in  The U n i v e r s i t y o f T e l  was t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s t u d i e s o f e v e r y  school student  girls  gifted  group)  i n the University  argued t h a t  the  most  as f a r as mathematics i s concerned, a r e those  up t o t h e  age o f 30  Therefore,  t h e U n i v e r s i t y should encourage t h e b r i g h t e s t  develop  (for science, i n general, u n t i l  t h e i r t a l e n t and a v o i d d i s r u p t i o n o f t h e i r  35). to  studies.  15 The  outcome of  t h i s program  students and f o r the continued, having  was  country.  very  for  the  then the program  has  modifications during  the  Since  undergone many  encouraging  years. Parallel  to  the U n i v e r s i t y  M i n i s t r y of Education programs f o r  the  announced i t s  gifted  the  Israeli  commitment to  support  (Burg, 1984) .  programs were i n t r o d u c e d i n two where c l a s s e s  program,  for gifted  These  c i t i e s : T e l - A v i v and  c h i l d r e n were  children  institute  to  independent  research  The  identifying  and  testing  and a s s i g n s g i f t e d  students  (Szold I n s t i t u t e ) .  This I n s t i t u t e i d e n t i f i e s to the  Haifa,  established.  Department of Education has assigned the task of gifted  supported  4th grade  i n which  programs f o r  the g i f t e d  first  b e g i n . I d e a l l y , a l l the students i n the 3rd grade should tested for  identification.  c o n s t r a i n t s , only 10%  In p r a c t i c e ,  of t h i r d grade  due  to  A c c o r d i n g to the i n s t i t u t e ,  1%  group are d e f i n e d as g i f t e d c h i l d r e n Not a l l the g i f t e d participate in  students who  the s p e c i a l  those i d e n t i f i e d , and whose  economic  p u p i l s are chosen  t h e i r t e a c h e r s and s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l s to take the to 1.5%  by  tests.  from each  age  (Shafran, 1989) . have been  programs f o r  identified  the g i f t e d .  parents p r o v i d e t h e i r  are u l t i m a t e l y a s s i g n e d to g i f t e d  be  Only  consent,  classes.  In a d d i t i o n to the c l a s s e s i n T e l - A v i v and H a i f a , t h e r e are s e v e r a l enrichment c e n t e r s are l o c a t e d  centers  i n Holon,  for gifted children. Petach-Tikva, and  These  Hertzlia.  16 In  addition  enriched and  a  studies  few  Kibbutz  there  are  also  pull-out  programs  offering  i n Jerusalem, Tel-Hai, Kefar-Tavor,  other  centers  where  movement a r e a l s o  gifted children  included.  project f o runderprivileged  gifted  Shlomi,  from  An a d d i t i o n a l  the  special  c h i l d r e n was s t a r t e d  in  1985. It  is  hoped t h a t t h e  g i f t e d programs w i l l  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n p r o c e s s and  continue  t o develop  the  and g e n e r a t e  new  ideas  b a s e d on t h e k n o w l e d g e g a i n e d f r o m f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n  this  field.  Anxiety Anxiety  i s defined  a s an u n c o m f o r t a b l e e m o t i o n a l  c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t e n s i o n , w o r r y and subjective reactions  discomfort such  shakiness.  as  which  increased  Anxiety  is  apprehension.  accompanied  heartbeat,  i s an u n p l e a s a n t  by  It is  perspiration,  and  and c o - w o r k e r s Schier  emotion c o n s i s t i n g State  and  experience and i s  an  stimulus  e t a l , 1972) .  Spielberger of C a t t e l l  a  physical  i n d i v i d u a l response t o e i t h e r i n t e r n a l or e x t e r n a l (Spielberger  state  Anxiety.  of  (1963)  (1973) d e v e l o p e d t h e  i n describing  two c o n s t r u c t s :  Trait  anxiety  ideas as  Anxiety  an and  17  Trait Anxiety Trait  Anxiety r e p r e s e n t s  characteristic  l e v e l s of a n x i e t y .  individual differences  in  I t can be c o n s i d e r e d  as  the p e r s o n a l p o t e n t i a l f o r e x p e r i e n c i n g a n x i e t y . A  person with  a high  l e v e l of  T r a i t Anxiety  respond t o t h r e a t e n i n g s t i m u l i more q u i c k l y and with i n t e n s i t y than an i n d i v i d u a l with  will higher  low T r a i t A n x i e t y .  Such  an i n d i v i d u a l may, t h e r e f o r e , experience more f r e q u e n t l y the occurrence of the symptom of a n x i e t y . The l e v e l of T r a i t A n x i e t y  i s determined by the  experience of an i n d i v i d u a l i n a n x i e t y producing  past  situations,  and by h i s a b i l i t y t o manage such s i t u a t i o n s . In  this  study  Trait  Anxiety  was  measured  S p i e l b e r g e r ' s Hebrew v e r s i o n of the T r a i t Anxiety  by  Inventory  f o r C h i l d r e n (TAI) t r a n s l a t e d and v a l i d a t e d by Taichman Malink  and  (1984).  State Anxiety State A n x i e t y i s the  m a n i f e s t a t i o n of the a n x i e t y  an  i n d i v i d u a l experiences a t a given moment. In t h i s study, S p i e l b e r g e r s Hebrew v e r s i o n , t r a n s l a t e d 1  and v a l i d a t e d  by  A n x i e t y Inventory State A n x i e t y .  Taichman  and  f o r Children  Melnik (SAI) was  (1984),  of  used t o  State  measure  18  Induction of Anxiety This  term,  children.  refers to  of combining  that exist i n these  generating  E t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s make d r a s t i c  anxiety unacceptable. way  purposely  the l i v e s of  induction  of  attempted t o f i n d  school children.  are applied  substantial,  anxiety level.  study  in  s e v e r a l normal a n x i e t y - c a u s i n g  components  effect i s  Thus, t h i s  anxiety  yet  in  situations When a l l o f  simultaneously, acceptable  a  the  combined  terms  of the  A d e b r i e f i n g a t t h e end o f t h e s e s s i o n i s a  requirement. The  f o l l o w i n g a r e components o f a n x i e t y w h i c h were used  i n t h e i n d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y : 1. de 2.  D i f f e r e n t from u s u a l classroom Ploeg,  environment  (Henk M.  van  1984).  U n f a m i l i a r a d m i n i s t r a t o r of t e s t  M o r r i s and D a v i s ,  ( F u c h s a n d F u c h s , 1986;  1973).  3.  Test Anxiety.  4.  Personal r a m i f i c a t i o n s of experience. Speilberger,  (Zeidner,  1988). (Gaudry and  1971).  5. U n f a m i l i a r i t y o f p u r p o s e a n d c o n t e n t  of situations.  (Gaudry and S p i e l b e r g e r , 1971). 6. I n a b i l i t y f o r a d v a n c e p r e p a r a t i o n .  Manipulation of the combination c a u s e a n x i e t y was  manipulation.  o f s i t u a t i o n s supposed t o  p r a c t i c e d on t h e  c o n t r o l g r o u p s , on t h e o t h e r  ( P r y s t a v , 1980).  treatment  groups.  The  hand, d i d n o t e x p e r i e n c e  this  W h a t e v e r a n x i e t y was e x p e r i e n c e d  by means o f t h e S t a t e A n x i e t y I n v e n t o r y  (SAI).  was m e a s u r e d  19  Strangers Strangers are  c o n s i d e r e d to  unknown to the c h i l d r e n . the r o l e they f i l l e d  as  Haifa.  They  agreed  study.  (See:  to  were  a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of the t e s t s to  were supposed to generate i n psychology  a d u l t s who  By t h e i r sudden appearance and  groups t h a t were assigned to  students  be the  be the treatment  anxiety.  groups,  by the they  These a d u l t s were female  and c o u n s e l l i n g i n the U n i v e r s i t y p a r t i c i p a t e as  volunteers i n  of this  Methodology).  Real Life Problem-Solving For the purpose of t h i s study  Real-Life-Problem-Solving  i s d e f i n e d as: a m u l t i f a c e t e d process  i n v o l v i n g the  ability  to: a) r e c o g n i z e the i s s u e or i s s u e s to be d e a l t with, b) e l i c i t  r e l e v a n t and e f f e c t i v e  solution(s),  c) communicate the s o l u t i o n to others d) p r o v i d e suggestions how This a b i l i t y students on  was  the Real  to a v o i d such a problem.  measured by Life  and,  the performance of  Problem S o l v i n g  (RLPSSS) which i s d e s c r i b e d below.  Situation  the Set  20 Real-Life-Problem-Solving-Situations-Set (RLPSSS) A  s e t of  stimuli that represent  real  r e l a t i n g t o home,  family,  school, peers  prepared  this  study  for  life  dilemmas  and community  (see:  Chapter  was  I I I .  Instrumentations). This s e t comprises a s e l e c t i o n of s i t u a t i o n s that adapted from tests:  two N o r t h  'Purdue  (Feldhusen e t (TOPS)  Elementary Problem-Solving  a l , 1976),  Problem S o l v i n g Test  (1984)  of  Test'  (PEPSI)  Problem  Solving'  to  i n Hebrew, a n d  be t r a n s l a t e d  (see: Chapter I I I  o f g o i n g ahead  RLPSSS a n d basis to  a) t h e r e i s no a v a i l a b l e  Problem-Solving tests  had  culture  (see:  and 'Test  to the facts that:  Real-Life-  way  Real-Life-Problem-Solving  (Zachman e t a l , 1 9 8 4 ) . Due  Life  American  were  Methodology).  on  groups t h a t  (1977)  adapted t o  relevant and  the  study), the only  w i t h t h e s t u d y was  administer i t  a l l the  a s PEPSI  and  Pilot  b) t h e  Real  TOPS  Israeli  practical  t o prepare a s e t of  a one-time  and  participated  in  simultaneous the  study,  21 Performance Score Every r e l e v a n t d i f f e r e n t idea generated by each of  the  q u e s t i o n s i n the RLPSSS i s accorded one p o i n t . The t o t a l these p o i n t s , performance  over a l l the  situations, i s  s c o r e . The focus i s  different relevant  ideas,  the  subject's  d i r e c t e d t o the v a r i e t y  and does  not  of  concern  of  literary  style. The (see:  s c o r i n g process i n v o l v e s  judgement of f i v e  judges  Methodology).  Limitations And Constraints The f o l l o w i n g l i m i t a t i o n s and c o n s t r a i n t s apply to t h i s study: 1)  Accuracy i n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : The g i f t e d students  t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n have been i d e n t i f i e d and s e l e c t e d the I s r a e l i procedure. The essentially identified  those as  having  the  whom  the  potential  'test to  special classes, implemented.  the in  selection,  they  which d i f f e r e n t  There i s no guarantee  are  are  battery'  perform  s c h o l a s t i c a l l y w i t h i n the e x i s t i n g r e g u l a r school However, f o l l o w i n g  through  students s e l e c t e d as g i f t e d  children  well  curricula.  assigned  curricula  of  are  to  being  t h a t a l l those who  have  been s e l e c t e d r e a l l y "belong" i n these c l a s s e s , or t h a t  the  s e l e c t i o n process has  the  really gifted.  This  not f a i l e d  to i d e n t i f y  some of  s i t u a t i o n n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g , the  of s e l e c t i o n i s u n l i k e l y , a t  system  t h i s p o i n t , t o be changed  and  22 no other c h o i c e was r e a l i s t i c a l l y  a v a i l a b l e , as f a r as the  g i f t e d students' p o p u l a t i o n was concerned. 2)  Accessible g i f t e d population:  One should  mention  t h a t a comparison of s e v e r a l p a r a l l e l c l a s s e s from the  same  age and the same circumstances  most  r e l i a b l e data. students  students who  relevant  in were  as a p p l i e d  would not  c l a s s e s of  country.  i s operating applies  operates  process  very few  e x i s t i n the e n t i r e  such a c l a s s and  However,  would l i k e l y y i e l d the  different  curriculum,  the  same  gifted  identification  to p a r a l l e l  comparable i n  classes,  terms of  a l l the  criteria.  T h e r e f o r e , an a l t e r n a t i v e way of comparing of two  which  Consequently,  here and assigned  n e c e s s a r i l y be  gifted  Every c i t y i n  a different  ways.  i d e n t i f i e d by  the  matched groups  of g i f t e d  T h i s a l t e r n a t i v e suggested  c h i l d r e n was  under induced i t s regular  matched groups.  a n x i e t y , and the setting.  classes: fourth, f i f t h ,  This and  i n one elementary s c h o o l .  considered.  t h a t the whole p o p u l a t i o n of the  g i f t e d elementary school c h i l d r e n i n one c i t y p r o v i d e these two  performance  (Haifa)  would  One which w i l l  perform  other which w i l l perform  population consists  of  s i x t h grades which a r e  in  three  located  The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r u s i n g  these  c o n s e c u t i v e t h r e e c l a s s e s i s based on: a) The  Israeli  (Ortar and M o r i e l i , as one u n i t .  "Miltha"  Intelligence  Group-Tests"  1973) which c o n s i d e r s these three grades  23 b) Anxiety  Spielberger's Inventory  for  (1973) A n x i e t y  Scales: State  C h i l d r e n (STAIC) i n  which the  a r e b a s e d on d a t a c o l l e c t e d f r o m 4 t h 5 t h and s c h o o l c h i l d r e n as one 3)  Ensuring  testing staff: and  uniform  behaviour  6th  has  on t h e p a r t  t o d e p e n d h e a v i l y on p r e c i s e  of the t e s t i n g  e n u n c i a t i o n , and  staff  ( t e a c h e r s and  of clearly  complexion,  type  'strangers').  of v o i c e ,  other d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  p e r s o n a l i t y communicated s u b t l e i m p r e s s i o n s . the researcher t r i e d  In t h i s  choose s t r a n g e r s t h a t would c o n s t i t u t e a  female s e n i o r students present  strangers,  so  of  A l l the  i n psychology  homogenous  ' s t r a n g e r s ' were and  that  there  All  of  was  no  them a c t e d  young  education.  c l e a r i n s t r u c t i o n s to the teachers  improvisation.  respect  to:  g r o u p a s much a s p o s s i b l e .  b)  elementary  i n s t r u c t i o n s i n o r d e r t o ensure u n i f o r m i t y of  I n e v i t a b l y , physique,  a)  norms  unit.  u n i f o r m i t y of behaviour  One  Trait  room  for  according  and  the  individual to  written  instruction. 4) The  Differences  i n p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g f o r induced  problem of working  same t i m e  u n d e r t h e same c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,  f o r a l l the experimental  difficulties,  such  strangers  be  to  simultaneously  as  arranging  present  s e v e r a l rooms.  empty e x t r a c l a s s r o o m s . serve t h i s  at  purpose  were:  The a)  the The rooms the  groups, presented for same  a l l  anxiety: at  the  serious  teachers  time  and  and using  s c h o o l d i d not have t h a t were a v a i l a b l e computer  room,  b)  six to the  24 l i b r a r y , c) the t e a c h e r s ' s c i e n c e room,  and  g i v e n room with  f)  lounge, d) the  the bomb  s h e l t e r room.  i t s special setting  and  e f f e c t on the a n x i e t y of the c h i l d r e n . the problem was  the  Clearly,  atmosphere has  The  a s s i g n the experimental  a an  only s o l u t i o n to groups  randomly  5) E t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of a n x i e t y i n d u c t i o n :  Inducing  to these  to  a r t room, e)  a v a i l a b l e rooms.  anxiety i n  children  problems.  Therefore,  r e a l i t y of  the  r e s u l t i n any  obviously types  students'  emotion damage  this  study,  life  to any c h i l d  to  to t e s t  administered  by a  s t r a n g e r without  purpose and  time  limit.  reasonable  to  simultaneously  assume  an  writing in  Each  supposed to  to  ethical  were sought  anxiety-inducing  these  cause a n x i e t y . all  of  in  plan,  an u n f a m i l i a r  of  the not  room,  clearly specifying  one  that  would  An a c c e p t a b l e  design  situation related  s i t u a t i o n s was  and t h a t  procedures.  was  rise  of a n x i e t y t h a t were p a r t of daily  d e s i g n i n g the experimental used i n  can g i v e  the  manipulated  Thus, them  it  was  occurring  would g i v e r i s e to s i g n i f i c a n t a n x i e t y w i t h i n  the treatment groups. One students  should mention t h a t i t immediately at the end  i s c r u c i a l to d e b r i e f  of the experimental  the  session.  These remarks should d i s c l o s e the purpose of the study,  and  p o i n t out t h a t any t e s t r e s u l t s  the  w i l l have no e f f e c t on  future welfare  of the students who  study.  of the  Each  strangers  e t h i c a l i s s u e s and c a r r i e d out  have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n was  well  aware  of  the d e s i r e d d e b r i e f i n g .  the these By  25  t h i s step  and  by  f o l l o w i n g the  described  protocol,  the  c o n s t r a i n i n g e t h i c a l i s s u e s were acknowledged.  6)  Lack of a Real L i f e Problem S o l v i n g t e s t i n  Israel:  I t was not p o s s i b l e t o f i n d a R e a l - L i f e - P r o b l e m - S o l v i n g  Test  in  life  Hebrew  that  situations. prepare  would  Therefore,  an  deal  with  everyday  t h i s researcher  appropriate set  Israeli  was  required  of p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  to  situations.  I t was beyond the scope of t h i s t h e s i s t o develop,  validate  and  However,  s t a n d a r d i z e an  Israeli-Problem-Solving Test.  some r e l e v a n t  ' r e a l - l i f e ' problematic  identified in  two  Methodology).  The r e l e v a n t s i t u a t i o n s were a d j u s t e d t o t h i s  study  through  professional  American  a  pilot  s i t u a t i o n s could  problem-solving  study  and  with  tests  the  be (see  help  of  judges.  As a r e s u l t of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r l i m i t a t i o n , the r e s e a r c h design  had  to  be  adjusted.  problems of the RLPSSS, post t e s t  As t h i s  was the  to  i t was not p o s s i b l e  design f o r comparison.  experimental-run  suggest  Owing  The  standardization t o use a p r e -  simultaneous  appeared t o be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h i s  i s an e x p l o r a t o r y study,  onestudy.  a l b e i t one which  new approaches i n t h i s area of i n v e s t i g a t i o n , need  to  make  a tentative  beginning.  In  may there this  r e s p e c t , the r e s u l t s obtained through the l o c a l l y  developed  RLPSS s e t were  not without  however,  t h a t continued  exploration  merit.  It  in this f i e l d  i s hoped,  will result in  more r e f i n e d R e a l - L i f e - P r o b l e m - S o l v i n g - S i t u a t i o n s - T e s t .  a  26 7)  Language:  Finally,  Hebrew.  The t r a n s l a t i o n  comments  is  sometimes  differences. been l o s t .  Some  the of  study  the students'  complicated  of the l o c a l  This fact  was c a r r i e d  should  out i n  responses  owing  to  cultural  f l a v o r may t h e r e f o r e  a l s o be k e p t  and  have  i n mind.  Overview of The Present Study This deals  study  with  i s organized  the  into  immediate  five  concerns.  background, the purpose of the study general  p r o b l e m , and t h e r e s e a r c h  are d e s c r i b e d ,  and t h e l i m i t a t i o n s  with.  II  Chapter  chapters. It  questions.  areas  furnishes  a d e s c r i p t i o n of the population,  study.  instrumentation  The  analysis chapter.  research  and  data  Chapter  of t h e c o l l e c t e d study,  a  for  processing IV d e a l s w i t h  data.  further research.  are  the used  regarding  Chapter  used  in  h y p o t h e s e s , method also discussed  the results  i s followed There  the  in  this of this  and t h e a n a l y s i s a summary o f t h e  by c o n c l u s i o n s  are also  III  the subjects, the  procedures  Chapter V contains  implications.  review  the study.  plan, research  d i s c u s s i o n which  educational  and  The t e r m s  I  and c o n s t r a i n t s a r e d e a l t  the main  variables,  in  presents  and i t s r a t i o n a l e ,  includes the l i t e r a t u r e  of i n t e r e s t  Chapter  and  recommendations  27  CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE  Introduction The r o l e o f e d u c a t i o n  "should  center around t h e a b i l i t y  to solve problems, t h e k i n d of problem-solving the  that, r e q u i r e s  i n d i v i d u a l t o be a n i n d e p e n d e n t t h i n k e r a n d t o s t r i v e t o  achieve  h i s or  (Olton and  h e r own s o l u t i o n s  Crutchfield, cited  to  by H a r r i s  complex  problems."  and Blank,  1983,  p.130). The  issue  of  discussed,  and analyzed  The  of  focus  this  problem-solving f o r many y e a r s  study  has  been  studied,  a n d i n many  aspects.  i s t h e performance  of  gifted  c h i l d r e n when r e q u i r e d t o s o l v e p r o b l e m s u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s o f anxiety. This review of  of the l i t e r a t u r e addresses the  problem-solving:  definitions,  transfer of training,  gender  succeed which i n c l u d e s r e l a t i o n s h i p between operational  approaches  Studies which deal with general population description of  of  another  to  experience,  d i f f e r e n c e s and m o t i v a t i o n  t h e need stress  skills,  t o cope  and a n x i e t y  with  stress.  i s described  t h e measurement  of  children are reported  a n x i e t y and g i f t e d c h i l d r e n .  of studies  which  to The by  anxiety.  a n x i e t y and p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  line  issues  of the  followed deal  by with  28  Problem-Solving Problem-Solving: Definitions Dewey (1933) d e f i n e d  problem-solving as:  Problem: A s t a t e of doubt, h e s i t a t i o n , p e r p l e x i t y , mental d i f f i c u l t y i n which t h i n k i n g o r i g i n a t e s . S o l v i n g : an a c t o f s e a r c h i n g , h u n t i n g , i n q u i r i n g , t o f i n d m a t e r i a l t h a t w i l l r e s o l v e t h e doubt, s e t t l e and dispose of t h e p e r p l e x i t y (p.12). Blank's  (1982) d e f i n i t i o n i s :  "A p r o b l e m , by definition, exists whenever an individual encounters a purposeful situation which requires resolution b y h i m a n d f o r w h i c h he h a s no r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e s o l u t i o n a t hand" [p.13]. Wheatley  (1984) s u g g e s t e d t h a t  problem-solving i s  what  we do when we d o n ' t know w h a t t o d o . Feldhusen and T r e f f i n g e r  (1985) a s s e r t e d  that:  "Problem s o l v i n g i s the process of recognizing an obstacle, d i f f i c u l t y , or i n a b i l i t y t o act; thinking of possible solutions; and t e s t i n g or evaluating the s o l u t i o n s " [p.48].  Woods  (1988), d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  problem-solvers, concluded  between  successful  and  poor  that:  "Successful problem solvers feel a sense of d i s e q u i l i b r i u m and i d e n t i f y a need t o l e a r n something when t h e y e n c o u n t e r s o m e t h i n g t h a t d o e s n o t make s e n s e . P o o r l e a r n e r s do n o t " [ p . 2 4 3 ] .  29  Problem-Solving Skills What a r e  the  skills  learner,  d e v e l o p e d and  in  f o r him  order  Guilford  given c)  a)  and  Hoepfner,  or  perceiving  outcomes, e) producing Blank is  the  and  i n the  situation,.b)  the  thinking,  solver? there  are  problem-solving  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  classifying d)  for  objects  thinking  characteristics  or  of  of a  a  ideas,  alternate  goal,  and  f)  solutions.  (1982) s u g g e s t e d t h a t  end-product of the  successful  problem-solving  i n t e r a c t i o n o f knowledge,  ability  motivation. Sternberg  (1984)  distinguished  intelligent  p r o b l e m - s o l v e r s who  are  intelligent  problem-solvers  who  r e f l e c t i v e problem-solvers time  of  complete  several  relationships,  logical  i n t o h i s way  e f f e c t i v e problem  r a p i d l y of  listing  identified  (1971) c o n c l u d e d t h a t  involved  thinking  object  integrated  t o become an  number o f a b i l i t i e s process:  t h a t n e e d t o be  on  encoding  operations  the  t h a n do  the  Sternberg problem-solving  to  problem  to  (1985)  t i m e and utilizing  on  resources,  the  less  are  impulsive.  The  spend  relatively  more  facilitate  thinking  groups:  subsequent  skills  for  metacomponents,  knowledge a c q u i s i t i o n components.  recognizing  a problem, d e f i n i n g  a problem-solving monitoring  feedback r e g a r d i n g  a mental r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .  and  problem-solvers.  three  p e r f o r m a n c e components and  problem, d e c i d i n g  more  classified  into  Metacomponents i n c l u d e  the  reflective  tend  impulsive  between  the  the  procedure, a l l o c a t i n g  s o l u t i o n to the  solved  the  problem,  and  P e r f o r m a n c e components a r e  problem, forming used  to  30  execute  the  metacomponents  and  performance  components  vary  performance  components  include  deductive reasoning,  spatial  by  and  feedback.  discipline. inductive  are  Typical  and  reading.  used t o l e a r n  S e l e c t i v e encoding,  selective  s e l e c t i v e comparisons are t y p i c a l  The  reasoning,  visualization,  Knowledge a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e s s e s or procedures.  provide  concepts  combination,  knowledge  acquisition  skills.  and  Treffinger  (1986) a r g u e d t h a t  divergent  thinking  s u p p o r t i v e r a t h e r than The has  information  centered  These methods  b)  data  research  human  referred  theory", because products and  two  have been  from is  opposite or  i t  protocols  model as i t u s e d  to does  these  products.  a)  computer  (Simon,  1981).  a match  between  to solve a  problem  a  task.  This  "information-processing seek  only  of t h i n k i n g , but a l s o the p r o c e s s e s  generate  mutually  problem-solving  performing  as: not  are  methods  used t o p r o v i d e  subjects  convergent  competing.  major  think-aloud  s k i l l s p e r f o r m e d by a and  problem-solving  p r o c e s s i n g t h e o r y of  around  s i m u l a t i o n s and  in  the r o l e s of  to  examine  which  the  underlie  31 Problem-Solving: Experience Vygotsky  (1978)  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g . He problem-solving  pointed out the r o l e of experience stated that  activities  g r a d u a l l y come t o p e r f o r m early experience performance  children f i r s t  i n the these  presence  experience  of others/  then  f u n c t i o n s f o rthemselves.  of f a i l u r e can s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t t h e i r  on  problem-solving.  Children's  k n o w l e d g e o f t h e i r own c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s t h e i r f e e l i n g s of p e r s o n a l Simon a n d B a r e n f e l d solvers are able t o  in  An  later  objective  i s influenced  by  worth.  (1979) c o n c l u d e d  s t o r e i n memory  t h a t many  the paths  problem  to  solution  f o r many p r o b l e m s . When f a c i n g a p r o b l e m t h e y r e f e r t o  past  success  been  i n problem-solving  and t o h e u r i s t i c s t h a t have  l e a r n e d . I n t h i s way p a s t e x p e r i e n c e  h a s t o be r e p e a t e d  r e s t r u c t u r e d t o meet t h e c u r r e n t demands o f t h e new which i s c a l l i n g  of  problem  f o r solution.  This issue teaching  and  leads t o  problem-solving  the can  question of result  t r a i n i n g t o b e t t e r p e r f o r m a n c e on o t h e r  in  whether  the  transfer  of  problems.  Problem-Solving: Transfer of Training Different studies (1976, 1 9 7 7 ) , b y  conducted  H a r r i s and  M a r t i n a n d Shaw (1990)  Blank  by  Houtz and  (1983)  Feldhusen  and by  indicated that training  in  Cramond, problem-  s o l v i n g r e s u l t e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performance.  Houts  and  of  Feldhusen  problem-solving  (1976, training  1977)  examined  p r o g r a m . They  the  effects  d i v i d e d 240  a  fourth  32  graders  into 3  t i m e and took  groups:  games, b)  part  in  a)  training  training  regular  o n l y , and  class  significant effect for  p l u s rewards w i t h  free  c) c o n t r o l g r o u p  activities.  the experimental  There  groups,  who  was  a  where  the  t r a i n i n g - o n l y g r o u p p e r f o r m e d much b e t t e r t h a n t h e o t h e r s problem-solving  test.  The  researchers  ' t r a n s f e r t e s t ' which presented the t r a i n i n g .  In t h i s  test,  also administered  a  s i m i l a r problems to those  in  the  t r a i n i n g - o n l y group  performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than the H a r r i s and  Blank  deficits  Creative  in several  Problemabilities  f o r f i f t h - g r a d e s t u d e n t s . They u s e d t h e P r o d u c t i v e Program concluded Dacey,  (PTP)  materials,  (in  contrast to  1967,  cited  t r a i n i n g was ability  found.  o f t h e PTP  in "Our  (revised former  their  Whimbey, concern  for  understanding  f i n d i n g s by that  and  transfer  of  for  accuracy  real  problems  that expert  c a u s e s them  to  problem-solvers'  take great  care  the problem i n order to f a c i l i t a t e the  course  i s n o t e n o u g h , and  i n problem-solving throughout  occur.  the  [p.147].  (1980) a s s e r t e d  reinforced  and  Ripple  p a r t i c u l a r k i n d s of  t o s o l u t i o n . He  transfer to  1972),  strong support  of a p p r o p r i a t e procedures  be  Thinking  to t r a i n f o r t r a n s f e r of f l u e n c y i n  l i f e problems which transcend of s u b j e c t matter"  version,  paper),  study found  also  others.  (1983) u s e d B l a n k ' s  S o l v i n g Program t o determine  on  the  suggested  curriculum  choice that  that i t in  in  order  one  should for  33 Torrance Skills  learned  task are in  f o r one  considered  that  students  solving  tasks  According solving later. his  to  the  and  near,  can and  can  different  based  the  transfer  that  than  still  according  found  are  far.  experiments, problemproblems.  of  problem-  evident  a  to the occurs  problem-solving  i f one he  t o be  t o new  improvement  intermediate  similar  through  skills  was  is  conditions  on h i s  better transfer  t a s k s . However,  affect transfer.  task  skills  t r a n s f e r these  the  new  transfer i s considered  problem-solving,  problem-solving  t r a n s f e r r e d to a i f the  (1983) c l a i m e d ,  experiments,  larger  transfer.  improve t h e i r  and  Sternberg  n e a r and  However, i f t h e  h i s experiments  skills  far  (1986) a s s e r t e d ,  moves f r o m p r a c t i c e on  not  task  t o be  novel,  Sternberg  on  discussed  i t s underlying principles.  substantially  of  (1980)  year  results when to  s t a r t s with that context  one work small did  34  Problem-Solving: Strategies Parnes s o l v i n g : a)  (1967)  suggested  gathering  information  f o r m u l a t i n g a problem manipulation  isa  environment  about  f o r problemb)  generating ideas,  d)  ideas into a solution strategy,  e)  c)  the  of t h e "chosen i d e a s " .  Newell behavior  stages  "mess",  definition,  of the best  implementation  five  a n d Simon  (1972)  f u n c t i o n o f an demanding  individual abilities.  a  stated that  solution  and  the  that  p r o b l e m s . The  of problem-solving  cuts across a  system  subject's  large class begins  i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the problem. This  u n a t t a i n a b l e . The  task  that there i s a general  problem-solving process  may r e n d e r p r o b l e m - s o l u t i o n s  subject's  i n t e r a c t i o n between t h e  They c o n c l u d e d  process  a  as o b v i o u s ,  then responds  an  representation  obscure, by  with  of  o r perhaps  selecting  and  a p p l y i n g a p a r t i c u l a r p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g method, a method w h i c h bears  some r a t i o n a l  Newell  a n d Simon  relationship to  achieving a  solution.  (1972) s t a t e d t h a t :  a t a n y moment, t h e e x e c u t i o n o f t h e method may be h a l t e d . When a m e t h o d i s t e r m i n a t e d , t h r e e o p t i o n s a r e open t o t h e p r o b l e m - s o l v e r : a) a n o t h e r method may be a t t e m p t e d ; b) a d i f f e r e n t i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n may be s e l e c t e d a n d t h e p r o b l e m r e f o r m u l a t e d ; o r c) t h e a t t e m p t t o s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m may be a b a n d o n e d ( p . 8 8 ) . Adams (1976) c l a i m s : the n a t u r a l tendency i n p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g i s t o perceivew t h e f i r s t s o l u t i o n t h a t comes t o m i n d a n d r u n w i t h i t . The d i s a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s a p p r o a c h i s t h a t y o u may runw either o f fa c l i f f o r i n t o a worse problem than youw s t a r t e d w i t h . A b e t t e r s t r a t e g y i n s o l v i n g problemsw i s t o d e t e c t t h e m o s t a t t r a c t i v e p a t h f r o m many i d e a s w o r concepts (p.xi).  35  Feldhusen  a n d T r e f f i n g e r (1985) m e n t i o n e d f i v e  problems-solving which they r e l a t e d t o c r i t i c a l  steps i n  thinking:  a) r e c o g n i z i n g p r o b l e m s , b)  formulating  hypotheses,  c) g a t h e r i n g p e r t i n e n t f a c t s o f d a t a , d)  drawing  Khatena that  conclusions.  (1984) r e v i e w e d  included  Guilford, Torrance  the  Osborn, and  number o f  works  Gordon  de  t h e main p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g o f : Dewey,  and P r i n c e ,  Bono. A l l  steps involved  those  i n the  Wallas,  Osborn  models  Rossman,  and  Parnes,  models d i f f e r e d problem-solving  i n the process.  K h a t e n a i n t e g r a t e d them i n t o f o u r m a i n s t e p s : a) S e n s i n g a n d defining the  problem,  mechanism, and  b) P r e p a r a t i o n ,  c)  Processing  d) F i n d i n g a s o l u t i o n t o t h e p r o b l e m .  Problem-Solving: Gender Differences The  c e n t r a l two q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g  in problem-solving the sexes, in  gender d i f f e r e n c e s  a r e whether t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between  and i f t h e r e i s , i s i t a d i f f e r e n c e i n a b i l i t y o r  attitude. Gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g were examined  Maccoly  and J a c k l i n  more g l o b a l s t y l e  (1974).  They  stated that g i r l s  of problem-solving, while  boys l e a r n  solve  problems  analytically.  gifted  students'  s c o r e s on t h e G i f t e d S c r e e n i n g  (This  screening  Abilities,  form:  i s used o f t e n  O'Tuel  Structure as  of  (1989)  studied  a to 300  f o r m SOI-LA.  Intellect  an i n s t r u m e n t  learn  by  Learning  f o r screening  36  s t u d e n t s f o r programs  f o r the  gifted).  She  found  that  f e m a l e s p e r f o r m e d b e t t e r on v a r i o u s v e r b a l t a s k s , a n d  males  performed b e t t e r  dealt  on a  w i t h 4 t h , 7 t h , and study  was  the  figural subtests.  1 0 t h g r a d e s . The  continuing  use  This study  main q u e s t i o n o f  of  this  this  identification  i n s t r u m e n t w h i c h does n o t a d d r e s s e q u a l l y t h e s u b j e c t s b e i n g i d e n t i f i e d through i t . Cramer  (1989)  checked  stereotypes i n a study with  gifted  s t u d y f o c u s e d on a t t i t u d e s o f towards mathematics. stereotypical  the  thinking  differences  4 t h grade  gifted  The f i n d i n g  sex  and  students.  boys and g i f t e d  The girls  suggested t h a t there i s  regarding  the  lower  ability  a of  females i n mathematics. P e r r o n e and Male their  accomplishments  efforts, while g i r l s  (1981) to  c l a i m e d t h a t boys  be a r e s u l t  of t h e i r  attributed their  considered ability  success t o  and  external  c i r c u m s t a n c e s , such as good l u c k , easy a s s i g n m e n t , t e a c h e r s ' favorite  etc.  They a l s o  discussed  syndrome i n  some f e m a l e s .  these g i r l s  felt  n e g a t i v e l y on t h e i r in  that  Perrone  the "fear and Male  high achievements  femininity.  of  success"  claimed would  This feeling  that  reflect  was n o t  found  males. Another  with gifted  s t u d y conducted by children  in  r e g a r d i n g a t t i t u d e s towards  the  Karnes  and D ' l l i o  4th, 5th  6th  grades,  leadership, concluded that  r e s p o n s e s o f t h e b o y s w e r e more t r a d i t i o n a l were t h o s e o f t h e g i r l s .  and  (1989)  than  the  37  Bell  (1989)  f o c u s e d on t h e g i f t e d g i r l s '  dilemmas, which  may  entitled  that  REACH  block was  their designed  b a r r i e r s t o achievement, she Some o f t h e S i l e n t vs Bell,  success.  In  a  P a s s i v e vs  explore  internal  s o c i e t y communicates double  were: Smart v s  Aggressive.  3-6)  project  interviewed the g i f t e d  dilemmas she d i s c u s s e d  Bragging,  to  (grades  girls. Social,  According  message t o g i f t e d  to  girls:  on t h e one h a n d i t e x p e c t s them t o a c h i e v e a c a d e m i c a l l y w i t h h i g h s t a n d a r d s , a n d on  t h e o t h e r hand,  pursue  feminine  the  traditional  the g i f t e d g i r l  i t expects  role.  Therefore,  them  to  whatever  does, she cannot w i n .  Giftedness Giftedness i s a b i o l o g i c a l l y rooted concept, a labelw f o r h i g h l e v e l o f i n t e l l i g e n c e t h a t r e s u l t s from thew advanced and a c c e l e r a t e d i n t e g r a t i o n of functionsw w i t h i n t h e b r a i n , i n c l u d i n g p h y s i c a l s e n s i n g , emotions, c o g n i t i o n and i n t u i t i o n . Such advanced and a c c e l e r a t e d w f u n c t i o n may be e x p r e s s e d t h r o u g h a b i l i t i e s such asw those involved i n cognition, creativity, academicw a p t i t u d e , l e a d e r s h i p o r v i s u a l and p e r f o r m i n g artsw ( C l a r k , 1983, p . 6 ) .  T h e r e a r e many which  additional  1978),  insight  style  other d e f i n i t i o n s aspects  such  ( S t e r n b e r g and  as  of 'giftedness', i n motivation  Davidson,  1986) a n d  ( S h o r e a n d D o v e r , 1987) a r e a d d r e s s e d .  t h a t seems  to  be m o s t  relevant  to the  discussion  l i f e problem  s o l v i n g was  by Tennenbaum  He r e f e r r e d  giftedness  c h i l d r e n who a r e p r o d u c e r s  learning  The d e f i n i t i o n  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n and r e a l (1991).  (Renzulli,  about  proposed to  those  o f new i d e a s , n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t h e  38 fast learners.  In f a c i n g r e a l l i f e problems one has t o come  out with new ideas r e l e v a n t to the s p e c i f i c  situation.  Gifted children: Problem-Solving Gallagher  (1975) d i s c u s s e d the need of problem  solving  programs f o r the g i f t e d c h i l d r e n i n order t o c h a l l e n g e t h e i r cognitive  ability.  R o s e n f i e l d and Houtz p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g of  (1977) compared  non-gifted children  scores on the  with those  g i f t e d and concluded t h a t g i f t e d s u b j e c t s were  of the  approximately  two years ahead of the n o n - g i f t e d . They found t h a t s o l v i n g s k i l l s grew  s t e a d i l y from grade  problem-  two through  grade  ( c i t e d by Shore and Dover,  1987)  six. Chatman and W i l l i f o r d  designed r e s e a r c h t o determine  whether f o u r t h grade  students used a p a r t i c u l a r s t r a t e g y i n t h e i r activities.  and  use  problems.SNone  verbalize  their  Davidson  of  of  thought  reported using c e r t a i n  are  incoding,  b)  the  strategies  while  students  could  gifted  Only  few  students  (1984) d i s c u s s e d i n s i g h t They proposed  psychological  selective  comparison which a r e  to  strategies.  and Sternberg  three  cognitive  processes.  i n concern with g i f t e d n e s s . there  problem-solving  These authors used an u n s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w  assess awareness solving  gifted  a subtheory  processes:  combination,  r e f e r r e d t o as  skills  and  that  a)  selective  c)  selective  " i n s i g h t s " when  c l u e s a r e encoded, combined or compared i n non standard  basic new  39 ways. T h e i r of g i f t e d  theory  and  was  tested  non-gifted  program, t h a t  trainable.  Shore  and  problem  and  that gifted  solving  insight  students  nongifted  and  (grades  Shaw 6th,  7th  the  second  received  additional  transfer strategies infused  c o n t r o l group exercises  group  students  tasks  of p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g ,  third  had  transfer  the  Dover's  and  6th  in  who  training  8th)  received the  logic,  i n which in  their  same  the  of  Creative CPS  training  training  with  the  third  in  various  analogical  skills.  a p p l i e d the  n e x t was  in  (CPST), and  and  groups  traditional  CPST s u b j e c t s  lowest percentage of  their  on  mentioned 5th  which r e c e i v e d  r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t the  percentage of  based  somewhat  and  training,  The  grades  are  (1990) t r a i n e d t h r e e  One  memory t a s k s ,  6th  outperformed nongifted  (CPS).  the  and  skills  (1987)  Problem-Solving  was  5th  skills.  Cramond, M a r t i n gifted  the Dover  c o m p a r i s o n between g i f t e d concluded  4th,  c h i l d r e n . They c o n c l u d e d ,  a training  he  with  had  the  highest  s t r a t e g i e s on  new  group, w h i l e  the  CPS  students  who  were a b l e  to another problem-solving  to  task.  Giftedness: Motivation and Problem-Solving Galton effort later  and  (1962) c o n s i d e r e d  talent.  logic  was  carried  as  a quality  out  many  of  years  by R e n z u l l i . Renzulli  his  This  giftedness  (1978) i n c l u d e d  definition  commitment'  of  that  the  g i f t e d n e s s . He is  shown  component o f m o t i v a t i o n r e f e r r e d to by:  a)  i t as  persistence  in  'task in  40  accomplishment and  c)  drive  self  of g o a l s ,  confidence,  to achieve,  distinguished  and  from  Whitmore  freedom  of  talent  their  motivation  and  persons  developed  no  one  not  between t h e by  their and  ignores  showing  more  effort  are  pre-requisites.  intellectually attitude,  t h e way  that  enable higher  distress,  (1980) p r e s e n t e d  gifted  and  talented  a personalized  recognizes  that but  able  their  depth  i n which  they  the  combination  achievement  willing  i n the b e l i e f and  that Male  individual  from  to  than  of just  a new  that  invite  a certain  order w i l l  a motive  to  succeed  are  amount  following  t o be  their uniting  productive.  of  A t k i n s o n and  and  the motive  Feather to  e q u a l l y p o w e r f u l . Persons likely  to  of  created.  t h e common d e n o m i n a t o r  to succeed but  be  concluded,  the c l a i m  has  may  reinforced  are d i f f e r e n t  who  tradition  This  the motive  one  person  t h e i r m o t i v a t i o n t o know and  (1966) t h a t  as  the  Such a  them a l l was finding  image o f  life.  accept  (1981)  study of eminent p e o p l e ,  a composite  wisdom a b o u t  departing  is  Perrone  by  by  are  t a l e n t w i t h o u t m o t i v a t i o n and v i c e v e r s a .  productive,  failure  feelings,  "Productive persons  development,  enthusiasm,  talent  Torrance  stress  goals,  t o s t u d y any s u b j e c t . However,  having  inferiority  t h a t m o t i v a t i o n and  the h i g h a c h i e v i n g g i f t e d  strive  of d i v e r s e  [p.182].  (1985) d i s t i n g u i s h e d  of i n t e r e s t ,  from  eagerness.  (1980) s t a t e d  concomitants  and  integration  less productive  of t h e s e q u a l i t i e s "  Chang  b)  take r i s k s  when  avoid driven they  41  perceive that there  i s a reasonable  chance o f  succeeding.  Persons m o t i v a t e d by a f e a r o f f a i l u r e a r e u n l i k e l y t o risks;  they  succeed  prefer  tasks  i n which  they  are  take  certain  to  or a r e expected not t o f a i l .  Milgram and f a i l u r e  (1976) a l s o  avoidance  s u c c e s s f u l outcomes  emphasized t h a t success  are d i f f e r e n t motives versus  The  fear of f a i l u r e  "effecting  averting failure  different motivational expectancies" and  striving  outcomes  are  f o r success  are  [p.192].  the striving  both c h a r a c t e r i z e d by c o p i n g w i t h s t r e s s and a n x i e t y .  What  t h e n i s meant by s t r e s s and a n x i e t y ?  Anxiety Stress and Anxiety T h e r e i s no a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h e t e r m i n o l o g y t o u s e when referring defense, 1966;  to  stress.  Anxiety,  f e a r , and t h r e a t a r e used  Schafer,  1978;  conflict,  interchangeably (Lazarus,  S p i e l b e r g e r , 1972).  u s e d a n d t h e many d e f i n i t i o n s  frustration,  The  terminology  o f s t r e s s may w e l l be s o u r c e s  of c o n f u s i o n . Torrance (1979), S e l y e agreed  ( 1 9 6 5 ) , Cox ( 1 9 7 8 ) , S c h a f e r (1983), and  t h a t c e r t a i n amount  Thorensen and  (1978),  Antonovsky  Eagleston  of s t r e s s improves  (1983)  performance,  w h i l e i n t e n s e s t r e s s may r e s u l t i n s e r i o u s d e t e r i o r a t i o n  of  performance. Trumbull and a n x i e t y  (1976) v i e w e d i n terms  of  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e end  r e s u l t s of  stress  stress.  The  42 individual's perception his  or her  1972,  of  the  stress  s u b s e q u e n t r e s p o n s e may  be  is called  threat,  and  anxiety  (Spielberger,  1976). Spielberger  theory  (1972)  developed h i s  which i s concerned  State-Trait  Anxiety  with:  C l a r i f y i n g t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f A - S t a t e and A - T r a i t aswpsychological c o n s t r u c t s , and w i t h s p e c i f y i n g t h e w c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s t r e s s f u l s t i m u l u s conditions whichwevoke d i f f e r e n t i a l l e v e l s o f A - S t a t e i n p e r s o n s w h o w d i f f e r i n A - T r a i t (p. 4 2 ) . Spielberger transitory  emotional  organism t h a t  varies  [p.39],  to  and  individual  and  state  Trait  and  anxiety  Ruebush,  (cited  or  State  Anxiety i n anxiety  Kogan  (1965)  by:  Sarason,  Anxiety  condition  i n i n t e n s i t y and  differences  Wallach children's  r e f e r r e d to  as:  of  as: the  f l u c t u a t e s over "relatively  proneness" reviewed the Davidson,  "a human time" stable  [p.39]. literature  Lighthall,  i n t h e i r b o o k ) . They p o i n t e d  out  on  Waite that  t h e m a j o r i t y o f s p e c i f i c f e a r s r e p o r t e d by c h i l d r e n w h a v e l i t t l e o r no b a s i s i n r e a l i t y . t h e s e s p e c i f i c f e a r s seem t o s e r v e as f o c a l p o i n t s o r s c r e e n s f o r w a n x i e t y a b o u t s i t u a t i o n s , i m p u l s e s , and c o n f l i c t s w w h i c h p o s s e s s extremely dangerous i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e w c h i l d ' s s e c u r i t y (p.190).  43  Anxiety: Operational Approaches Two o p e r a t i o n a l variable  i n children are described  a)  The C h i l d r e n ' s  was b a s i c a l l y adults.  derived  Castaneda,  items t h a t  scale  Manifest  Anxiety  from T a y l o r ' s  to  Scale:  anxiety-  this  (1953) a n x i e t y  be a p p r o p r i a t e  was s a i d  the  below:  P a l e r m o and McCandess  seemed  Children's level  approaches concerning  scale f o r  (1956) s e l e c t e d t h e for  t o measure  scale  children.  This  the c h i l d ' s  general  f o r Children  (GASC):  of anxiety. b)  The G e n e r a l  Anxiety  Scale  d e r i v e d by S a r a s o n e t a l . ( 1 9 6 0 ) . The i t e m s s e l e c t e d i n t h i s scale  are  children's Kogan,  compatible anxiety.  Freud  1965) d e f i n e d  basically present.  might e l i c i t  with  content  (1960) d e v e l o p e d  (cited  conception in  reflected  as s i g h t  addition to Test  this  of  Wallach  and  i s p e r c e i v e d as  p h y s i o l o g i c a l concomitants  such  also a  Freudian  as a s t a t e t h a t  o f GASC  anxiety,  absence, e t c . In  the (1936)  anxiety  unpleasant, Item  with  often  situations  of  blood,  s c a l e Sarason  that  parental et a l .  Anxiety  Scale  for  Children  (1965) i n  their  studies  (TASC). Wallach  and  Sarason's General ( T A S C ) . They  might g e t h u r t that  Anxiety  changed  person to f i r s t  Kogan  person  (GASC)  and T e s t  the interrogative ( f o r example,  Anxiety  form  some i t e m s i n o r d e r  scales second  "Do y o u w o r r y t h a t y o u  i n some a c c i d e n t ? " was r e p h r a s e d  I might g e t hurt  from  used  a s : " I worry  i n some a c c i d e n t " ) . They a l s o  to minimize redundancies  omitted  i n content.  44  This Anxiety and  modification  scales  (GASC  and  validated in Israel  both  scales  of  General  TASC) was (Ortar,  i n c l u d i n g item  reliabilities,  the  The compared  (Milgram, translated  children  1976)  in  Hebrew  c o r r e l a t i o n s and  of  split-half  satisfactory results including 0.76  and  0.82,  study  that  1976). s c a l e s were  l e v e l s of a n x i e t y  (Milgram,  Test  translated into  Kuder-Richardson c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s of respectively  and  1973). I n t e r n a l a n a l y s e s  score  yielded highly  Anxiety  of g i f t e d  Israel.  i n elementary school  compared w i t h n o n - g i f t e d  used  in a  c h i l d r e n vs  Milgram  found  non-gifted  that  have a l o w e r l e v e l  c h i l d r e n of the  same  gifted  of  anxiety  age.  Anxiety: Problem-solving The period  issue  of t h r e e  1 9 6 5 ; ) . The anxiety of the  of c h i l d r e n ' s a n x i e t y  on  decades.  literature the  irrelevant  studies (1969)  the  problem-solver.  out  with  children than  and  engaged  1960;  studies  W a l l a c h and on  the  performance of  presented that  by  a  Kogan,  influence  of  c h i l d r e n . Some  below.  anxiety  interacts  to produce a d i f f i c u l t  Research  over  Nottelman  with  situation  for  (1975),  carried  grades, concluded that h i g h l y  anxious  s i g n i f i c a n t l y more  in off-task  behaviors  l e s s anxious c h i l d r e n . Gross  performed grade  5th  are found  information  4th  provides  problem-solving  relevant West  (Sarason,  i s dealt with  (1984)  in a  children,  reported  on  two  p r i v a t e elementary investigating  experiments  school  with  relationships  2nd  that and  among  he 6th  state  45 anxiety,  memory  processes,  problem-solving  tasks.  performance d e f i c i t Schill low  anxious  and  found  subjects t h a t the  direct  drugs,  support  as  sex  the  as  of  and  functioning  i f male,  resorted  comfort.  She  information  on  be  to take  of  life  problems  facilitating  modified  stressed  with  stopped  disruptive effects.  effects  little  anxiety  effects presented  t h e ways i n  and  of a  which  advantage eliminate  of its  effects.  Zeidner  e t a l . (1988) d e a l t  Israeli  fifth  improve  students'  students'  the  on  subjects,  dealt  specific  and,  a source  of  anxious  subjects  others  that  behaviors  high  to analyze  of  provide  facilitating  of  was  h i g h l y anxious  environments can  disruptive  test  trying  (1970) d i s c u s s e d  p a r a d i g m t h a t can  the  those  performance  state-anxiety.  coping  anxious  a c t i o n . The  as w e l l  learning  with low  a l c o h o l or  Sieber anxiety  conclusion  (1984) compared t h e  well,@@sought the to  His  children's  r e s u l t e d from high  s t r e s s p r i m a r i l y by taking  and  and  sixth  graders.  test  coping  with They skills.  the  anxiety  of  t r a i n e d teachers  to  As  p e r f o r m a n c e i m p r o v e d . However, t h e  anxiety  scores  was  test  a  result  improvement  the on  negligibly affected.  Anxiety: gifted vs. non-gifted children The  comparison  children  is central  field  of a n x i e t y to a b a s i c  of g i f t e d c h i l d r e n .  level  of g i f t e d  vs  non-gifted  controversial issue in  the  46  There  are  p a r t i a l l y by experience".  two d i f f e r e n t  research  and  views t h a t  p a r t i a l l y by  One p o i n t o f v i e w  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n have h i g h e r  are  supported  o p i n i o n "based  on  emphasizes t h e f a c t t h a t t h e  a n x i e t y compared w i t h t h e  g i f t e d . @This v i e w was e x p r e s s e d  by D i r k e s  (1983) who  non-  stated:  t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n of g i f t e d n e s s i s f e r t i l e ground f o r w a n x i e t y c a n n o t be d e n i e d . . . s i n c e t h e a b i l i t i e s o f t h e w g i f t e d a r e o u t o f s t e p w i t h age p e e r s a n d o f t e n surpasswtheir e l d e r s , they upset customary r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d w i n v i t e ambiguous e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r performance...Thewanxiety t h a t r e s u l t s i s p r o p o r t i o n a l to t h e support o r w r e j e c t i o n t h a t they experience i n response t o theirwuniqueness and i n i t i a t i v e (p.68). This researchers, and  others  view,  however,  as M i l g r a m who f o u n d  was n o t  (1976),  published  that gifted  relevant  However, i t s h o u l d  not  research The  literature  i s presented  that the  concerning  this  expressions  of  of  below.  t o p i c of  gifted  T h e r e i s much i s s u e , and opinion,  vagueness  many o f  not  the  based  on  emphasize t h e f a c t  that  at a l l . first  l i n e of research w i l l  gifted children  h a v e more  than non-gifted  children. Clark  t h a t a t ages 6 non-gifted education  less  l e v e l o f a n x i e t y i s v e r y g e n e r a l , and has  in the l i t e r a t u r e are  (1983),  children exhibited  y i e l d e d a comprehensive theory.  conclusions  other  A s u b s t a n t i a l sample  be m e n t i o n e d  c h i l d r e n and t h e i r  by  R e y n o l d s and B r a d l e y  a n x i e t y compared w i t h n o n - g i f t e d . the  supported  f e a r s and  - 10, g i f t e d  counterparts, and about  a r e more  (1985)  found  c h i l d r e n , compared w i t h  their  were  and Hankins  pessimistic  more  the p o l i t i c a l  worried  situation.  about  their  I t should  be  47 mentioned t h a t  the comparison  a n s w e r s t o 19 q u e s t i o n s characterizing to  was b a s e d  regarding  subjects'  t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l concerns  intellectually gifted  the questionnaire  on t h e  c h i l d r e n . The  were a n a l y z e d  and  the  answers  consequences  presented. Galbraith  (1985) i n t e r v i e w e d g i f t e d  t h a t 80% o f t h e with threats and  of nuclear  war,@@international  c h i l d r e n ' s c o n c e r n s were h e l p l e s s n e s s . They f e l t  being  gifted  and  e x p e c t e d them t o  that  about w o r l d them.  strong feeling  parents,  teachers felt  c a n do i n l i f e ,  These f i n d i n g s  children  support  George and  experience  them a b o u t  and  friends  overwhelmed by t h e  and they  also  pessimism while worrying  previous  r e p o r t s by  Gallagher  (1978,  feeling  about  of what  worried  p r o b l e m s , a n d f e l t h e l p l e s s t o do a n y t h i n g  (1976, I s r a e l ) a n d gifted  these  one e x p l a i n e d t o them  b e p e r f e c t . They  number o f t h i n g s t h e y  concerned  to Galbraith,  accompanied by t h a t no  found  relationships  i s a l l about, t h a t k i d s o f t e n teased  smart,  and  i n t e r v i e w e d g i f t e d c h i l d r e n were  g l o b a l economic problems. A c c o r d i n g  being  students  of  about Landau  USA)@@that  helplessness  t h e i r f u t u r e and t h e  and  future  of t h e w o r l d . Roeper  (1982),  based  on h e r b r o a d e x p e r i e n c e  with  g i f t e d c h i l d r e n , mentioned t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and circumstances  that might account  g i f t e d : The p e r f e c t i o n i s t , the c o m p e t i t i o n ,  f o r these  the child/adult,  the exception,  feelings of the the winner  of  t h e s e l f c r i t i c and t h e w e l l  48 integrated child.  All  those  characteristics  may  involve  anxiety. A study compared  French  c l a s s e s on Anxiety  carried  a n x i e t y and  that gifted  i n Canada by  immersion  Inventory  highest  out  gifted  (1987),  classes  self-concepts  which  with  (using the  F o r C h i l d r e n as an  students,  Forsyth  regular  State-Trait  a n x i e t y measure),  particularly girls,  found  demonstrated  the  anxiety.  The students (1989).  issue  of i d e n t i f y i n g  i s discussed Their  by  (55.7%),  from l a c k of death/disease  the  s p e c i f i c f e a r s of  study  findings indicated  f e a r s mentioned violence  i n the  the  by  social  g i f t e d were:  life  (40%).  D e r e v e n s k y and  t h a t the  miscellaneous, to  common  n u c l e a r war  which  study  Coleman  f o u r most  included  g e t t i n g pregnant  This  gifted  was  also  (58.6%), anything  (47.1%),  and  conducted  in  Canada. The  line  of r e s e a r c h  which supports  the  opposing  a r g u m e n t t h a t g i f t e d c h i l d r e n h a v e more s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e a lower l e v e l of a n x i e t y t h a n t h e i r n o n - g i f t e d i s presented  counterparts  below.  R e y n o l d s and Manifest  and  Anxiety  M c C a n d l e s s , 1956)  Bradley Scale  and  (1983)  (CMAS;  administered  r e v i s e d the  Casteneda,  Palermo  (second grade t o t w e l f t h grade).  the g i f t e d  sample  They f o u n d  c h i l d r e n ) d i s p l a y e d a lower l e v e l  a n x i e t y than the n o n - g i f t e d  sample  and  i t to groups of g i f t e d  non-gifted  (465  Children's  (329  children).  vs  that of  49 Scholwinski Children's high  IQ  Manifest  variables  to  level  Scale lower  vs  in their  non-gifted,  about t h e i r  Several (Republic the  interesting  Wu-Tien  level  of  He  peers  to had  t h a t the  more s t a b l e , f e l t  anxious  i n general  Chig  Lin  of  in  Chinese  the  and  used a  (General Test  Chinese  6th  report  out  an  less  students  special  in  gifted  of Test  compared  the  and  5th  classes from  in special  more c o n f i d e n t  Taiwan  the  4th  withdrawn  gifted  and  adaptation  c h i l d r e n i n 3rd,  with  regular  c l a s s e s were  and  secure  and  situations.  total  Sarason's General  C h i l d r e n GASCC and (TASCC), and  life  Davis  [p.134].  (TASCC). He  not  all  challenging tasks,  (1981) compared g i f t e d w i t h  g r a d e s . He  adaptation  gifted  who  reported  emotionally  scales  611  were a s s i g n e d  gifted  5th  5th  "gifted  (1981) u s e d  anxiety  and  g r o u p on  4th,  s t u d i e s were c a r r i e d  f o r Chinese C h i l d r e n  Hai  with  problems"  Scale  less  IQ  This  factor analysis.  on  Anxiety  classes.  high  found t h a t  solve d i f f i c u l t  that  of a n x i e t y .  (GASC) f o r C h i n e s e c h i l d r e n (GASCC) and  g r a d e s who  Revised  school performance than average  of C h i n a ) .  Sarason  their  levels  study  a g r e a t e r w i l l i n g n e s s to take independently  the  (RCMAS), f o u n d a g a i n  c h a r a c t e r i z e d the  (1985),  grade g i f t e d  and  Anxiety  (1985), w i t h  t h a t emerged t h r o u g h t h e i r  Connell  anxiety  Reynolds  children exhibited  lower a n x i e t y  and  and  of  233  Anxiety  Anxiety  Anxiety  Scale  Children's  non-gifted  children and  and  4th an  Test  Anxiety  for  Chinese  f o r Chinese  Children  Scale  Manifest  Anxiety  Scale  50 (CCMAS) an a d a p t a t i o n o f  (CMAS). No s i g n i f i c a n t  was d e t e c t e d between t h e 2 g r o u p s  on a l l 3 a n x i e t y s c a l e s .  Wen C h i L i u (1981) compared with  average  pupils  from  children, 1 s t grade  (TASCC) was  gifted  using a t o t a l  of  t o 3rd grade.  used.  In t h i s  difference  w i t h IQ above 100 p r i m a r y  school  The T e s t A n x i e t y  study,  too,  no  146  scale  significant  d i f f e r e n c e was f o u n d between t h e 2 g r o u p s . Chin-Li TASCC s c a l e s gifted total  Tzeng  et a l  Chinese c h i l d r e n  at  subjects.  for  the  scores  2 groups  a  t h e GASCC  of g i f t e d  t h e 4 t h and  Here a l s o ,  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e that  used  and compared a n x i e t y l e v e l s  o f 147  noted  (1981) a l s o  non-  using  a  significant  was r e p o r t e d ,  on a n x i e t y  and  5th grades lack, o f  and  but i t  were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  was  lower  boys than f o r g i r l s . Milgram  Anxiety level  (1976) r e p o r t e d t h a t  Scale,  Israeli  gifted  o f a n x i e t y a s compared  were f o u n d t o have a l o w e r Gifted  girls  girls,  w h i l e no s i g n i f i c a n t  gifted  and n o n - g i f t e d b o y s .  girls  among  significance. were a l s o and b o y s that with  were f o u n d t o  gifted  similar. less  were  level  be l e s s  anxious than  lower boys girls.  non-gifted  d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d  between  The d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n b o y s and did  reports  anxious than g i r l s . age,  have a  of a n x i e t y than d i d  (the  not  on t h e  G i f t e d were l e s s  increasing  found t o  General  w i t h t h e n o n - g i f t e d , and  children  Milgram's  according t o the  reach  statistical  Test Anxiety  anxious than  In a d d i t i o n , s t u d y was  Scale  non-gifted  i t was  conducted  found with  grades  4-8), boys e x p r e s s e d  less  anxiety  and g i r l s  reported  more. Roome reducing  and Romney  anxiety  biofeedback  (1985)  by i n d u c i n g  and  muscle  t o w a r d s more i n t e r n a l  They  children  in  relaxation influenced  locus  found the  of that  subject  o f c o n t r o l when compared w i t h there  argued a g a i n s t general  the p o s s i b i l i t y  r e l a x a t i o n . They  n o n - t r e a t m e n t g r o u p . However, anxiety.  explored  are  was  no change  the s u p p o s i t i o n  more  anxious  in  that  than  a  trait gifted  non-gifted  children. Many o f t h e s e measured a n x i e t y ,  s t u d i e s were w h i c h may  be s u b j e c t  Some s t u d i e s t h a t t r i e d however,  the  compared  elementary g i f t e d  criticized  to avoid  same c o n c l u s i o n .  fewer  by  their  students  teachers  behavioural  to  t h i s problem  reached,  Cullinan  non-gifted  (1984) students  found t h a t the g i f t e d  as  problems  with  they  manipulation.  L u d w i g and  on a t e a c h e r - r a t i n g s c a l e . They perceived  f o r t h e way  less  than  anxious  did  and  their  were  exhibit  non-gifted  counterparts. A three  study  junior high  reaction  schools  of g i f t e d  The r e s e a r c h e r s cognitive non-gifted that  c o n d u c t e d by Wooding  stressor subjects,  i n Calgary  vs n o n - g i f t e d  concluded was  that  less  and t h e i r  of the n o n - g i f t e d .  and Bingham  to the  Canada,  i n t e n s i v e than recovery  was  in  compared  a cognitive gifted  (1988)  stressor.  reaction that  the  of  more r a p i d  to  a  their than  52  Conclusion: Problem-Solving / Gifted children / Anxiety As was d e m o n s t r a t e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r , t h e l i t e r a t u r e broadly with skills,  the  issues of  experience,  problem-solving  transfer  of t r a i n i n g ,  f o c u s on m o t i v a t i o n i n p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  deals  (definitions,  strategies).  The  leads t o a comparison  b e t w e e n n o n - g i f t e d who work u n d e r t h e m o t i v a t i o n o f a v o i d i n g failure  and  the gifted  (Perrone  and  M a l e , 1981) .  f a i l u r e or t o achieve  are  striving  The m o t i v a t i o n  success  individual perceives the and  who  generates  for  success,  either to  avoid  s t r e s s . The way t h e  s t r e s s i s c o n s i d e r e d as  anxiety,  i s measured by a n x i e t y s c a l e s , ( S p i e l b e r g e r , 1973). The  studies  research  design  mentioned  t h e r e f o r e cannot  and i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n  i n this be  chapter  compared.  Any  of  a l l  the  were  different  and  such  comparison  may  p r o v i d e vague outcomes o f o v e r - g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . The  present  study focuses  on t h e e f f e c t a n x i e t y h a s  the problem-solving  performance  children  when  confronted with real  l i f e p r o b l e m s . I t seems t h a t t h i s  core  topic i n the education of enough  and  understanding Only  there  i s an  the gifted urgent  gifted  i sstill need  not  for a  explored thorough  of i t s implications. one r e f e r e n c e  issue. This reference argues t h a t  of  on  gifted  i s the a r t i c l e individuals  advantage, and they respond u n i q u e n e s s i n an  has been  found  concerning  by D i r k s  learn to  use  (1983).  She  anxiety  t o c o n f l i c t by i n t e g r a t i n g  effort to find  this  to  their  appropriate strategies  to  53 d e a l with p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g . was found  concerning  problem-solving  However, no s u b s t a n t i a l  the e f f e c t s  of a n x i e t y on the r e a l  performance of g i f t e d  more  literature,  so  the  information  i t i s hoped t h a t  life  children.  In view of the i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d i n the and  research  that  literature,  i s missing  in  t h i s study i s opening a  the new  l i n e of r e s e a r c h t h a t may p r o v i d e some answers r e g a r d i n g the problems i n v o l v e d with under c o n d i t i o n s of l i f e problems. The study  i s presented  the performance  of g i f t e d  children  a n x i e t y when they  are faced with  real  d e s c r i p t i o n of the  methodology of  this  i n chapter I I I .  54  CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY  This chapter the  includes a d e s c r i p t i o n of the  population,  s u b j e c t s , t h e v a r i a b l e s , i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and  used i n  this  study.  comprised a p i l o t  Included  study  i s the research  and t h e main s t u d y ,  procedures plan  data  processing,  r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s e s and method o f a n a l y s i s r e g a r d i n g and  real  l i f e problem  which  anxiety  solving.  POPULATION Target Population: The  target  elementary  population of  school g i f t e d  qualities  of  students  intellectually  terms, r e f e r t o c h i l d r e n  this  study  refers to the  i n Israel.  The a g r e e d upon  gifted  who a c h i e v e  children, at  in  a higher  general  level  of  p e r f o r m a n c e s c h o l a s t i c a l l y , who t h i n k more c l e a r l y ,  process  i n f o r m a t i o n more e f f e c t i v e l y ,  insight  than  do  average c h i l d r e n  G a r d n e r , 1983; R e n z u l l i , Most  (Feldhusen  and  1978; S t e r n b e r g ,  T r e f f i n g e r 1985; 1986) .  o f t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r i e s  t h e i r own c r i t e r i a the process  a n d d e m o n s t r a t e more  f o ridentifying the  gifted.  of selection i s applied n a t i o n a l l y ,  i n chapter I .  In  have  Israel,  as d e s c r i b e d  55  Accessible Population The  criteria  for  a s s i g n i n g them to s p e c i a l for  a l l Israeli  one  city  selecting  gifted  Consequently  e n t i r e g i f t e d p o p u l a t i o n of one  i t seemed  accessible population  most  to focus on  t h a t was  the  chosen f o r  and  this  s i x t h grades  j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r u t i l i z i n g these three  grade l e v e l s as one two  major  unit,  in  present  references:  study,  a)  O r t a r and  the Hebrew Israel).  and  were v a l i d a t e d  s i x t h grades, b)  Israeli  Morieli.  University  Spielberger's  with the  anxiety  fourth, f i f t h  and  I n t e l l i g e n c e Group T e s t s , developed ( M i l t a I n t e l l i g e n t Test p u b l i s h e d  by  and  of  the M i n i s t r y  of  with the f o u r t h , f i f t h  l e v e l s c o n s t i t u t i n g one  based  SAI, which are used i n the  These t e s t s have been administered  c h i l d r e n s i n c e 1966,  consecutive  f o r r e s e a r c h purposes, was  i n v e n t o r i e s f o r c h i l d r e n , TAI  by  to be  Israel.  The  on  from  city.  study comprised of g i f t e d f o u r t h , f i f t h Haifa,  same  however, d i f f e r  a p p r o p r i a t e , f o r the purpose of t h i s study,  The  and  c l a s s e s are e s s e n t i a l l y the  students. C u r r i c u l a ,  to another.  students  administrative unit.  Education to a l l  and  sixth  Israeli grade  56  Background Information: Some schools Haifa  background information  population  i sgiven  provided  Haifa's  by t h e P s y c h o l o g i c a l  public  Service of  below:  The t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n to  about  S i x t h grades) i n H a i f a ,  of elementary p u b l i c school c o n s i s t s o f 18,097  (First  students.  The t o t a l number o f t h e F o u r t h g r a d e s t u d e n t s i s 2,250. The g i f t e d F o u r t h  grade c l a s s c o n s i s t s  o f 24 s t u d e n t s  (18  boys and 6 g i r l s ) . The t o t a l number o f  F i f t h grade students c o n s i s t s  2,350. The g i f t e d F i f t h g r a d e c l a s s c o n s i s t s o f 27  of  students  (18 b o y s a n d 9 g i r l s ) . The t o t a l number o f S i x t h g r a d e s t u d e n t s i s 2,450. gifted  S i x t h grade  class consists of  26 s t u d e n t s  (18  The boys  and 8 g i r l s ) . As n o t e d a b o v e , throughout I s r a e l , that the accessible entire  country.  t h e s e l e c t i o n procedures are s i m i l a r  and i t i s r e a s o n a b l e t o c l a i m , population  of Haifa  therefore,  i st y p i c a l of the  57  Selection of the research groups The t w o g r o u p s s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s s t u d y 1. The  entire population of gifted  4, 5, a n d 6 e n r o l l e d  were:  students i n grades  i n the special classes f o rthe  gifted  in Haifa, Israel. 2.  Randomly s e l e c t e d c l a s s e s  of Non-gifted  students  f r o m g r a d e s 4, 5 a n d 6. There  was one c l a s s a t e a c h  students c l a s s i f i e d grade l e v e l  as g i f t e d ,  i n which t h e  grade l e v e l  and three  containing  classes at  students not c l a s s i f i e d as  gifted  w e r e e n r o l l e d . From n i n e c l a s s e s o f n o n - g i f t e d s t u d e n t s one a t e a c h g r a d e l e v e l was r a n d o m l y  selected.  t h r e e c l a s s e s i n each o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n g i f t e d ) was  divided  t r e a t m e n t matched achievement.  into  These  anxiety,  two matched  ( g i f t e d and  gender  groups  only  Each o f t h e  two g r o u p s : t r e a t m e n t  f o r Trait  each  and nonand  were  non-  school  randomly  assigned t o treatment and non-treatment groups. The a c t u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f s t u d e n t s i n t h e depended on t h e i r be m e n t i o n e d t h a t  s c h o o l a t t e n d a n c e on t h a t d a y . because  of matching,  experiment I t should  the results of the  s t u d e n t s whose a s s i g n e d p a i r s d i d n o t a t t e n d s c h o o l on  that  day h a d t o be dropped f r o m t h e s t u d y . The  final  t h e s t u d y was:  number o f g i f t e d s t u d e n t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g f o u r t h grade:  N=24, f i f t h  s i x t h g r a d e : N=24. T o t a l o f 70 g i f t e d 22  girls).  g r a d e : N=22  students  (48 b o y s  in and and  58 The in  final  number  of n o n - g i f t e d students  t h e s t u d y was: f o u r t h  s i x t h grade: and  N=20. T o t a l  grade:  participation  N=24, f i f t h g r a d e :  N=28, a n d  o f 72 n o n - g i f t e d s t u d e n t s  (38  boys  with  the  34 g i r l s ) .  Variables: This performance  study, of  being  gifted life  e s s e n t i a l l y concerned  students  students  i n real  anxiety,  employed t h e f o l l o w i n g  i n relation  problem-solving,  to  non-gifted  under c o n d i t i o n  of  variables:  Independent Variables: 1.  Treatment:  of  a n x i e t y , an  consideration this 2.  The t r e a t m e n t  i n t e r v e n t i o n which i n assessing  Non-treatment:  Giftedness:  gifted special 4.  r e p r e s e n t s an  inducing essential  p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g performance  The N o n - t r e a t m e n t v a r i a b l e r e f e r s  for  tothe  anxiety. refers  c h i l d r e n who  to the  special qualities  have b e e n i d e n t i f i e d  found  in  and a s s i g n e d  to  classes.  Non-giftedness:  refers  to  c l a s s e s who were n o t i d e n t i f i e d 5.  to the  study.  absence o f induced 3.  variable refer  Gender: r e f e r s  participating  children  in  the  regular  as g i f t e d .  t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e between b o y s and  i n the study.  girls  59  Dependent Variables 1.  Anxiety:  and  State Anxiety  2.  Real  Real  Life  Life  Inventory  Trait (SAI)  Problem S o l v i n g  Anxiety  a  series  of  i s required to  solutions,  and  been a v o i d e d  Inventory  (TAI)  ( S p i e l b e r g e r , 1973).  P e r f o r m a n c e : as m e a s u r e d  Problem S o l v i n g S i t u a t i o n  presents subject  as m e a s u r e d by  sixteen identify  Set  (RLPSSS).  conflict  This  set  situations.  The  the problem(s),  to  suggest  t o f i n d ways i n w h i c h t h e p r o b l e m c o u l d  (see:  by  have  Instrumentation).  Instrumentation The variables  instruments  in this  Trait  study  used  to  o b t a i n measures  Inventory  (TAI)  for Children.  State Anxiety  Inventory  (SAI)  for Children.  Life  the  were:  Anxiety  Real  on  Problem S o l v i n g S i t u a t i o n  Set  (RLPSSS).  Anxiety Inventories Spielberger measure  e t a l . , (1973) d e v e l o p e d  S t a t e and  Trait  i t e m s were a d j u s t e d such  as  format  l a n g u a g e and ranging  r a t h e r than  from  the  Anxiety  to the  questionnaires  f o r C h i l d r e n (STAIC).  level  of  children  for  to  h i g h was  four category  format  designed i n the  for  The  aspects  experience. A three-category low  to  response children,  . questionnaire  for adults. The  concurrent v a l i d i t y  c o r r e l a t i o n with (Castaneda  et  of the  Children's Manifest  a l . , 1956)  and,  TAIC was  based  Anxiety  Scale  General  Anxiety  on  its  (CMAS)  Scale  for  60 Children widely  (Sarason, e t a l . ,  used a n x i e t y  from 4th, .75  measures. I n  a sample  5 t h a n d 6 t h g r a d e t h e STAIC t r a i t  w i t h CMAS a n d .63 w i t h  T r a i t Anxiety The anxiety.  1 9 6 0 ) , two w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d o f 75 scale  children correlated  t h e GASC.  (TAI) f o r C h i l d r e n :  Inventory  TAI measures  the  subjects'  general  state  I t c o n s i s t s o f 20 i t e m s w h i c h S p i e l b e r g e r  as r e l a t i n g  to "relatively  anxiety proneness" The according  t o how  of  describes  stable individual differences  (Spielberger,  subjects  and  are  asked  they f e e l  in  1973, p. 3 9 ) . t o respond  i n general.  to  the  The i t e m s  items  require  self-description. The  alpha  reliability  s a m p l e o f 456 grades  by  Cronbach  m a l e a n d 457  formula  20,  as  a  5 t h and 6 t h modified  by  ( 1 9 5 0 ) , was .78 f o r m a l e s a n d .81 f o r f e m a l e s .  Taichman and concurrent  Inventories  Malinek  validity  translated version  This  females from 4th,  Kuder-Richardson  Spielberger's  Israeli  o f t h e TAI s c a l e computed f o r  w e r e t r a n s l a t e d i n t o Hebrew b y  (1984), was  with  of Tel-Aviv  based another  test for children,  on  correlation  The  of  well-established  (Ziv, Levin  c o r r e l a t i o n was f o u n d t o b e  University.  the  anxiety  and I s r a e l i ,  1974).  .65 f o r a s a m p l e o f  N=237  6th - 8 t h grades. The  alpha  reliability  c h i l d r e n was c o m p u t e d  for a  of the  Hebrew T A I  s a m p l e N=237  scale  6th-8th  and  for was  found  t o be  .84 (Male N=113,  a l p h a = . 8 5 , and Female  N=124,  alpha=.82).  State Anxiety Inventory (SAI) for Children The  SAI  was a l s o  instrument of "right  20  items  to physical  Subjects are  on  directly  relate  The  asked  feels  on t h e SAI i n c r e a s e  to describe  their  description.  to anxiety,  in  stress.  feelings  at the  such  The  t o be  .82 f o r m a l e s a n d  Taichman  correlation  that  worry,  and  and M a l i n e k validity  w i t h an I s r a e l i  L e v i n and I s r a e l i , 6th-8th grades  1974).  sample  o f 4 t h , 5 t h and 6 t h g r a d e s .  f o r m u l a 20 a s m o d i f i e d b y  concurrent  The  as t e n s i o n ,  o f SAI was computed w i t h a  456 m a l e s a n d 457 f e m a l e s  Richardson  Characteristics  are represented.  alpha r e l i a b i l i t y  was f o u n d  .87 f o r f e m a l e s  (Kuder-  Cronbach).  Hebrew v e r s i o n was a l s o  was  It  examined  Anxiety test  by  means  used. of the  f o rchildren, (Ziv,  The c o r r e l a t i o n  f o r a sample  of  N=235 was .45.  alpha r e l i a b i l i t y  N=237 6 t h - 8 t h g r a d e s . .89  subject  danger and p s y c h o l o g i c a l  emotional  nervousness,  The  Scores  the  This  t h e y a r e r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The i t e m s a r e  focused  of  by S p i e l b e r g e r ( 1 9 7 3 ) .  e v a l u a t e s how  now, a t t h i s moment".  response  time  developed  was  computed w i t h  Cronbach's r e l i a b i l i t y  a sample  of  coefficient  was  (Male N=113, alpha=.87 a n d Female N=124, a l p h a  =.90).  62 Correlation between TAI and SAI The  correlation  consideration  the  i n t h e development  inventories.  and v a l i d a t i o n  situation should  to  not  situation.  be  measuring  a n x i e t y . However, i f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n too  low, t h i s  relationship  w o u l d mean  between o f 0.45  inventories  (Spielberger,  the  between  was  a  o f t h e two  Hebrew.  the  same  two  kind  of  t h e TAI and SAI  i slittle  or  no  T h e r e f o r e , t h e moderate  i s an i m p o r t a n t  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the  e t a l . 1980).  TAI and SAI have been t r a n s l a t e d  including  SAI  Thus,  that there  the constructs.  correlation  The  and  o f t h e SAI. T h i s s h o u l d n o t be s o , as t h e SAI  from  inventories  is  TAI  A v e r y h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n w o u l d show t h a t t h e T A I  is predictive varies  between  I t has  also  i n t o 27  proved  to  languages,  be  a  useful  instrument i n c r o s s - c u l t u r a l  r e s e a r c h . The a d a p t a t i o n o f t h e  inventories  done w i t h  to  Hebrew  S p i e l b e r g e r and problem  of  inventories,  was  Dia2-Guerrero  cross-cultural i n English  (1976),  anxiety.  the cooperation who d e a l t  with  (For the  a n d i n Hebrew, s e e A p p e n d i x A ) .  E a c h i n v e n t o r y was a d m i n i s t e r e d u n d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g conditions:  - t h e s u b j e c t must answer - t h e r e i s no s e t t i m e  each item by h i m s e l f .  limit.  - t h e I n v e n t o r y may be u s e d i n e i t h e r individual  setting.  the  complete  Administration of TAI and SAI:  standard  of  a group o r  63 - the Inventory was  presented as a means of  e v a l u a t i o n , and the word a n x i e t y was  not  selfused.  - the s p e c i f i c d i r e c t i o n s were w r i t t e n on the page of the  front  Inventory.  - With students of elementary  school age,  i t is  recommended t h a t the a d m i n i s t r a t o r w i l l : a) read the d i r e c t i o n s aloud while the students f o l l o w , and b) w i l l be a v a i l a b l e d u r i n g the e n t i r e response s e s s i o n . If  any s u b j e c t  is  unclear  about  an  item,  the  a d m i n i s t r a t o r should not e x p l a i n , but r a t h e r r e r e a d the item and  say: Answer how  you f e e l g e n e r a l l y ( f o r TAI).  Answer how  you f e e l r i g h t now  ( f o r SAI).  Real Life Problem Solving Measure (RLPSSS) A real l i f e Israel.  problem s o l v i n g  (See: L i m i t a t i o n s  "real-life-problem"  items from:  1) PEPSI:  1984)  the  "Purdue Elementary  (Zachman, Jorgensen,  were adapted The  for  (Feldhusen e t . a l , 1977), and 2)  Problem-Solving"  in  In order  to  current  study,  Problem-Solving TOPS: "Test  Huisingh and  Barrett,  a d a p t a t i o n of the r e l e v a n t s i t u a t i o n s i n the  w i t h the help  r e a l i t y of I s r a e l i  of two p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,  one  and three E n g l i s h t e a c h e r s . The adapted a p i l o t study  of  to c r e a t e the necessary problems.  t e s t s t o the everyday  in  not found  and C o n s t r a i n t s ) .  resolve t h i s  Inventory"  t e s t was  which i s d i s c u s s e d  above  l i f e was  undertaken  school  counselor,  s i t u a t i o n s were used  below. The process  of  64 selecting,  translating  and  adapting,  most a p p r o p r i a t e s i t u a t i o n s that Set  i s referred (RLPSSS).  situations The  t o as R e a l  The  final  Life  RLPSSS was  those  The  Problem  working  the  choosing  resulted  for this  i n a set  and  RLPSSS d e v e l o p m e n t  to  the  compare  effects  of  "normal" c o n d i t i o n s .  therefore,  treatment  sixteen  study.  t h e RLPSSS was  under  the  Solving Situations  s t u d e n t s working under  administered, to both  study  suitable  only purpose f o r using  anxiety with  then  RLPSSS i s a s e t o f s e l e c t e d  t h a t s e r v e d t o be  the performances of  same t i m e  for this  and  o n l y once  and  non-treatment  The  at  the  groups.  involved several  activities  which are d e s c r i b e d below: a) TOPS  The  questions  (1984) were  checked  by  i n the  translated  three  local  assembled  in  into  the a set  from  experts  teachers w i t h mastery of both incorporated  fifteen  taken  English to  Hebrew  (mainly  languages).  translation. mainly  situations  for  These  Israeli  from and  English  Their input  was  situations  p r e s e n t a t i o n as  a  were pilot  study. b)  Fifteen  other  adjusted to deal with The  situations  from  Israeli-real  life  questions pertaining  the r e s e a r c h e r  i n order  q u e s t i o n s c r e a t e d from  to  PEPSI  (1982)  relevant  problems.  e a c h s i t u a t i o n were w r i t t e n  to ensure  TOPS, and  consistency  t h e i r relevance to  were  with  by the  Israeli  children. Some q u e s t i o n s however, had  to  be  were " c r e a t i v e l y "  totally  new.  Two  adapted.  of the  Others,  illustrations  65 were a l s o m o d i f i e d . and  15) c)  4th,  (See The  5th,  d) the  box  set:  Situation  number  3  B).  translated  6th  final  in a  s e t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d  neighboring  s c h o o l as  in  grades  a Pilot  Study  below). most d i s c r i m i n a t i n g s i t u a t i o n s were s e l e c t e d f o r  s e t . T h i s was  different  e)  two  The  final  The  Appendix  and  (described  (In t h e  achieved  i d e a s p r o v i d e d by final  r e c o r d i n g t h e number  students  RLPSSS c o n s i s t e d i n 16  A l l the  chosen s i t u a t i o n s '  f o r d r a w i n g , and  RLPSSS was  the  by  thus  their  randomly  f o r each  of  situation.  situations.  p i c t u r e s were p l a c e d  o r d e r i n g i n the  final  in a  format  of  assigned.  Research Plan The studies:  research  plan consisted  the  S t u d y and  Pilot  o f two  the Main  consecutive  sub-  study.  I. Pilot Study A pilot 5th,  and  s t u d y was  6th grade  conducted  classes  some c h i l d r e n  identified  not  them  to e n r o l l  gifted,  and  thus  heterogeneous group. was  l o c a t e d i n the  targeted  The  (N=93).  as g i f t e d  i n any these  with  form of  classes  three non-gifted, The  whose  classes parents  a  had  study.  chosen the  reasonably  s c h o o l chosen f o r the p i l o t  same m i d d l e - c l a s s n e i g h b o r h o o d  f o r t h e main  contained  s p e c i a l program f o r represented  4th,  of  study Haifa  66  The reasons a) The to  f o r conducting the p i l o t  student's responses  study were:  t o the items were to be  e v a l u a t e the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the i n d i v i d u a l  and  thus  to  aid  in  the  identification  used  situations,  of  the  most  d i s c r i m i n a t i n g s i t u a t i o n s f o r the a c t u a l main study. b) respond  The t i m e - d u r a t i o n  to  determine  the  15  required for  s i t u a t i o n s was  the s u b j e c t s  recorded  in  to  order  to  upon the a c t u a l time-framework f o r the main study.  c) By  a trial  Ssolving  Situations  determine  possible  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of  Problem  the  researcher  was  difficulties  t h a t might  be  associated  with the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of these  situations.  Unexpected o r g a n i z a t i o n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s  associated  d) with  s t a f f and  pilot  Sets,  Real L i f e  students c o u l d  study and remedied The p i l o t  study was  simultaneously i n t h e i r class  handed  v e r s i o n of  out the  TOPS and  i n s t r u c t i o n s . The fun  be i d e n t i f i e d  home-rooms.  d i r e c t i o n s out silently.  PEPSI. Both  student had  loud  as  hardest. the  When each student  the set back t o  The  s e t s , randomly  their  on  the  teachers i n  sets contained  each  Hebrew  the  same  to the students as  The The  marked and  a  students were asked, teacher followed  had f i n i s h e d , he/she  the task,  classes  d i v i d i n g the  students  the teacher, who  taken  during  c a r r i e d out with the t h r e e  s e t s were presented  try  to  l a t e r i n the main study.  task which would not be graded.  however, t o  able  down how what  the  read the  the text  brought long  the  student's  67  general or  academic  s t a n d i n g i n t h e c l a s s was:  no  time  limit  was  established during  s t u d y c o m p l e t i o n of the t e s t , time range  for a l l  The  of  range  relationship evaluation) the  sets.  between and  and  All  some  relevant  table  There  (according to  70 m i n u t e s and  o f t h e two  70 m i n u t e s .  the  the sets.  was  no  teachers'  f o r students to accomplish as w e l l  as some good  and  i n order  t o complete  the  poor  students  completed  d a t a were r e c o r d e d on a c h a r t .  i t  the  set  of  i t took  situations,  the t e a c h e r ' s e v a l u a t i o n  of the  An  example  below.  i n c l u d e s the time  good, p o o r ) , and each  pilot  minutes.  complete  subject,  ability  v e r y good  g i v e n i n T a b l e 3.1 The  to  Some v e r y good s t u d e n t s  set,  35  i t e m s on e a c h  35  the  i t d i d serve to determine  the time d u r a t i o n  s t u d e n t s needed  within  fifteen  t i m e was  poor  to  Good,  Poor. While  is  V e r y good,  f o r every  the  gender  of the student  subject of  (very  the good,  t h e number o f i d e a s t h a t were g e n e r a t e d  situations.  Table 3.1. Schamatic Summary of Information Concerning the Pilot Study Subject  Time  Gender  Teacher' s evaluation on student's standing  No. of ideas on each situation 1 2 3. ..15 Total  in  68  The  information gained  in this pilot  study  furnished  several decisions: a)  The  pilot  f r o m TOPS and  study  eight situations  nine  situations  b) levels The  out  of f i f t e e n  i n 6th grade but  limit  of  to accomplish  teachers  and  most o f  the  " s t r a n g e r s " who to allow  was  a realistic  e s t i m a t i o n of the  the  students  to respond  order  students, RLPSSS,  two so  Situation  more that  situations.  15  to delete t h i s c)  order and  the  optimum f o r a l l g r a d e i n each  administered  the  time  owing  RLPSSS  study to  a  with  added set  and  final  regarding  the  to  of  gifted  the  consisted  technical  final of  failure  i t was  17 in  decided  analysis.  illustrations  several questions  This  set.  effect  were  from the  i n two  to avoid ambiguity  set.  r e q u i r e d f o r most  to the  a ceiling  final  situation  not  grade.  i n some o f t h e RLPSSS s e t s ,  Some d e t a i l s  as w e l l as  and  45 m i n u t e s f o r i t s c o m p l e t i o n .  situations  However,  No.  found  situations  adequately  to avoid  same t i m e  i n 4th  45 m i n u t e s was  were i n s t r u c t e d  In  I t was  a d a p t e d f r o m TOPS  a t the  f o r non-gifted students  A time  adapted  f r o m PEPSI were c h a l l e n g i n g enough f o r  students  impossible  situations  f r o m PEPSI were d i s c r i m i n a t i v e .  that  gifted  i n d i c a t e d which  have b e e n the  t o comply w i t h  modified  situations,  in  local  realities  organizational/  logistical  norms. d)  The  information t h e main  pilot  study  provided  t h a t f o r m e d t h e b a s i s f o r amending p r o c e d u r e s  study.  in  69 In  addition,  participated  in  a m e e t i n g was the  Pilot  improvements emerging from written the  study  additional  the  sets  written  to a l l the  One  the of  the  as  the  s e t of  teachers  instructions possible  who  practical addition  situations  and  of in  strangers).  were  i n the  participating  teachers the  t h i s m e e t i n g was  ( i . e . home-room  e n s u r e as much u n i f o r m i t y of  Study.  i n s t r u c t i o n s to administer  main  These  held with  designed  to  administration  subjects.  II. Main Study The SAI  and  main study the  The grades, gifted  was  total  of  s t u d e n t s and  The 1.  administration  of  the  TAI,  the  now-adapted RLPSSS.  study a  included  conducted with six classes, three  m a i n s t u d y was The  fourth, three  of  for non-gifted  c a r r i e d out  administration  of  fifth,  sixth  w h i c h were  for  students.  i n two  the  and  TAI  stages: (On  December  13,  1989) . 2.  The  December 20,  administration  of  the  SAI  and  RLPSS  (On  1989) .  Stage 1 The  first  data regarding students. into  two  stage the  of  Trait  These d a t a equal  the  groups.  m a i n s t u d y was  Anxiety  of  were t h e n u s e d  aimed t o  a l l the  collect  participating  t o match t h e  subjects  70 This  first  before  the  (TAI),  the  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the TAI, the matching of the students  and  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of  t h e i r random groups.  stage  included: preparation  the T r a i t  assignment  A n x i e t y Inventory  i n t o treatment  D e s c r i p t i o n of the procedures  and  non-treatment  i s g i v e n below.  Preparations for TAI administration A meeting with school  Principal  was  the s i x held  home room  to  provide  teachers and  the  instructions  for  a d m i n i s t e r i n g the TAI. The teachers were acquainted with the r e s e a r c h and were asked f o r t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n , and criticism. confirmed. individual  Arrangements The and  for  research  were  r e s e a r c h e r met  with  the t e a c h e r s  group  then  sent  basis,  i n s t r u c t i o n s i n order t o ensure a uniformly  the  that a l l  informed then on  an  out  written  teachers  followed  procedure.  Administration of TAI The TAI  was administered  c l a s s e s by t h e i r home-room instructions  to  each  t o the  students i n  t e a c h e r s . The f o l l o w i n g  teacher  were  intended  to  their  written ensure  standardization. To  (Name of t e a c h e r ) :  Attached are enough q u e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r a l l the students i n your c l a s s . I t i s important t h a t these q u e s t i o n n a i r e s be f i l l e d out i n the same way a t the same time by a l l the students p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the study. a) Please read the f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s to students b e f o r e the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s :  the  71 "Researchers from the U n i v e r s i t y are i n v e s t i g a t i n g how c h i l d r e n of d i f f e r e n t ages f e e l . Therefore, they have asked us t o a d m i n i s t e r the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e . I t i s very important t h a t you t r y your hardest t o be c l e a r i n your answers. There i s no c o r r e c t or i n c o r r e c t answer f o r any g i v e n item". b) A f t e r r e a d i n g the above statement, d i s t r i b u t e q u e s t i o n n a i r e and read the d i r e c t i o n s out loud w h i l e students f o l l o w along s i l e n t l y .  the the  c) Ask the students t o u n d e r l i n e only one of the three p o s s i b l e c h o i c e s as an answer: Almost Never, Sometimes, or Often. (See Appendix A f o r copy of TAI). d) I f a student has any q u e s t i o n about a s p e c i f i c item, the teacher i s t o answer vaguely with the f o l l o w i n g statement: "Answer how you f e e l g e n e r a l l y " . . I f the student has a q u e s t i o n about a s p e c i f i c word, repeat the word as a c l a r i f i c a t i o n , but do not e x p l a i n or d e f i n e i t . e) There w i l l be no enforced time l i m i t . However, experience suggests t h a t , most students w i l l f i n i s h i n e i g h t to twelve minutes. f) When each student hands i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , p l e a s e check t o see t h a t a l l items have been completed. g) When a l l students have f i n i s h e d , p l e a s e b r i n g the completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o the s p e c i f i e d room where the school psychologist, researcher, and a s s i s t a n t from the U n i v e r s i t y w i l l immediately score the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . Thank you very much f o r your c o - o p e r a t i o n , Tamar Z o l l e r Researcher I t should be mentioned t h a t the TAI (as w e l l as the SAI and RLPSS) were marked with the c h i l d ' s number as i t appears on h e r / h i s c l a s s l i s t . of  the page  of  The numbers were entered on the back  each  set.  i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the matching of The both  The  researcher  the p a i r s  i s s u e of gender was thus a l s o addressed the a n x i e t y  performance.  issue  and  used  i n each  this class.  with r e s p e c t  the corresponding  to  RLPSSS  72 It  should  numbers and  be m e n t i o n e d ,  (as r e p r e s e n t i n g  r e l a t e d research  information order  to  gained  that  the  except f o r t h e use o f t h e  s u b j e c t s ' names) f o r m a t c h i n g  purposes,  a l l the data  gathered  were t r e a t e d a s s t r i c t l y  preserve  the  anonymity  and  and t h e  confidential  privacy  in  of  the  individual.  Matching subjects on anxiety Matching establish  two  achievement order  of the equal  groups  t o treatment  m a t c h i n g was c a r r i e d  o f each  anxiety.  Gender  to and  into consideration  study  was  carried  out  students  teacher  on  the  basis  resulted gifted  scores  of  in  each  as  of the  were  groups. with the  below.  t h e end  Since  of the  able  up-to-date  the l i s t  on t h e  p a i r s o f boys  matched w i t h i n  described  the teachers  s e m e s t e r g r a d e s . The r e s e a r c h e r  information,  as  close to  had i n f r o n t o f h e r  of t h e s u b j e c t s '  or non-treatment  o u t by t h e r e s e a r c h e r  home-room t e a c h e r  school marking p e r i o d , the  i n order  t o c o n t r o l e x t r a n e o u s v a r i a b l e s . T h e s e two g r o u p s were  The  the  regarding  i n s c h o o l were a l s o t a k e n  then randomly assigned  help  s u b j e c t s was n e c e s s a r y  to  first  evaluate  grades.  Each  o f c h i l d r e n and  their  had i n f r o n t o f h e r t h e l i s t T A I . On t h e well  as p a i r s o f g i r l s  s i x classes.  i n t h e c r e a t i o n o f two e q u a l  basis of  This  were  matching  sub-groups w i t h i n  c l a s s e s and two w i t h i n t h e n o n - g i f t e d  this  classes.  the  73 Each of gifted  the sub-groups w i t h i n  c l a s s e s was  the g i f t e d  randomly a s s i g n e d  to  and t h e  treatment  non-  or  non-  treatment. To  verify  the matching,  p a i r e d t - t e s t s were  performed  between t h e t r e a t m e n t g r o u p s and t h e n o n - t r e a t m e n t g r o u p the  gifted  as w e l l  of  as t h e n o n - g i f t e d .  Stage 2 The  second stage of the  of data  relevant  anxiety  was  State  subjects, life  was  measured  problematic  in  administration  administration treatment  of the  of these t e s t s  of  participating  solutions to  real  i n t h e RLPSSS s e t .  included  SAI  stage  g r o u p s . The l e v e l  t o suggest  study  collection  At this  a l l the  s i t u a t i o n s presented  stage of the  the  questions.  i n the treatment  who were a l s o a s k e d  This the  to the research  induced  Anxiety  m a i n s t u d y was  the preparation  and t h e  RLPSSS, and  for the  t o t h e t r e a t m e n t and t h e  non-  groups.  Preparation for SAI and RLPSS Administration In p r e p a r a t i o n the  RLPSS,  teachers  meetings  were  individual  were  given  administration held  a s a g r o u p , and t h e n  teachers  who were  f o r the  with  the  individually.  written  help  These s t r a n g e r s  -  with  the  helpers  administration  were  six  and  home-room  In a d d i t i o n , the  instructions.  and g r o u p m e e t i n g s were h e l d w i t h to  o f t h e SAI  Separate  s i x "strangers" of  female students  the  study.  finishing  74  t h e i r B.A. i n p s y c h o l o g y written (see  instructions to  S A I a n d RLPSS  administration  a n d e d u c a t i o n . They a l s o be c a r r i e d o u t  administration).  were  received  on t h e t e s t i n g  The p r a c t i c a l i t i e s  d i s c u s s e d , and  informed c r i t i c i s m also  day of was  encouraged.  The t e a c h e r s a n d t h e " s t r a n g e r s "  received  a phone c a l l  as a reminder t h e evening b e f o r e t h e day o f t h e  experiment.  Administration of SAI and RLPSS On t h e  t e s t i n g d a y , (December 2 0 , 1989) t h e  teacher t o l d the  students that  the  home-room  c l a s s w o u l d be  divided  i n t o two as f o l l o w s : a)  Those  whose names  g r o u p ) , were t o r e p o r t  were c a l l e d ,  t o a s p e c i f i e d room.  b) The r e m a i n d e r o f t h e c l a s s remained  i n their  divided,  each group  research  plan.  home-room.  with  ( t h e n o n - t r e a t m e n t group) After  the  classes  were  was g i v e n i n s t r u c t i o n s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e  The t e a c h e r s a n d deal  (the treatment  t h e i r groups.  "strangers"  were i n s t r u c t e d  on how t o  75  Non-treatment groups The  half  of the c l a s s d e s i g n a t e d as the  non-treatment  group remained i n the home-room w i t h t h e i r r e g u l a r The  teachers  were  given  the  following  teacher.  instructions  ( t r a n s l a t e d from the Hebrew): To  (Name of t e a c h e r ) ,  The f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s have been w r i t t e n f o r you i n order to ensure the standardization of the testing procedures: a) Read the f o l l o w i n g statement to the students before you d i s t r i b u t e the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s : "You have a l l been chosen to h e l p i n developing a very important t e s t aimed a t I s r a e l i s c h o o l students. You will help the r e s e a r c h e r s understand how c h i l d r e n s o l v e problems. F i r s t , you w i l l answer a q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i m i l a r to the one you answered b e f o r e , then I will hand out b o o k l e t s with i n t e r e s t i n g problems. There i s no r i g h t or wrong answer. What i s important i s the honesty of your answer." b) D i s t r i b u t e the SAI to each student and read the d i r e c t i o n s out loud as the students f o l l o w along s i l e n t l y . c) Ask the possible choices Often.  students to u n d e r l i n e as an answer: Almost  only one of the Never, Sometimes,  d) I f a student has a q u e s t i o n s about any specific item, the t e a c h e r i s to answer vaguely: "Answer how you f e e l r i g h t now ". I f the student has a q u e s t i o n about a specific word, repeat the word as c l a r i f i c a t i o n , but do not explain or d e f i n e i t . e) No time limit will be e n f o r c e d . However, past experience has shown t h a t most students w i l l f i n i s h the SAI i n between e i g h t to twelve minutes. f) When each student hands i n h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e , p l e a s e check to see t h a t a l l items have been answered. g) Distribute instructions:  the  RLPSSS,  and  read  the  following  "You w i l l be presented with s e v e r a l p i c t u r e s d e s c r i b i n g various s i t u a t i o n s . Examine each p i c t u r e and answer the corresponding q u e s t i o n s . For most q u e s t i o n s there w i l l be more than one answer, so w r i t e as many p o s s i b i l i t i e s as you can. However, i f f o r some reasons you do not f i n d immediate  76 p o s s i b l e answers f o r a situation."  certain  q u e s t i o n go  h) As w i t h t h e SAI, i f a c h i l d has specific situation, answer vaguely, s u g g e s t i o n s g i v e n above.  on  to the  a q u e s t i o n about a according to the  i ) No time limit will be enforced f o r However, a f t e r 40 m i n u t e s announce t h a t t h e r e minutes f o r f i n i s h i n g w r i t i n g . j) C o l l e c t t h e room o f t h e s t u d y .  s e t s and  bring  next  the are  them t o t h e  RLPSSS. 5 more  headquarters  Thank you  again,  Tamar Z o l l e r Researcher  Treatment Groups The  students assigned f o r  instructed them was The  to proceed  a stranger,  stranger  consequences  That for  responsibility them. The  groups  that  test  was  the  and  unexpected  test,  opportunity  to prepare  arouse  for  previously).  test  supposed t o  have  the  sudden  future,  would  and  made  the  be  important their  clear  presentation  letting  of  students  to the an the  f o r i t were s u p p o s e d t o c o n t r i b u t e t o the  students.  elements  is sufficient  a n x i e t y . Taken t o g e t h e r t h e  more p o w e r f u l  were  i n s t r u c t i o n s were p r e s e n t e d t o  without  of these  seen  c o n s e q u e n c e s was  t h e t e n s i o n e x p e r i e n c e d by E a c h one  not  important  children's  these  way  an  groups  classroom. Waiting  (someone t h e y had  the  for  strict  treatment  to a d i f f e r e n t  announced  administered.  the treatment  impact  (see: I n d u c t i o n of A n x i e t y ) .  was  by  itself  to  assumed t o  be  77 The for  f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s were g i v e n t o t h e  the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the  SAI  and  RLPSS t o t h e  strangers treatment  groups: To  (name o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r ) :  The f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s have order to h e l p s t a n d a r d i z e the t e s t i n g a) desk. your  been g i v e n t o you procedures.  in  See t h a t a l l students are seated; s i t one t o a I n t r o d u c e y o u r s e l f by o n l y y o u r name and p r o f e s s i o n .  b) Read t h e voice:  following introduction  i n a s e r i o u s tone  to  "Today you w i l l be t a k i n g a s e r i e s of t e s t s t h a t are c r u c i a l f o r your f u t u r e . These t e s t s w i l l begin with easy t a s k s and become h a r d e r and h a r d e r . Any q u e s t i o n s you might have, w i l l be a n s w e r e d o n l y when e a c h s t u d e n t has finished. Before we start to test you I will distribute a questionnaire similar to the one you have a l r e a d y taken. Honesty i n answering i s extremely important. There are no r i g h t o r wrong answers, o n l y honest or d i s h o n e s t answers. P l e a s e answer as p r e c i s e l y as y o u a r e c a p a b l e o f . " c) D i s t r i b u t e the loud while the students  SAI and r e a d the i n s t r u c t i o n s f o l l o w along s i l e n t l y .  out  d) No t i m e l i m i t w i l l be e n f o r c e d . However, experience shows t h a t most students w i l l f i n i s h i n between e i g h t to twelve minutes. e) When each p l e a s e c h e c k t o see f)  Distribute  student hands i n h i s t h a t a l l i t e m s have b e e n t h e RLPSS  and  read the  questionnaire, answered.  instructions  out  loud: "We will start the s e r i e s of t e s t s by presenting several pictures. Examine each picture and answer the corresponding questions. For most q u e s t i o n s there w i l l be more than one answer. So please write down as many p o s s i b i l i t i e s as you c a n . However, i f f o r some r e a s o n s you do not find immediate solutions, go on to the next situation." g) No t i m e l i m i t w i l l be s e t f o r t h e RLPSS. a f t e r 40 m i n u t e s announce t h a t t h e r e a r e o n l y f i v e for finishing writing.  However, minutes  78 are  h) No q u e s t i o n s s t i l l t a k i n g the  the  i ) When a l l students with  are to RLPSS.  be  answered w h i l e  the  students  of the t e s t s have b e e n c o l l e c t e d the f o l l o w i n g statement:  debrief  "The ' t e s t s ' you have j u s t completed are p a r t of a s t u d y t o u n d e r s t a n d how I s r a e l i c h i l d r e n f e e l and how they solve r e a l life problems. Your responses will have no b e a r i n g a t a l l on y o u r f u t u r e , nor w i l l they c o u n t as a g r a d e i n any o f y o u r c l a s s e s . The r e s e a r c h e r s t h a n k you for y o u r c o o p e r a t i o n , and i f you have any q u e s t i o n s f e e l f r e e t o d i s c u s s them w i t h y o u r home-room t e a c h e r . " j) Please return all headquarters of the study.  the  SAI  and  RLPSS  Thank you  to  the  again,  Tamar  Zoller  Researcher  Data Processing Data c o l l e c t i n g relating 1)  and  scoring consisted  of  two  parts  to: Anxiety  2)  s c o r e s as m e a s u r e d by  Real-Life-Problem  m e a s u r e d by  the  Solving  TAI  and  SAI.  performance scores  as  RLPSSS.  Scoring for Anxiety The  anxiety  e a c h f o r m and back of the before.  scores,  entered  dealt with  earlier,  information similarly  at the  form, the  I n t h i s way,  later  recorded  (TAI  top  student's i t was  and  SAI),  of the  were r e c o r d e d  f r o n t p a g e . On  number was  already the  TAI  f o r matching the p a i r s ,  and  t o use  and  a l l needed comparisons. the  total  The  the  recorded  p o s s i b l e t o use  for  on  scores,  SAI  s c o r e s were c o d e d . A l l  this was the  79 completed  forms  University  o f TAI  student  who  and SAI assisted  were d o u b l e  c h e c k e d by  a  i n the study.  Scoring of the RLPSSS The twelve  RLPSSS b o o k l e t s were c o l l e c t e d  packages r e p r e s e n t i n g the treatment  groups of the s i x c l a s s e s . by  grade,  gifted  number.  The  following a) special  b o o k l e t was  F i v e judges education  In  by t h e s t u d e n t ' s  code  RLPSSS c o m p r i s e d  the  (two p s y c h o l o g i s t s , one c o u n s e l o r ,  one  one  teacher  f o r the  and one e l e m e n t a r y  packages  of t h e judges  was  dealing. This  the  judges,  o r more  t h e RLPSSS  None o f t h e  was  the p o l i c y  scoring  o f t h e RLPSSS.  maintain  The  (each first  one w o u l d  the o b j e c t i v i t y  i s known  of  judgements.  held i n order  to  m e t h o d o l o g y t o be u s e d i n t h e  i t was like  she  followed the recording  T h i s m e e t i n g was  and u n i f o r m  t h e RLPSSS.  instrument  o f one g r o u p ) .  a l l the judges  At t h i s meeting  scoring  booklets  consistently biased  of s u b j e c t s ' responses. discuss  the  teacher)  knew w i t h what g r a d e o r g r o u p  step helped  and a v o i d e d  RLPSSS. I d e a l l y ,  sets  of  school  t o r e c o r d a l l the answers.  judges  b) A m e e t i n g w i t h  such  identified  data processing  package c o n t a i n e d  for  or non-treatment).  stages:  were g i v e n  c)  marked  the k i n d o f the group ( i . e .  or n o n - g i f t e d treatment  addition,dSeach  into  and n o n - t r e a t m e n t  E a c h RLPSSS b o o k l e t was  a colored sign representing  task  and a s s e m b l e d  decided  how  to score  t o have a q u a l i t a t i v e  Unfortunately,  the  t o be p r o b l e m a t i c .  the index  assessment The  of  well-known  80 established need t o  i n s t r u m e n t s have  compromise  between  emphases  (Treffinger,  1985). In  addition,  instrument but issue  of  the  one  Renzulli,  1983;  RLPSSS i s n o t for  this  comparisons regarding t r e a t m e n t vs  However, i t s h o u l d different  the  the  purpose  scoring  initial  scores:  all  the  score,  i)  relevant which  Limitations  RLPSSS t o  all  study  justifies  any  any  real  vs  non-  same t i m e .  comparison  be  with  misleading.  life  For  problem-solving  c o n s t r a i n t ) . However,  i n s t r u c t i o n s of  the  judges  for on  appropriate.  marking  the  established  of the  emphasized t h a t  study the  seem t o be  The of  (see  of t h i s  an  caution.  s a m p l e s a t a d i f f e r e n t t i m e may  i s required  Feldhousen,  They a l l ( g i f t e d  such comparison a w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d test  quantitative  n o n - t r e a t m e n t ) worked a t t h e be  the  the  in this  subjects.  to  study,  handled with great  t h a t were i n v o l v e d  due  specific  simultaneous a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  subjects  gifted,  and  the  adapted  limitations  qualitative  1974;  since  s c o r i n g was  The  their  of the  RLPSSS c o n s i s t e d  RLPSSS p e r f o r m a n c e different  included  score  which  a l t e r n a t i v e s , and  the  subjects'  o f two  included  ii)  total  sets  Fluency  number  of  responses. i)  RLPSSS Performance  idea  that  the  subject  with  one  point.  s i t u a t i o n s was RLPSSS.  1  provided  The  sum  considered  (X +X +..• 2  + x  score:  i6  = x  different  f o r each s i t u a t i o n was  of as  Every r e l e v a n t  total the  Total • )  points  over  performance T  h  e  l  a  r  9  e  r  t  score h  e  scored  all  the  on  the  number  of  81 the  points  the  higher  the  score  on  an  interval  scale  of  performance. ii)  Fluency  subjects'  responses,  expressed  by  of  the  relevant  Fluency  opened t h e  + F  presents door  The  problems  o u t who  as  a  find  dangerous person  kidnapper, by  t h e man  the  door  they  might  parents,  relative  etc.), and with  a  new  so t h a t by  cause him.  fact  not  way  Another  that  the  might  of  illustrated in  the  of  the  RLPSSS  (see  c h i l d r e n who  had  in spite  being  asked  alone  the  All  kinds  of  of  etc.),  problem  (friend  Russia,  children  at  a  a  subjects of  of t h e i r  the  salesman  might o f f e n d  him,  parents  problem  was  t h a t t h e main i s s u e  was  disobeyed  the  him  therefore,  person  relationships  perceived  and Other  i n , they  looking  a rapist,  hurt.  from  at  state  a murderer,  get  of  to  l o o k i n g a t the  a friendly  the  s u b j e c t s who  the  presents.  arriving  way  kinds  i s . Some s u b j e c t s p e r c e i v e d  l e t t i n g him  problems to  s u g g e s t e d by the  be  were  as  so when  (a t h i e f ,  t h o u g h t t h a t he  separately  o f two  a t e r r o r i s t , a drug d e a l e r ,  opening  some i d e a s  to a stranger,  situation  was  to  situation  initially  were o f f e r e d . One  the  )  t o do  suggestions  of  Total •  = F  home  were  this  16  dilemma  warning not  which  recorded  first  of t h e i r  recording  aware t h a t  of s c o r i n g i s  the  subjects  the  i n s e v e r a l ways. T h e s e  were  (F1+F2+  parents'  home.  same s u b j e c t  example. The  Apendix B),  Following  became  above p r o c e s s  following  their  one  responses  score,  The  score:  the  parents'  82 instructions,  which  leads  p a r e n t s t r u s t them n e x t The pursued. might  to  be  who  question:  d e m o n s t r a t e s how  mentioned the  dangerous,  or  a  door),  i d e a . Any  was  the  idea  a d d i t i o n a l idea  of  the  man  being  of the  man  who  jail),  his  only  one  point,  but  Although qualities oneself  such  as  etc.,  different that to  the  include  the  that  no  attention  w o u l d be  important  i n the  It  was  interpretation analysis  of the  of  as  i t  of t h i s  (with  point.  several  a  on  prisoner  RLPSSS  three some  additional to  express other requires  of the  fact  decided  not  the  main  findings. the  issues  judges  decided  s u c h as  style,  handwriting,@@which, though  that study  were n o t the  should  RLPSSS p e r f o r m a n c e  final be score.  was  points.  towards  i t was  each  regarding  s i m i l a r to  thought,  the  for  i s , fluency  of the  to  the  another  in spite  were  paid  wider context, agreed  man  ability  for fluency,  line  or  on  emphasis  discussion  this  spelling  that  mentioned  gained  style,  r e s u l t s , which  Continuing  elaborations,  was  a thief,  light  the  scored  d)  study.  score  does s h e d  important  RLPSSS r e s u l t s , i n t h e  marking  point  performance score  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Therefore, RLPSSS was  one  with  (a r a p i s t ,  shifts  d i m e n s i o n s . B e i n g as  gained  d a n g e r o u s , and  language,  i t  the  several responses  h i s Fluency  fluency  the  friend  scored  provided  characteristics escape from  could  possibility  family  consequences of opening the  However, i f a s u b j e c t  "How  time?"  example above  Subjects  the  variables  in  conclusions based  only  on  very this and the  83 At  t h i s meeting, problematic  discussion decided  in  on  the  judges'  a procedure (For  example:  the  few  irrelevant  very  disregard e)  them by  received  distributed,  and  The  points  summed f o r a c o v e r . The repertoire with  not  awarded  were r e c o r d e d  on  of  ideas  A f t e r the  j u d g e s was  held  s c o r i n g was  relevant  score,  it  eventually of  was  decided  a g r e e d upon,  to to  the  (randomly  ones t h e y had  before).  s i t u a t i o n i n every  pages  of the  on  least in  bring  set  booklet,  written  r e f l e c t e d , at could  these  Owing  t e s t booklets  w h i c h was  a subject  for  zero).  n e c e s s a r i l y the  score  life-situation f)  them w i t h  f o r e a c h RLPSSS  total  judges  evaluation  responses,  packages of  the  total  specific  policy for  judges a g a i n  The  i r r e l e v a n t responses).  scoring  A f t e r the  forum.  for  responses.  a n s w e r s were s u b m i t t e d  the  and front  part,  t o b e a r on  the  dealing  problems.  RLPSSS were s c o r e d , f o r the  purpose  of  a n o t h e r m e e t i n g of finalizing  the  the  scoring  procedure. g) this  A final  point,  identification gifted, The was  c h a r t was  the of  treatment  coded the  prepared  information  pairs,  statistical  the  researcher.  relevant  are  the  or  non-  form  which  used.  included  analysis:  At  to  gender, grade, g i f t e d  o r n o n - t r e a t m e n t , was  following categories  submitted to  by  i n the  84 Table 3.2: Summary of Information Concerning the Main Study  +— + |ID|  +  +  +  +  Exp/Cont.|Gender|TAI|SAI|X +X 1  + -_+  +  ID: R e f e r s  +  +  X  2  + 1  +  +  |Total|  6  +  +  t o t h e I d e n t i f i c a t i o n number o f t h e s u b j e c t .  Exp/con: R e f e r s t o t h e sub-group t h a t t h e s u b j e c t belonged to. Exp.(treatment) was coded as (1) , a n d C o n t . (nont r e a t m e n t ) was c o d e d a s ( 2 ) . TAI: r e f e r s Inventory .  to  the subject's  scores  on  the T r a i t  Anxiety-  SAI: r e f e r s Inventory.  to  the subject's  scores  on  the State  Anxiety  X : R e f e r s t o t h e s u b j e c t ' s p e r f o r m a n c e s c o r e on t h e RLPSSS. It includes a l l the r e l e v a n t a l t e r n a t i v e ideas provided f o r the s i t u a t i o n . X-JL, X / 16 f ideas r e g a r d i n g every x  :  r  e  e  2  Total:  refers  the subject's d i f f e r e n t relevant one o f t h e s i t u a t i o n s 1, 2, 3 16.  r  t  0  t o the t o t a l performance  score  on t h e RLPSSS.  Statistical Hypotheses Each o f t h e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s  s e t out i n Chapter 1 a r e  g i v e n below as n u l l hypotheses f o r s t a t i s t i c a l null  f o r m was  chosen  i n preference  owing t o t h e a m b i g u i t y the q u a l i t y support  of the evidence  The  to the d i r e c t i o n a l  one  i n this field  d i r e c t i o n a l hypotheses.  1)  be  There  will  of study  and  t h a t i t was p o s s i b l e t o mount i n  of the testing  difference gifted  existing  testing.  no  statistically  i n t h e RLPSSS mean p e r f o r m a n c e  significant  s c o r e s between t h e  groups and t h e n o n - g i f t e d g r o u p s . 2)  difference  There  will  be no  statistically  i n t h e RLPSSS mean p e r f o r m a n c e  significant  s c o r e s between t h e  85  Treatment (non  (induced-anxiety)  induced 3)  anxiety)  There  interaction The  and  will  be  no  exploratory  stated  significant  Treatment.  in  Chapter  be  no  i s tangential 1,  and  is  to  the  of  an  nature.  4) difference  Non-treatment  statistically  between G i f t e d n e s s and  problem  the  groups.  following research hypothesis  central  gifted  groups  There in  will  t h e RLPSSS  b o y s and  gifted  statistically  mean p e r f o r m a n c e  significant  scores  between  girls.  Method Of Analysis The  analysis  of the data  1. A n a l y s i s ( a n x i e t y b e f o r e and 2. RLPSSS  of  i n c l u d e d two  data concerning  after  A n a l y s i s of  the  stages: anxiety  induction  i n d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y ) .  data concerning  p e r f o r m a n c e on  the  test.  1. Regarding Anxiety It  will  be  recalled  s u b j e c t s were matched groups  (treatment  n o n - g i f t e d , was  and  the  on TAI  stage  vs non-treatment),  induced levels  the g i f t e d  and  of g i f t e d ,  study  the  of the  two  as w e l l  i n the randomly s e l e c t e d  of a n x i e t y  the p a r a l l e l  as  t-tests. treatment  ( a c c o r d i n g t o SAI  were compared between t h e t r e a t m e n t of  1 of t h i s  scores. Equality  v e r i f i e d by p a i r e d  A n x i e t y was groups,  that i n  and  non-treatment  scores) groups  groups of the n o n - g i f t e d .  The  86 procedure f o r t h i s purpose was again the a p p l i c a t i o n of the paired  t-tests.  Level of Statistical significance The  l e v e l of s t a t i s t i c a l  s i g n i f i c a n c e i n r e s p e c t of the  p a i r e d t - t e s t s i n r e s p e c t of the i n d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y  was  . 01. T h i s l e v e l was decided was  indeed  an  Without t h i s proceeding  e f f e c t of effect  on i n order t o i n s u r e t h a t there  a n x i e t y on  there  the treatment  would have  been  no  groups. point  in  with t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  2. Regarding RLPSSS A comparison of the RLPSSS performance of Treatment and Non-Treatment groups of G i f t e d  and Non-Gifted  c a r r i e d out by a two way ANOVA. The ANOVA takes more than one f a c t o r s i m u l t a n e o u s l y  children  was  i n t o account  and r e l a t e s t o  Research  Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3. Owing t o the small number of g i f t e d g i r l s , ANOVA d e s i g n  t h a t would  i n c l u d e gender  sizes.  e x p l o r a t o r y Research Hypothesis 4 was t e s t e d  i n a q u a l i t a t i v e l y way.  way  was not p o s s i b l e ,  because of the uneven and d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e c e l l The  a three  only  87  Level of Statistical Significance The statistical  choice  of  hypotheses  an  alpha-level  was b a s e d  for  testing  on c o n s i d e r a t i o n  the  of  the  c o n s e q u e n c e s o f m a k i n g a Type I o r Type I I e r r o r i n d e r i v i n g inferences  from t h e  Since  study  this  results  deals  with  of  the a n a l y s i s  anxiety,  Type I e r r o r o r  Type I I e r r o r  Either  s e r i o u s . A very  error i s  indicate  a very  inferring  small  risk  small  I  anxiety  is  students  error  c o u l d have  effect,  taken  how  to  into  account  deal with  However, A Type I I  error, incorrectly  is  effect  not  effect,  an  anxiety  c o u l d be s e r i o u s  n o t be t a k e n  into  account  while  when  i f  training  situations.  inferring really  b e c a u s e an i m p o r t a n t in training  large error.  in  problem  there  a  consequences,  unnecessarily  real-life  would  incorrectly  o f s u c h an  educational  a  consideration.  Type I e r r o r ,  treatment  data.  o f making  &alpha.-level  & a l p h a . - l e v e l would i n d i c a t e a l a r g e r i s k A Type  risk  i s a crucial  of a  t h a t t h e r e was a  the  of the  that is  there  such  factor  an  would  students.  The d e c i s i o n , t h e r e f o r e , was t o a c c e p t  a higher  r i s k of  a Type I e r r o r and t o u s e an a l p h a - l e v e l o f . 1 0 i n o r d e r  to  m i n i m i z e Type I I e r r o r . Additional mean i t e m gifted  scores  vs  conditions, possible  qualitative on  interest  i n the  t h e RLPSSS  non-gifted, are given  data  and i n the  form of p r o f i l e s  comparing boys  treatment next  vs  chapter  f o r further research.  vs  of  girls,  non-treatment as  a matter  of  88  Summary This chapter population The  (target  procedure  g r o u p s , and e a c h was  provided  for  selecting  accessible  the  gifted  two  group  ( c o n t r o l group).  matched  units  discussed  of  The  the  were:  first  v a r i a b l e s and  S p i e l b e r g e r ' s Hebrew  scores  SAI  were  for version  is  consequences by  students.  The  are  Problem-  independent  for  in  order  into to  two  anxiety  were  measuring  Trait  TAI  scores  were  one.  SAI  anxiety  was  combination  of  matched  examine  i f  induced. of  c h i l d r e n such as:  presented  three  o f TAI  a n x i e t y was  elements t h a t are considered  which  applied  Real-Life-  assessing  the groups  used  Induction  of  or  Non-Treatment,  f o r measuring State Anxiety.  dividing  successfully  randomly  the f o u r t h i s a dependent v a r i a b l e .  instruments  A n x i e t y and  units  (anxiety-induced)  Treatment,  Solving-performance.  The  equal  were  non-gifted  G e n d e r , and  used f o r  non-gifted  same p r o c e d u r e  Giftedness, Non-Giftedness,  The  and  gifted units  e i t h e r a treatment  a non-treatment  variables  The  the  population).  t h e manner o f m a t c h i n g them i n t o two  t o be  the  a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of  p o p u l a t i o n and  discussed.  assigned  to  has  for a  to increase anxiety i n  introducing  unclear, the  ethical considerations,  suddenly a t e s t ,  but  which  children's  "stranger"  i n an  the  b a s e d on  implies  future.  This  purpose  meaningful test  u n f a m i l i a r room. Owing  induction  only elements t h a t are r e l a t e d to  the  school  of a n x i e t y  school.  was to  included  89 The Problem  depended  Solving  v a r i a b l e was  Situations  adapted  through  a  pilot  problem  solving  tests:  performance  of r e a l  score based  on  the  (RLPSSS). employing  (1976) and  problem  the t o t a l  subject generated  Set  study  PEPSI  life  m e a s u r e d by  i n response  This two  TOPS  s o l v i n g was  relevant  a Real  Life  set real  was life  (1984).  The  a s s e s s e d by  alternative  ideas  a  every  to the s i t u a t i o n s presented i n  RLPSSS. The  devoted  m a i n s t u d y was to matching  the groups,  with assessing r e a l groups  (gifted  conditions:  conducted  life  and  problem  non-gifted  t r e a t m e n t vs  were  and  stages. Part  Part  solving under  I I was  was  concerned  performance  of  different  anxiety  determined  the data  the  by  five  collecting  and  data  judges  and  the  r e s e a r c h e r . R e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from the d i f f e r e n t presented  I  non-treatment).  Conclusions regarding processing  i n two  i n the next chapter.  analyses are  90  CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESULTS  Introduction The  results  Chapter. results The  while life  on a n a l y s i s  first  to  do  with  the remaining situations  the  the  under  chapter  in this  the  (anxiety  to problem  the problem:  s t u d y was  the  gifted  upon t o s o l v e l i f e  and  induction), in real-  noted  a n x i e t y , g i f t e d n e s s , and  of  this  questions  solving  the v a r i o u s c o n d i t i o n s  of  in  investigated  addresses  intervention  namely,  performance  called  are presented  data.  part relates  Recapitulation investigated  of the  p a r t of t h i s  previous chapter,  on  study  Included are the r e s e a r c h problems based  having  of the p r e s e n t  The  effect  Israeli  the  gender.  general  problem  of induced children  in  anxiety  who  were  problems.  Results I. Anxiety Study Before Treatment A matched p a i r Anxiety  Inventory  t-test  (TAI)  was  performed  groups.  was  the matching  verify  that  The  purpose of t h i s  successful,  so  that they  their  of  a n x i e t y b e f o r e the  level  the treatment  Trait  s c o r e s , of the matched t r e a t m e n t  non-treatment g i f t e d to  comparing the  group. Table  d i d not  4.1  of t h e s e differ  two  and  comparison groups  was  significantly  in  i n d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y  to  presents t h i s  comparison.  91  Table 4.1: Comparison between Treatment and Non-Treatment Gifted Groups on Trait Anxiety Inventory (TAI) Mean Scores  TAI  SD  M  Treatment Non-treatment  N  33.6  6.96  35  33.51  6.12  35  t  0.21  p = 0.84 Table 4.1 g i v e s the r e s u l t s  of the two groups of g i f t e d  students. The groups d i d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n of TAI mean group  scores.  The  mean TAI score  terms  of the treatment  (N=35 g i f t e d students) was 33.60, and t h a t of the non-  treatment group The r e s u l t s  (N=35 g i f t e d students) was 33.51. a l s o show t h a t  the v a r i a b i l i t y of the TAI  mean scores f o r both groups were very s i m i l a r : r e g a r d i n g the treatment group: S.D. =  6.96, and the non-treatment  group:  S.D. = 6.12. These data  support the b a s i c  assumption t h a t the two  groups were comparable on t r a i t a n x i e t y b e f o r e the i n d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y t o the treatment group. The  procedures d e s c r i b e d above with the g i f t e d  were c a r r i e d  out  in  the  same  way  with  the  groups  non-gifted  treatment and non-treatment groups. A comparison between the TAI mean scores of the matched groups was performed the  p a i r e d matched t - t e s t .  through  Table 4.2 p r e s e n t s the r e s u l t s .  92  Table 4.2:  Comparison between Treatment and Non-Treatment Non-Gifted Groups on Trait Anxiety Inventory (TAI) Mean Scores  TAI  M  33.94  Treatment  SD  N  5.84  36  t  0.00  33.94  Non-treatment  4.52  36  (approx.)  p=l.00  Table 4.2  shows t h a t the matched p a i r t - t e s t r e v e a l e d  no  s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e on the TAI mean  scores  between the treatment and  groups  the non-treatment matched  of n o n - g i f t e d s t u d e n t s . The mean TAI score of the group  (N=36 n o n - g i f t e d students) was  non-treatment group  (N=36  33.94 and t h a t of  non-gifted  33.94. Regarding the v a r i a b i l i t y :  treatment  students)  treatment group  was  the also  SD=5.84,  and the non-treatment group SD=4.52. The  results  in  Tables  e s s e n t i a l l y , the matched gifted,  in  both,  4.1  and  4.2  students, g i f t e d as  treatment  and  indicate  that  w e l l as  non-  non-treatment,  assigned  groups, i n i t i a l l y had the same l e v e l of t r a i t a n x i e t y b e f o r e treatment.  93 After Treatment Following  the induction  of  anxiety  i n the  treatment  g r o u p s , a l l t h e s u b j e c t s were a s k e d t o r e s p o n d t o t h e Anxiety level  Inventory  of anxiety  session  ( S A I ) . The the c h i l d r e n  i n which  i n treatment  different  after  groups responded The  in their  matched p a i r  as  whether  difference  at  a n x i e t y mean since  any  situations only  The  S i t u a t i o n Set  gifted  and  i n non-treatment  non-  assigned  time, but  treatment  the  natural  t-tests  were  had  groups  under  responded  conclusion "treatment"  comparing  setting.  t h e SAI s c o r e s  and non-treatment  created level  home-room  conducted a  i n order  SAI.  regarding  =  0.01  to  significant  between  performance would  as  examine  T h i s a l p h a - l e v e l was  "non-treatment"  of  (gifted  statistically  of alpha  s c o r e s on t h e  i f anxiety  Solving  a t t h e same  treatment  non-gifted), anxiety  the  a n x i e t y was i n d u c e d , and t h e n o n - t r e a t m e n t  t h e two s u b - g r o u p s , well  as  t h e SAI  circumstances.  immediately  Problem  A l l t h e groups,  as w e l l  groups, responded t o  measured  e x p e r i e n c e d a t the time of the  the Real L i f e  (RLPSSS) was p r e s e n t e d . gifted,  SAI i n s t r u m e n t  State  their set  under be  i s e v i d e n t w i t h a very- s m a l l r i s k  two  relevant of type  I  error. It  was assumed  successful,  on  counterparts  i f  the treatment group  the treatment group higher  that  the  of  average  the anxiety of the g i f t e d  the non-gifted than  i n the non-treatment  would  induction  was  students  and  s t u d e n t s would their  score  matched-pair  g r o u p s . T a b l e 4.3  presents  94 a  comparison  treatment  between  the  and n o n - t r e a t m e n t  performances gifted  groups  of  the  on t h e  matched-  SAI.  Table 4.3: Post-Treatment Comparison of the State Anxiety Inventory (SAI) Mean Scores between the Treatment and the Non-Treatment Gifted Groups  SAI  M  Treatment  SD  35.37  N  7.56  t  35 3.67  Non-treatment p  30.66  4.22  35  = 0.0008 Table  4.3  shows  the  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e and n o n - t r e a t m e n t effectiveness  statistically of  gifted  for  the  anxiety  significant  the  SAI  test  of the  the g i f t e d  matched p a i r  students  of  means on t h e  groups  of  i n d i c a t e d by t h e  results  results;  The mean SAI  s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r than  non-treatment  (35.37 v s 3 0 . 6 6 ) .  that  the  anticipated It  planned  manipulation  the  There  of  These  is  a  groups  score  of  the  that  of  the  results  anxiety  is  suggest  produced  the  response.  s h o u l d be n o t i c e d  that while the standard  (S.D.) o f t h e n o n - t r e a t m e n t anxiety  The  treatment  t r e a t m e n t g r o u p was group,  treatment  d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e two  a t p<0.001.  the  students.  induction t-test  on  induced g i f t e d  g r o u p was  g r o u p was  induced anxiety treatment  4.22,  7.56.  The  deviation  t h e S.D.  of  the  greater  S.D.  in  group r e f l e c t s  the f a c t  that  95  there in  was  their  This  is  considerable response to the i n keeping  subjective  state  perceives  a  which  stressful  treatment  and  the  among i n d i v i d u a l  method o f a n x i e t y  with  c o m p a r i s o n between  Table 4.4:  diversity  the  definition  reflects  the  situation. SAI  induction  used.  of a n x i e t y  way  the  Table  mean s c o r e s  non-treatment n o n - g i f t e d  subjects  4.4 of  as  a  individual presents  the  a  matched-  groups.  Post-Treatment Comparison of the State Anxiety Inventory (SAI) Mean Scores between the Treatment and Non Treatment Non-Gifted Groups  SAI  M  Treatment  35.78  SD  N  8.35  36  t  4.03 Nontreatment  29.. 56  4.35  36  f o r induced  anxiety  p=0.0003 Table  4.4  treatment  as The  of  anxiety  the  gifted  evidence  non-gifted  under s i m i l a r  non-gifted  by  the  This  s e t t i n g s and  anxiety  inducing  mean-score d i f f e r e n c e  subjects group.  students.  in  the group  a t the  same  group.  e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the  evidenced  treatment  the  group  experienced time  shows  i n the This  on  the  treatment group  difference  was  treatment SAI and  found  of  the to  is the nonbe  96  statistically of  significant.  the  S.D.  the  non-treatment group  t h a t was  the  as  reacts  differently  a subjective  may  state  according  a l s o apply  due  to  i n d u c t i o n was  a  lack  4 . 3 5 ) . The  i n which  to the  h e r e . The  way  Again,  s/he  scores  the  by  individual  of  interpretation referring  every  individual  the  of  the  SAI  than the  lack  to  perceives on  more d i v e r s e  that  than t h a t  gifted,  of commonality  perceived  indicate  greater  with the  non-treatment group.  be  was  vs  t r e a t m e n t g r o u p were much  of the may  (8.35  suggested before,  situation,  data here a l s o  treatment group  anxiety  the  The  for scores  homogeneity  i n how  the  anxiety  subjects.  Summary of the Anxiety Study In  this part  establishing  a basis  establishing  of  anxiety  (gifted  that  anxiety  step  before  level  study.  g r o u p s on the  as  the  the  the  anxiety in their  devoted  the  study.  groups and  on  to The  initial  the  evidence a  subjects'  solving  treatment  i t was  problem  condition.  significant  w o u l d have b e e n no  trait  was  t r e a t m e n t g r o u p s was  treatment  between  of  non-gifted),  i n the  However, once  experiment  comparable  result in a  anxiety  groups, there the  equal  examining under  study a t t e n t i o n  f o r subsequent p a r t s  induced  d i d not  of  the  as w e l l  was  performance anxiety  two  of  and  found t h a t  differed significantly the  inducing  difference in  justification  state anxiety,  If  vital  the  non-treatment t o go the on  on  with  matchedthe  g r o u n d was  day  of  clear  97  to  examine  the performance  problem-solving  of the  situations  and r e l a t e  research questions presented i n this The  second p a r t  concerning solving  the  of t h i s  effect  subjects  of  in  real  the r e s u l t s  the  study.  chapter deals with the anxiety  to  life  on  real  life  results problem  performance.  II. Real-Life-Problem-Solving-Study The r e s u l t s w h i c h observations Real L i f e  follow deal  on t h e d e p e n d e n t  Problem  Solving  w i t h an a n a l y s i s  variable:  Situation  Set  Performance  of  the  on  the  (RLPSSS).  Descriptive Data Means and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s  o f t h e RLPSSS  performance  scores of a l l the groups, treatment, non-treatment, non-gifted,  boys  and g i r l s  data are used i n l a t e r  gifted,  a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 4.5.  sections  of the r e s u l t s .  These  98 Table 4.5: Descriptive Data: Real Life Problem Solving Situation Set (RLPSSS) Means (M) and Standard Deviations (S.D.) by Treatment, Giftedness and Gender  Non-Treatment M  Treatment  S.D.  N  M  S.D.  N  Gifted  94.00  26.54  35  87.25  22.07  35  Non-Gifted  74.36  19.14  36  68.03  22.44  36  Gifted  90.21  29.38  24  83.63  21.16  24  Non-Gifted  66.82  16.55  19  66.50  17.78  19  17.31-  11  95.18  22.96  11  19.17  17  69.25  25.97  17  Boys  Girls 102.27  Gifted Non-Gifted  81.11  Statistical Hypotheses to be tested The  research hypotheses  r e p e a t e d below 1)  the  f o r convenience t o the reader.  There  difference  presented i n Chapter I I I are  will  be  a t t h e .10 l e v e l  RLPSSS between t h e  no  statistically  significant  on t h e mean s c o r e p e r f o r m a n c e on  gifted  and n o n - g i f t e d  regardless  of  treatment. 2)  There  difference  will  at the  be  .10 l e v e l  no on  statistically mean-score  significant  performance  on  99 the  RLPSSS  between  the  treatment  treatment groups r e g a r d l e s s 3)  There  interaction  will  at  the  be  of  and  the  non-  giftedness.  no  .10  groups  statistically  level  due  to  significant  giftedness  and  treatment. The central  following research hypothesis i s tangential problem  stated  i n C h a p t e r 1 and  i s o f an  to  the  exploratory  nature. 4) difference the  There  will  a t the  .10  be level  RLPSSS between b o y s  and  no  statistically  significant  on t h e m e a n - s c o r e p e r f o r m a n c e  on  girls.  Analysis of Variance Results The 1-3  d a t a was  by means o f  fixed-effects, It w i l l statistical  analyzed to investigate research analysis  a 2x2  factorial,  design.  be r e c a l l e d significance  regarding  the performance  are  i n T a b l e 4.6  given  of v a r i a n c e using  hypotheses  from Chapter 3 for  that the l e v e l  testing  o f t h e RLPSSS was  below:  a l l .10.  of  hypotheses The  results  100 Table 4.6: Analysis of Variance of Treatment and Giftedness on Real Life Problem Solving Situation Set (RLPSSS) Mean Performance  SOURCE OF VARIATION  SUM OF SQUARES  Group  13405.17  1  13405.17  26.07  1516.17  1  1516.17  2.95  .088*  1.49  1  1.49  0.01  .957  Treatment Group x T r e a t m e n t  MEAN SQUARE  df  Residual  70961.96  138  514.22  Total  85884.79  141  609.11  *Significant Table  4.6  (giftedness) Treatment there  a t t h e p<.10 shows  effects  (induced  were  no  (F=0.01,p=0.957).  that  .000  level. there  (F=26.07  anxiety)  Sig of F  F  /  were  p=0.000), and  effects,  significant  significant  Group  significant  (F=2.95, p=0.088), interaction  but  effects,  101 As means 4.5  of  an a i d gifted  were p l o t t e d  to  i n t e r p r e t i n g these  vs  n o n - g i f t e d by  as  shown i n F i g u r e  findings,  treatment 4.1  4.1:  Gifted  vs.  in  cell Table  below:  NON-TREATMENT  Figure  given  the  TREATMENT  Non-Gifted  by  Treatment  102 The 3.83.  standard  e r r o r of estimate  E r r o r bands  cell  mean.  of width  interaction  3.83, a r e  4.1 also  Figure effect  o f t h e c e l l means depicted  indicates  between t r e a t m e n t  that  was  about  there  each  was  no  and g i f t e d n e s s .  Research Hypotheses 1-3: Interpretation The  results  given  Research Hypotheses level and  above  1 and  of significance.  graphical,  is  average, performed  at a  RLPSSS,  the  treatment.  did  However,  performance of statistically Since  both  regular  groups.  situation  level  statistical on  the  i n response  to  the  regardless  anxiety  Both groups  lower  0.10  group',  group,  of  that  a t the  both  gifted  of  affected  the  performed  l e v e l under i n d u c e d  do n o t o v e r l a p ,  at  a  anxiety.  t h e c e l l means  were  significantly.  induction  school  the  induction  t h e e r r o r bands  anxiety  not tenable  Non-Gifted  What i s p a r t i c u l a r l y that  that  higher  significant  taken to d i f f e r  2 are  What t h e a n a l y s e s ,  suggest  than  a r e i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean  noteworthy about these r e s u l t s  (considering  setting)  did  affect  ethical  is  s t a n d a r d s and a  p e r f o r m a n c e on  life-  problems.  Research hypothesis interaction giftedness.  effect This  was  3  found  i s interpreted  giftedness  d i d n o t somehow  o f a more  complex n a t u r e ;  were s t a t i s t i c a l l y  i s tenable. between t o mean t h a t  No  statistical  treatment treatment  combine t o p r o d u c e a j o i n t only  significant.  the  and  s e p a r a t e main  and  effect effects  103 As an i n t e r e s t i n g  aside,  a comparison of p r o f i l e s  is  p r e s e n t e d b e l o w . E a c h p r o f i l e p r e s e n t s t h e means o f a l l t h e responses given  to  each  situation  by  a  certain  group,  treatment, non-treatment, boys,  girls).  (gifted,  non-gifted,  The  c o n n e c t i n g t h e means o f e a c h g r o u p ,  of  line this  profile  group.  Figure gifted  i s the  4.2  below p r e s e n t s p e r f o r m a n c e p r o f i l e s  and n o n - g i f t e d g r o u p s who d i d n o t e x p e r i e n c e  anxiety.  f o r the induced  104  F i g u r e 4.2 shows t h a t i n a n o n - t r e a t m e n t c o n d i t i o n , g i f t e d group's p r o f i l e (1) a p p e a r s a t a h i g h e r l e v e l that of the non-gifted group (2) on n e a r l y a l l situations. The ANOVA indicates that the o v e r a l l d i f f e r e n c e were s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  the than the mean  S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  L I F E PROBLEM SITUATION NUMBER OF THE RLPSSS  Figure  4.2: The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d and N o n - G i f t e d under Non-Treatment C o n d i t i o n  105  F i g u r e 4.3 presents the performance p r o f i l e s f o r the g i f t e d g r o u p s and t h e n o n - g i f t e d g r o u p s u n d e r treatment.  Figure  4.3:  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f and N o n - G i f t e d under Treatment C o n d i t i o n s  Gifted  106  Figure  4.3 s u g g e s t s t h e  of t h e  profiles  of  induced  anxiety.  The g i f t e d  the  non-gifted  modified.  same d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e  t h e two  g r o u p s when  profile  performing  pattern  seems  than  somewhat  between t h e two p r o f i l e s  depend on somewhat d i f f e r e n t  under  (1) a p p e a r s h i g h e r  ( 2 ) . However, t h e  The d i s t i n c t i o n s  levels  seem t o  situations.  R e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s 4:  Research Hypothesis t o do w i t h  postulated  4 was e x p l o r a t o r y  gender e f f e c t s .  were a r e l a t i o n s h i p between in  coping  with  whether g i f t e d in  postulate  boys and g i r l s ,  relatively study,  s m a l l number  anxiety.  of g i f t e d  girls data  there  anxiety wonder  differentially  While t h e  gender  because of t h e  a v a i l a b l e f o r the  i s given  under b e t t e r sampling  with  a  view  conditions  the future. 4.5  the various  presents  d e s c r i p t i v e data  groups, g i f t e d  non-treatment. disproportionate  The  table  and  comparing boys vs g i r l s  small  design.  o f boys and  and n o n - g i f t e d ,  suggests sample  that sizes,  girls  treatment  because a  u n d e r t h e two t r e a t m e n t  would be i n a p p r o p r i a t e because the  were a f f e c t e d  additional non-statistical  Table in  i f  one w o u l d  tested s t a t i s t i c a l l y  t o more r i g o r o u s r e s e a r c h in  situations,  by i n d u c e d  c o u l d n o t be  Presumably,  and h a d  g i f t e d n e s s and i n d u c e d  life-problems  t h e i r performance  i n nature  2x2  and  of the ANOVA  conditions  of the unbalanced nature  To compensate f o r t h i s ,  qualitative  data  of  i n the  107  form of p r o f i l e s of  performance on each  s i t u a t i o n s f o r both boys  and g i r l s ,  of the 16  g i f t e d and  problem  non-gifted,  under the two treatment c o n d i t i o n s , were o b t a i n e d . While  these p r o f i l e s , a t  best, are only  suggestive,  they may p o i n t t o i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r study. The r e s u l t s , then, of are  i n v e s t i g a t i n g Research Hypothesis  p r e s e n t e d below i n p r o f i l e  form:  F i g u r e 4.4 suggests t h a t under non-treatment  condition  the  d i f f e r e n c e s i n l e v e l of the g i f t e d boys' p r o f i l e  the  gifted girls'  profile  4,  (2) are  (1) and  not c o n s i s t e n t . In  some  s i t u a t i o n s the g i r l s p r o v i d e d more s o l u t i o n s w h i l e on others the  boys p r o v i d e more. For  the purpose of the study, t h i s r e s u l t i s important.  It indicates  t h a t the  differential  gender  treatment  condition.  RLPSSS does  effects  when  not produce performed  consistent under  non-  108  101  FE  Figure  4.4:  PROBLEM S I T U A T I O N  NUMBER  OF THE R L P S S S  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d  Boys and G i f t e d  G i r l s under Non-Treatment  Conditions  109 When a n x i e t y the of  i s i n d u c e d and a l l o t h e r c o n d i t i o n s  same, any d i f f e r e n c e the e f f e c t  to  just  note t h a t  which  the  i n Situations  about  Situations  the  of the reader, 6, 10 and 15,  out t h a t the  6 and  same  10, i n  to  which  deals  with furniture  answer c a n be p r o v i d e d  Figure b o y s and  at this  4.5 shows t h e  gifted  girls  under  (see F i g u r e  4.2) i n be  and g i r l s  seemed  to  performance  on  high  gifted  performance  to Situation  may have p e r f o r m e d somewhat b e t t e r .  interest  could  the  the  i t i s of  study.  non-gifted,  t h e boys  h i g h l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d . With r e g a r d  situation  result  scope of t h i s  out-performed the  I t turns  contribute  i s beyond  for curiosity  gifted  examined.  i n p r o f i l e s may be due t o a  of anxiety.  Content a n a l y s i s However,  remain  was  15, t h e g i r l s  Is the reason that  or i s  i t pure  the  chance?  no  stage.  performance p r o f i l e s treatment  of  (induced  gifted anxiety)  conditions. For  t h e most  part,  a p p e a r s somewhat h i g h e r situations for  the levels  these s i t u a t i o n s  gender further  the l e v e l  of the p r o f i l e f o r  than the  level  seem d i f f e r e n t ,  for  boys. In  but the  investigation.  induced anxiety  some  distinction  i s q u e s t i o n a b l e . The p o s s i b l e  on p e r f o r m a n c e s u n d e r  girls  e f f e c t of  seems w o r t h y o f  110  Figure  4.5:  The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d Boys and G i f t e d G i r l s under Treatment C o n d i t i o n s  Ill Searching b o y s and  for  girls,  boys under  even  Figure  the  two  shows p r o f i l e s  of  finer 4.6  distinctions  shows p r o f i l e s  treatment gifted  conditions,  girls-under  between  gifted  of  gifted  only  and  the  Figure  two  4.7  treatment  conditions. Figure to  fluctuate  levels  under  gifted  boys  most o f in  4.6  the  Figure  shows t h a t  the  over s i t u a t i o n s , the  two  4.7  (the  but,  treatment  under i n d u c e d situations.  levels  of  the  conditions  These p r o f i l e s for  gifted  suggest a p o s s i b l e  Regarding  the  girls,  beginning  of  performed t h e i r Later,  the  gifted  girls  to  suggest  RLPSSS, t h e  do  not  that  of  the  seem t o induced  performance of  gifted  affects  gifted  boys a c r o s s  seem t o  perform better  to  perform  more  substantiated.  gifted  c o u n t e r p a r t s who  levels  girls  may  profiles differ  notice  i n the  that  at  the  under a n x i e t y  out-  experience  of  the  two  not  is  this  the as  Gifted  remains  of  tempted  affect  same d i r e c t i o n  most s i t u a t i o n s .  However,  anxiety.  groups  under a n x i e t y , w h i l e g i f t e d  poorly.  two  difference.  not  does  on  those  under the  v e r y much. One  anxiety  that  more p o o r l y  gender  girls  did  between  suggest  girls  conditions),  one  seem  compared w i t h  treatment  the  profiles  differences  anxiety perform  profiles  gifted  the  it  girls  b o y s seem to  be  112  i  X  1  1  '  2  '  I  3  1  I  4  '  I  5  '  I  6  1  TREATMENT --NON-TREATMENT  —i—'—I—'—I—•—i—'—i—•—i—i—i—•—j—i—i—i—[  7  B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  L I F E PROBLEM SITUATION NUMBER OF THE RLPSSS  F i g u r e 4 . 6 : T h e P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d Boys under Treatment and Non-Treatment C o n d i t i o n s  113  LIFE  PROBLEM SITUATION NUMBER OF THE  RLFSSS  F i g u r e 4 . 7 : The P e r f o r m a n c e P r o f i l e s on t h e RLPSSS o f G i f t e d Girls under Treatment Conditions and Non-Treatment Conditions  114 Summary Major findings: The gifted  effect  of induced a n x i e t y  students  at  the  intermediate  elementary  school  situations  i s present. Similar  is  also  in  found  performance  is  dealing with  among at a  on t h e p e r f o r m a n c e  the  lower  grade  real  effect  life  due  in  problematic  to induced anxiety  non-gifted. level  level  of  However,  their  of the  gifted  than that  students. The  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e p e r f o r m a n c e  n o n - g i f t e d was  f o u n d t o be  0.001  regardless  level,  i n t e r a c t i o n between  statistically of  significant  treatment.  t r e a t m e n t and  of g i f t e d  No  giftedness  at  and the  significant effects  were  found.  Additional finding: Informal performance,  whether  on t h e s i t u a t i o n s , i n performance performance girls'  analyses under  and t h a t  under  suggested  that  t r e a t m e n t o r n o t , seems t o  depend  t h e r e may  seemed t o d e c r e a s e  under  profiles  induced anxiety.  RLPSSS p e r f o r m a n c e  increased  of  anxiety.  under  be g e n d e r  differences  G i f t e d boys' anxiety,  while  a p p e a r e d t o be unchanged, These  findings  RLPSSS  are,  gifted or  at  even best,  tentative. I n C h a p t e r 5, t h e drawn, and made.  results  are discussed  s u g g e s t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h and  conclusions application  115 CHAPTER V  SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  This present as  chapter  study  for  purpose of the  and t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r u n d e r t a k i n g  the study's  conclusions,  r e c a p i t u l a t e s the general  results.  This w i l l  educational  i t , as  well  be f o l l o w e d by d i s c u s s i o n ,  implications  and  recommendations  further research.  Summary Rationale and Purpose of this Study This education's  study task  i s based  i s t o prepare  s u c c e s s f u l l y with is  not just  generation able to  on t h e  life  t o the next  gather,  the next  problems.  to transfer  assumption t h a t generation  The main t a s k  of  modern to  deal  schools  i n f o r m a t i o n a n d knowledge f r o m  one  one, b u t t o p r o d u c e a c i t i z e n who  handle,  and  process  i n t e l l i g e n t way, s o t h a t he w i l l  information  is  in  an  be a b l e t o cope w i t h  life  one h a s sometimes t o  take  problems. In o r d e r risks of  t o s o l v e problems,  a n d h a s t o be a b l e t o make d e c i s i o n s , u n d e r a l l  c o n d i t i o n s . One o f t h e most p r e v a i l i n g  anxiety a person or  the  experiences  consequences  understanding  the  of  issues  problems under a n x i e t y  while  is  i t s  involved very  conditions i s the  facing either solutions. in  kinds  dealing  relevant to the  a  problem  Therefore, with  life  educational  116 process  within the  formal  depth understanding special  may e f f e c t  i s supposed  children.  "more"  There  is  the c u r r i c u l u m  to decide  concerning  problems and reference  the  are  controversy  quantitatively,  Findings  or  the way  whether  differ  as  they  perform  mutual r e l a t i o n s h i p population  unique q u a l i t i e s awareness  t h a t by  address t h e i r a b i l i t y  gifted special  be  in  handling  just  quality. real  life  anxiety  more i n s i g h t  (with  into  the  f o r the g i f t e d .  between t h e d e m o c r a t i c  was  o f t h e most  educational  should  well  and  i n schools.  these  under  t o n o n - g i f t e d ) , may p r o v i d e  its gifted  they  way g i f t e d a r e  discussed  a p p e a r s t o be a g r e e d t h a t t h e r e  the  design  programs f o r t h e regarding  i s s u e of adequate education  The and  Such an i n -  p r o g r a m s t h a t t h e modern  to provide  p r o g r a m s . One n e e d s  entire  system.  p r o j e c t s t o be d e v e l o p e d and i m p l e m e n t e d  Among t h e s p e c i a l system  educational  in  society  Chapter I. I t  i s a need t o c u l t i v a t e  able  providing  the  i n s o c i e t y , and t h e r e them w i t h  and needs, b o t h t h e y  is  programs  that  and s o c i e t y  will  benefit. The  geographical  which t h i s Israel,  research  is  a  a  country  potentially  identification citizens  can  faced  circumstances  are  with  also  quite  within  significant. extraordinary  of which i s t h e n e c e s s i t y t o s u r v i v e  hostile  of the special contribute to  need. I n t h i s r e s p e c t ,  political  was c o n d u c t e d  problems, n o t t h e l e a s t in  and  region. strengths t h e common  Consequently, that  the  i t s more g i f t e d  good i s  the issues associated with  an  urgent  t h e impact  117 of  anxiety  on r e a l  to  be o f p a r t i c u l a r The m a i n  effect of  main  of the g i f t e d  seem  importance.  on  Israeli  Having t h i s the  problem s o l v i n g  purpose of t h i s  of anxiety  gifted  life  real  s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e  life  problem  solving  the  performance  children. purpose  i n mind  leads to the formulation of  problem and t h e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s which  follow.  The Problem Life solving.  is  i n essence a  Dealing with l i f e  whether  the s o l u t i o n  or  generate  will  may c a u s e decisions for  continuous process of problems  found w i l l  i n v o l v e s t h e dilemma  actually  e v e n more c o m p l i c a t e d  anxiety  in  and a c c e p t  the i n d i v i d u a l  the p o s s i b l e  problemof  solve the  problem,  ones. T h i s  dilemma  who  risks  needs  to  o f t h e way  make chosen  t h e p r o b l e m t o be s o l v e d . Anxiety  responses d i f f e r  (Spielberger,  1972).  anxiety affect confront real  f r o m one i n d i v i d u a l  The p r o b l e m  t h e performance life  i s , therefore,  of g i f t e d  problematic  t o another how  does  c h i l d r e n when  they  situations  that  need t o  be  many a s p e c t s  of  solved. The  literature  problem-solving.  There  c o n c e r n i n g a n x i e t y and a n x i e t y and (see:  gifted  deals  broadly with  exists  also  i t s effects.  children  a  The  have b e e n  C h a p t e r I I ) . However, no r e s e a r c h  vast  literature  issues related also  to  investigated,  l i t e r a t u r e was f o u n d  118 concerning  t h e combined m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l  Problem-Solving/  Anxiety/  Gifted  issue:  Real-Life-  children.  Research Questions The  following three research  result  of  gifted  and n o n - g i f t e d s t u d e n t s  1.  counterparts  Does  anxiety  performance  3. life  problem  and  affect  of g i f t e d  solving  i n elementary  real  the  referred  4.  Is  the  their  non-  problems?  life  problem  solving  students?  affect  performance?  t o i t s gender  girls  a  school:  out-perform  life  as  with  between g i f t e d n e s s a n d a n x i e t y  there a s i g n i f i c a n t  gifted  real  and n o n - g i f t e d  fourth research question  and  evolved  a r e concerned  children  i n solving  Does i n t e r a c t i o n  The  and  problem,  Do i n t e l l e c t u a l l y g i f t e d  gifted  2.  t h e main  questions  on  focused  o n l y on t h e  gifted  differences.  d i f f e r e n c e between g i f t e d  their  real  p e r f o r m a n c e when a n x i e t y i s i n d u c e d ?  life  boys  problem-solving  119  Results and Discussion The  results  indicated  that gifted  problem-solvers The  gifted  than  of  to  for  the  a  reciprocating of  particular  in  life  from  the  population.  The  small  many and  percentage  by  later  gifted  performed  significantly  gifted  i n coping  with  the  former,  the  former,  are  that  did  p r o b l e m s was  of  and  evidence  b e t t e r than  life  mutual  i n terms  to the  of  contribute The  gifted, the  Therefore,  to  ways.  the  c o n t r i b u t i o n of the  real  stemmed  gifted very  provided  interest.  question  better real  high p o t e n t i a l  society  education  are  comparison  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s o c i e t y appropriate  Research  non-gifted.  in this  i t has  first  group,  constitutes a  However,  meaningfully  a  the  society  population  society.  as  are  interest  expectations  t o the  in relation  an  the  the non-  important  finding. One  of  t h e myths a s s o c i a t e d  question  was  that  brilliant  students  l e s s well-endowed Influential  intellectually having for  high  Gallagher, gifted  coping 1978;  with  as: nuclear  war,  real  life  are  1936;  Jung,  problems  G a l b r a i t h , 1985).  feeling  of  (Landau,  g l o b a l problems,  relationships,  as  1954).  T h i s view suggests  with  are  problems.  (or genius)  helplessness  life  international  research  children  giftedness  (Freud,  c h i l d r e n are preoccupied  first  gifted  with  t h e o r i e s even viewed  Another view emphasizes the in  the  academic achievement, but  dealing  p s y c h o l o g i c a l maladjustment  gifted  with  economy,  the 1976; that such or  120 with  personal  number o f  problems,  things  expectations  of  relationships. deep i n s i g h t of  the  they  such as: can  society  The into  and  The  special  according  involved  causes a f e e l i n g  results  reinforce  them,  to e x p l a i n  why  solve real  life  of  the  gifted  even i f t h e y may  the  n e e d and  motivation  the  gifted  that  to  depart invite  to  find  t h e y do  not  to  context,  succeed. This  m o t i v a t e d by  gifted  is  in  of  peer a  understanding their  question emphasizes  t h a t may  help  ability  (1980) d i s c u s s e d  He  order  i s so  to the  ways  suggested  away f r o m  of that  strong  coping  for with  stress. and  Male's  eminent  (1981)  people  to take r i s k s  f e a r o f f a i l u r e and  line  a higher  stress.  shy  contrast  research  from t r a d i t i o n a l  a new  Perron  motivation  of the  their  v i e w , have  giftedness,  Torrance  problems even under c o n d i t i o n of  willingness  first  c h i l d r e n have  problems.  ambivalent  helplessness.  associated with  thinking,  the  by  the  intensifies  thinking. This  of  of the  regarding  just  line  gifted  this  the  to t h i s  to  readiness  In  and  relevant  another  qualities  by  p r o b l e m s . However, t h e i r  complications  worries,  overwhelmed by  in life,  of  gifted, the  do  being  to the  explains  i f there  is a  non-gifted  therefore  theory  avoid  the  chance  who  taking  are any  risks. D a v i d s o n and of  insight  findings gifted  skills  of t h i s  Sternberg  (1984) d i s c u s s e d  in giftedness, study  in solving real  regarding life  w h i c h may higher  the  centrality  explain also  the  performance of  the  problems. According  to  Davidson  121 and  Sternberg,  involve  the r e l e v a n t  selective  selective problem  encoding,  combination,  The  the  gifted.  deal  of the p r e s e n t with  the g i f t e d  as  with  life  and  The  to  comparison,  and  to  the  perceive  alternative  ideas  to  theoretical  that  b e t t e r than  non-  above i s t h a t t h e myth  o r as  h e l p l e s s when  have  be  of  of  confronted  substituted  by  the  repertoire  and  can  a rich  problems.  s h o u l d and  c h a l l e n g e them  the view  of the  a l l kinds  children  support  problems  should  they  relevant r e a l - l i f e  the  and  study  life  problems  cope w i t h  gifted  that w i l l with  real  impractical  acknowledgement t h a t handle  gifted  r e a c h new  A major i m p l i c a t i o n  real  the  which  problem.  results  the g i f t e d  selective  enable  i n many ways and  cope w i t h  psychological processes  can b e n e f i t  with p r a c t i c a l problematic  from  activities  situations,  academic s t u d i e s  in  that their  programs to  cope  addition curriculum  provides.  The  results  in relation  to the  indicated  that anxiety affected  direction  of  decreased  as a f a c t o r  in this  performance.  study,  not  t h a t i s connected  life  p r o b l e m s . One  face  is  whether  of to  research  the treatment  r e m a i n a f e a t u r e o f modern l i f e . dealt with  second  Anxiety  question  groups i n is  likely  to  In t h i s r e s p e c t , a n x i e t y i s  as a p a t h o l o g i c a l t r a i t , with  the c r u c i a l purposely  the  the a b i l i t y  to deal  questions that  introduce  anxiety  but with  educators in  the  122 educational can  system,  or t o avoid  ideally  one s h o u l d  peaceful  and  unnecessary environment  personal  in  1980).  environment  which  may  Kogan,  society force  (Dirkes,  1983).  in  attitudes.  of  and  of  the  performance  i s very  educational  part  enlisting of  concerning  complicated  system,  study  may o f f e r  1973;  of  modern  anxiety  essential  as  a  duties  e i t h e r one o f  the  deliberate  and i s u n p o p u l a r i n  because  of  the  However, when s u c h an  and a d e q u a t e l y  own  believe that i f  was f o u n d t o s u p p o r t  resolved.  children  the e t h i c a l  In t h i s  an example o f s u c h an  ethical  induction  c o n t r o l l e d , and t h e  seem t o be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y  anxiety.  an  distractions.  d e b r i e f e d a b o u t what was t a k i n g p l a c e ,  present  a  any  Such  Dillon,  educators  ways  Research  of anxiety  i s well-planned  Getzels  find  c o n c e r n s w h i c h may a r i s e .  the  avoid  e n e r g y t o one's  any u n n e c e s s a r y  1965;  However, no r e s e a r c h  issues  to  c o n s t i t u t e an i n s e p a r a b l e  must  positive  later  that  t o grow i n  anxiety.  one's  hand, some o t h e r  and a n x i e t y  formal  and  elicit  peace, d e v o t i n g  On t h e o t h e r  induction  the attitude  t o enable c h i l d r e n  development without  Torrance,  these  intuitively  i s s u p p o s e d t o e n a b l e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t and g r o w t h  and  life,  strive  harmonious  (Wallach  stress  support  stress  of t h e c h i l d  are  This  be p u t i n p h r a s e s u c h a s : "To s t r e s s o r n o t t o s t r e s s " ? Many e d u c a t o r s  the  i t a s much a s p o s s i b l e .  respect, induction  123 A  follow  participated as  well  up  discussion  i n the present  as  the  with  study,  non-gifted,  and l i k e d t o d i s c u s s  deliberate  induction  situations. they  were  Some happy  anxiety,  expected,  proud t o  solving  importance  of  decreasing  statistical under  of these  i n this  decreased  to  the  the f e e l i n g to  educational  study.  the r e a l  life  problem-  and n o n - g i f t e d  when  of  ethical  drastic  that the l e v e l  anxiety  children.  the  performance  the  trend  increased.  found t o  The  anxiety  be  moderate.  c o n s i d e r a t i o n s which  prevented  in  of the a c t u a l l y  s u f f i c i e n t f o r obtaining and  was  anxiety  only  that  i s i n the demonstrated  "normal c o n d i t i o n s "  the  problematic  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p e r f o r m a n c e u n d e r  induction  possible  results  performance  However, i n v i e w o f the  and  contribute  performance of both g i f t e d  The  and  anxiety  who  that the gifted,  positively  expressed  knowledge b y t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n As  children  the issues involved i n the  o f them even and  revealed  reacted  debriefing,  of  the  this  study,  induced  anxiety  a moderate o v e r a l l results  should  i t is was  effect  be  in  evaluated  accordingly. Given performance, a)  the fact  that anxiety  two m a j o r i m p l i c a t i o n s s h o u l d  I t may be s p e c u l a t e d  levels  of anxiety  tests.  These  from the  caused a  lower  may s c o r e  that gifted lower  scores might  g i f t e d program.  scales within the battery  decrease  be  considered.  c h i l d r e n with  on t h e i r  high  identification  determine t h e i r  Therefore,  in  inclusion  exclusion of  anxiety  of the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n tests,  and  124 weighting  their  r e s u l t s with those  contribute  to the  identification  identified  as g i f t e d  owing  of the other t e s t s , of g i f t e d  to t h e i r  may  who may n o t  lower performance  be  under  anxiety. b) One t a s k o f a sound t o work u n d e r  conditions  overcome  this  induction  of anxiety  to  be  adaptation improve  of  under  under  The r e s u l t s that  the  Chapter I V ) .  more  anxiety.  there  i s no  i n the  Although the  of  differential  i n performance  the  of the n o n - g i f t e d hypothesis  of  skills,  to  of  s u g g e s t i o n s h o u l d be  to affect  performance  of  giftedness  (See F i g u r e  4.1,  RLPSSS o f  both  compared w i t h  matched  the g i f t e d  and  the  groups,  the  a s compared  with  c h i l d r e n was m a i n t a i n e d . concerning  assumption  that  performance  under a n x i e t y children  question  both g i f t e d  on  anxiety  non-treatment  between g i f t e d n e s s the  research  same d i r e c t i o n  interaction  the n o n - g i f t e d  prove  framework  i n t e r a c t i o n between  was f o u n d  performance  The  general  This  to  controlled  i n s c h o o l s , may  to the t h i r d  treatment groups d e c r e a s e d under  that  they learn  The  and development  in relation  children  performance.  children  research.  and a n x i e t y . A n x i e t y non-gifted  so t h a t  supervision  strategies,  i n further  indicated  anxiety,  in  within  performance  examined  of  decrease  effective  education i s to " t r a i n "  quality  the  possibility  of  and a n x i e t y was b a s e d on gifted  children's  i s probably different  from t h a t of  because  of  the  the  o f (a) t h e d i f f e r e n c e  i n the  125 intellectual (conducted  level  in  differences  as  Israel  indicated for their  i n anxiety  levels  difference  i n motivation  of f a i l u r e  vs  striving  Further while  there  to  (Milgram,  succeed the  significant  (Perron  such d i f f e r e n c e c o n c e r n i n g  two The  are not  groups'  personality  be  kept  and  level  a) their their  performance,  i s t o pay  effect  no  with  of  anxiety  that  gifted  and  the  of  anxiety  of the  should  intellectual  ability on  their  from t h a t of  their  not  only  to  bear  teacher  that  f u n c t i o n i n g of  their  intellectual  of the performance (and  i n mind  general  of the  anxiety  of the g i f t e d ,  i s one  as  students of  them),  i t concerns  the  non-gifted.  I f performance under a n x i e t y produces  non-gifted  two  problems,  i n terms  of  a t t e n t i o n to the  of c o n d i t i o n s ,  b)  that  the  life  impact  c h i l d r e n should  under a l l k i n d s  of the  1985).  Therefore:  manner  teacher  the  reveals  suggests  different  e n r i c h m e n t . The  concern  finding  of t h e i r  the be  counterparts.  students,  should  (c)  e s t a b l i s h e d . However, i t  in spite  T e a c h e r s of g i f t e d  task  the  T h e i r advantage  i s well  performance appears to non-gifted  real  the  from n o n - g i f t e d c h i l d r e n i n a l l a s p e c t s  i n mind t h a t  high  this  development.  intellectual  to solve  (b)  performance.  i m p l i c a t i o n of  different  Male,  data  tests  i.e. fear  d i f f e r e n c e between  there the  and  research  in their  on  ability  1976), and  under a n x i e t y ;  populations i s no  psychological  identification),  to perform  a n a l y s i s of  is a  by  and  with  gifted,  then  similar  any  results  strategy  of  126 performance under with g i f t e d gifted  children  children  c)  a n x i e t y which  life  may p r o v e  and v i c e  gifted  as t h a t  education  own i n t e l l e c t u a l the mutual  c a n be  same l i f e  is  the g i f t e d  ability,  affected  for  should also of  in  needs o f t h e g i f t e d ,  while  projects"  and n o n - g i f t e d ,  of s p e c i a l  w o r k s h o p s w h i c h f o c u s on s t r a t e g i e s problem-solving Instead  of  dilemmas,  and w i t h  the "pull-out"  in  in  " p u l l - t o g e t h e r " program their  special  many ways  way b o t h  their  the g i f t e d  non-gifted peers.  under  as  a  should include life  anxiety. i n which the  the suggested  on a  the  "joint  t o cope w i t h r e a l  model o f f e r s a  common g r o u n d . I n  can b e n e f i t  gifted  and n o n - g i f t e d l e a v e  p o p u l a t i o n s may have m u t u a l b e n e f i t .  development of with  join  suggests  project"  of  intellectual  c o u l d be o f f e r e d  i n which g i f t e d  classes to  Any  areas  i n t h e same way  program,  l e a v e t h e r e g u l a r "home c l a s s " ,  same  according to their  a t t h e same t i m e  p r o g r a m s . The " j o i n t  the  include provisionsf o r  share  respond  real  model f o r t h e  non-gifted peers  problems, and both  interaction  a n x i e t y . A model w h i c h a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e s p e c i a l  part  non-  consideration.  t o study  Both-populations  for gifted  with  the g i f t e d  n o n - g i f t e d , a new suggested  involvement  common i n t e r e s t .  effective  and t h a t  performance  of the  program which enables  effective  t h a t t h e r e i s no  and a n x i e t y ,  problem-solving  direction  t o be  t o be  versa.  B a s e d on t h e f i n d i n g s  between g i f t e d n e s s  i s found  The  from  The same w i t h  the  this  emotional  communicating non-gifted,  127 who  will  also  problems w i t h  benefit  the  B a s e d on following III  goals  from  discussing  life  gifted. the  arguments  above,  i t  seems  t h a t R e n z u l l i (1977) s u g g e s t e d  enrichment program f o r g i f t e d  basis  practical  that  for his  the Type  c h i l d r e n a r e r e l e v a n t as  a  f o r such a model:  "To a s s i s t y o u n g s t e r s i n b e c o m i n g a c t u a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s o f r e a l p r o b l e m s o r t o p i c s by u s i n g a p p r o p r i a t e methods o f inquiry. To p r o v i d e s t u d e n t s w i t h o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r t a k i n g a n a c t i v e p a r t i n f o r m u l a t i n g p r o b l e m s t o b e i n v e s t i g a t e d and t h e methods by w h i c h t h e p r o b l e m s w i l l be a t t a c k e d . To a l l o w s t u d e n t s t o use i n f o r m a t i o n as raw r e p o r t i n g about c o n c l u s i o n s reachedby other To be  datarather persons.  than  provide opportunities f o r students' i n q u i r y a c t i v i t y d i r e c t e d t o w a r d some t a n g i b l e p r o d u c t .  to  To p r o v i d e s t u d e n t s w i t h an o p p o r t u n i t y t o a p p l y t h i n k i n g and f e e l i n g processes to r e a l s i t u a t i o n s r a t h e r than s t r u c t u r e d exercises". (Renzulli,1977, p.9). The  n o n - g i f t e d may  even d i d serve  not  as  mutual  consider  a model by benefit  s h a r i n g t h e way  will  reference This  The study.  learns of the  grow  while they  through o f common  to understand  and  the  gifted  gifted  s o l v e problems.  the  opportunity  interest, respect  where  the  frame  may The to each of  other.  idea should,  fourth research It  problems t h a t the  as p r o b l e m s ,  communicate a b o u t s u b j e c t s population  provide  related  of course,  be  q u e s t i o n was  to gender  further  explored.  t a n g e n t i a l to the  differences.  The  main  literature  128 r e p o r t s d i f f e r e n c e s between g i f t e d the  style  and  ( M a c c o l y and 1989;  the  Jacklin,  Cramer,  1989;  concerned with higher  levels  Taiwan,  way  anxiety  results  reported  levels  higher  regarding  real  girls  anxiety  life  are  in  problems  1981;  O'Tuel,  1989) . The  reports  boys  girls  have  (Milgram,  1976;  b o y s , need  affected  by  to  their  the  ways t o  some k i n d  high due  tests.  better  anxiety  girls  who  gifted  programs.  indicated  whose  interpret  of  may  anxiety to  are  are  girls,  that under  performance  girls are  lower girls  f o r the  identified  and  in contrast  who  This  to  identification initially  excluded  are  One  better.  able  are  from  the  on  the  performance  who  included.  results.  to perform  to the  levels  their  Only the  these  anxiety  refers  a possible explanation  gifted  girls  performance  boys  in  b o y s . However,  data  their  gifted  are  reports. Gifted  suggest t h a t g i f t e d  identification under  study  than g i f t e d  possible that gifted  programs  provides  literature  slightly  interpretation  It is  in this  same c o n d i t i o n .  two  may  anxiety  problem-solving,  under the  interpretation  gifted  gifted  of a n x i e t y  contrast  There  other  the  increased  in  decreased  tests.  Male,  Bell,  girls  with  suggest that g i f t e d  t h a n do  regarding  what  The  1989;  levels  of a n x i e t y  deals  P e r r o n e and  O'Tuel,  accordance with  gifted  1974;  gender  gifted  1981).  The  gifted  each  b o y s and  to  perform  interpretation  small percentage recommended  for  of the  129 The their may  suggestion  results  to  together  c o n t r i b u t e to a  level  on  with  the  other  gifted  the  girls  tests  due  t e s t s and  to  weight  identification  s e l e c t i o n process  more i n t e l l e c t u a l l y lower  include anxiety  which c o u l d  tests  identify  who  perhaps performed at  to  their  high  levels  a of  anxiety. A n o t h e r i m p l i c a t i o n as performance regarding c o u l d be  under  the  opposite  the  same  relates  gifted  i f boys  direction  mean  such a  should  to  conclusions  population. are  Any  such  a f f e c t e d i n one  average  girls  are  drawn  conclusion direction,  affected  of these  two  in  under  different  nothing.  case a separate  be  gender d i f f e r e n c e i n  ( i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r performance)  c o n d i t i o n s . The  d i r e c t i o n may  girls  general  the  t h e i r performance), while  the  In  anxiety  misleading  (decreasing  regards  provided  and  analyses  f o r b o y s and  conclusions  should  for  be  drawn  gender d i f f e r e n c e s of  gifted  accordingly. The children  issues  needs t o  s m a l l number o f should  involved  be  be  further  gifted  viewed with  this  direction,  this  result  with  i n the  girls  explored. in  this  caution,  until  On  study  possible  any  girls,  ambiguities.  the  conclusion  further research  l a r g e r samples of g i f t e d  and/or c l a r i f y  account of  in  confirm  130  Conclusions and Educational Implications The  following  obtained  from  the  investigator's conclusions study  as 1.  conclusions findings  of  interpretation  seem  justified  specified  suggestions involved,  provide  the  a l t e r n a t i v e ways t o a v o i d This  conclusion  impractical,  (sometimes even  life  The directly  involved  to  The of  the  life  life  problems  better  dilemmas w i t h of  the  more  problems  s u g g e s t more  happening.  myth t h a t  gifted  i n a b s t r a c t academic spheres h e l p l e s s ) , when  curriculum  t o programs which c h a l l e n g e  life  problems,  in their  they  of  for their Anxiety  the  life  f o r the the  are  have  to  conclusion  is  gifted  gifted.  gifted  outside  and  in  performance. Therefore, ignored.  The  above  attitude  of  dealing  the the  effect  conclusion with  school  direction of  are  class, able  in society.  of d e c r e a s i n g anxiety  in  to them  children's  challenges  anxiety  the  with  i n preparing  future responsible tasks elementary  Attention  i n coping  that they  situations,  affects  problem-solving  of t h i s  c l a s s as w e l l as  in assuring  handle a l l kinds  life  limitation  t o s o l v e them, and  paid  2.  real  implication  r e l a t e d to the  adequately  the  problems.  educational  result  the  and  results.  i s i n c o n t r a s t to the  are  face r e a l  the  such problems from  c h i l d r e n who  evidence  study,  identification  more i d e a s  on  I.  They r e s p o n d  regarding  this  within  i n Chapter  based  of  G i f t e d c h i l d r e n deal with  than n o n - g i f t e d .  may  are  real their  cannot  the schools  be  current as  a  131 pathological effect  feature. Anxiety  on c h i l d r e n ' s r e a l  The  educational  and d e a l t w i t h  developing  skills  however,  dealing with educational the take  life  within  as  s y s t e m . No l o n g e r system,  Anxiety  children's  i t , will  and any  the  in  the also  under a n x i e t y .  gifted  in  their  performance  is  the  gifted  in  the  within should  life  the  problem-solving  t h e advantage  level,  When  non-gifted  direction:  which  of  includes  on r e a l  life  apply  t o other  areas  facing  anxiety  their  direction  as  their  experience  problem  sets  the  stage  discussions  better ability  respect  b e n e f i t from mutual  s t r a t e g i e s of coping  The  i n real  t h e same  together  beneficial  same  implications i n this  a n d n o n - g i f t e d may share  the  that  of  counterparts.  educational  They c a n  and  T h i s means t h a t  growth.  reduced  their non-gifted The  gifted  does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y  personal  within  planned  t a l e n t t o out-perform the non-gifted  their  first  deliberately  reality  curriculum  terms o f i n t e l l e c t u a l  problem-solving, of  be f o u n d . The  of  (See: S u g g e s t i o n s ) .  affects  performance  is  s y s t e m , ways  c a n a n x i e t y be i g n o r e d  performance of both populations decreased  t h a t h a s an  performance.  need o f  a normative  i tinto consideration 3.  the school  t o acknowledge t h e  anxiety  educational  problem-solving  t o cope w i t h  is  feature  i m p l i c a t i o n s a r e t h a t once a n x i e t y  recognized  step,  i s a given  of  with  anxiety  i n dealing with  of the g i f t e d  and  fruitful other  t o solve  and life  life  that  interaction.  i t . The s h a r i n g  f o r the  are  work  out  o f common mutually problems.  problems  may  132 turn  out  t o be  an  asset  to both  of these  populations  (see:  Discussion). 4.  Within  difference Gifted their that  in  girls real  real  to the  are  has  further  conclusion real  life  can  for  be  included  practices that  of the  existing  whereas  higher  the  the  gifted.  than  above Perhaps peers  programs. T h i s  issue  before  any  definite  gender d i f f e r e n c e s  is a limited  girls  anxiety.  girl  performance under  clearly  gender  anxiety,  i m p l i c a t i o n of  in gifted  b o y s and  of the  under  b e t t e r than t h e i r  drawn r e g a r d i n g  greatest potential,  of  is a  induced.  investigated  problem-solving  a reassessment  levels  process  perform  Given that g i f t e d n e s s call  performance  educational  who  there  s o l v i n g p e r f o r m a n c e was  identification  girls  be  life  b o y s when a n x i e t y was  under a n x i e t y to  population  higher  problem  important  only g i f t e d  gifted  reported  of g i f t e d  relates  the  life  An  the  anxiety.  resource,  identify alike.  in  there  is a  with  the  those  This c a l l  identification  requires  procedures.  133 Recommendation for Further Research Some r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h line  of t h i s 1.  It  i s recommended t h a t t h e  of  research process  battery) 'high  in  2.  the  their and in  part  children  be  other  gifted  tests  in  will  be  m a k e r s . The  i n terms of c o p i n g curriculum  of  c h i l d r e n who anxiety,  deal with their  the  test  included  the  process.  and  the  recognized  i t should  be  gifted 1)  the  way,  program  will  research are  investigated  In t h i s  can  be  an  tell  specific  teaching  strategies  terms of  student'  a c h i e v e m e n t enhancement g i v e n  anxious  in spite  l e a r n how  a n x i e t y might not  c o n d i t i o n s under which s t u d e n t s  in  that  i n t r o d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y  gifted.  performance. Further  ensure  the  (see r e c o m m e n d a t i o n that  identifying  by  with  entered  i t , so  test  screening  be  weighing  anxiety  Such p r a c t i c e may  children  Further  the  of the the  anxiety  identification  optimize  group f o l l o w i n g the  policy  the  investigated.  'loads'  i s c l e a r l y needed. gifted  of  adequately  relative  the  i n t r o d u c t i o n of  I t i s recommended t h a t a n x i e t y  training  gifted  integral  to  the  and  educational  in  order  anxiety'  selected  an  gifted  (i.e.  results,  the  study.  measurements as process  following  to  perform.  cope  obstacle us  most a p p r o p r i a t e , the  of  what in  anxiety  134 3.  Based  on  the  findings  continuation  of the  implications  as w e l l as t h e  it  is  further  education  needs o f t h e g i f t e d independent  sections dealing  that  children within which  challenges.  non-gifted  should  suggest  The g u i d i n g  a " p u l l - o u t " type their  special  opposite will  leave  together" The (a) cope  of  includes  that there  i s no  each o t h e r  the  special  and n o n - g i f t e d p o p u l a t i o n s  from  a  new  the  apply;  model  respect,  the  with  of  the  populations be  "pulled  experience.  (i.e.  (b) t o m u t u a l l y  how  life  them w i t h  to  awareness,  communicate  g i f t e d were  p e r f o r m t h e n o n - g i f t e d may p r o v i d e  emphasize:  to learn together  anxiety,  that  i n s t e a d of  classes,  i s , both  r e l e v a n t common r e a l  finding  gifted  are taken out to  regular  that  populations  etc.);  concerning  of  i t is  of  "home-classes" and w i l l  problem  skills,  part  reduces the  i d e a o f t h i s model i s t h a t  should  t o e n a b l e t h e two  life  interaction  f o l l o w i n g p u r p o s e s o f s u c h a model s h o u l d  with  2,  gifted  real  and t h a t a n x i e t y  f o r a common e n r i c h m e n t  strategies,  this  model  some " j o i n p r o j e c t s "  trying  programs  their  1 and  a framework o f a s p e c i a l  p r o g r a m where t h e g i f t e d  direction  educational  be i n c l u d e d .  performance of both g i f t e d  education.  new  also  between g i f t e d n e s s and a n x i e t y ,  to  the  and i n  However, a s an i n t e g r a l  In view o f t h e f i n d i n g s  reasonable  with  a  t h e p r o g r a m , b a s e d on t h i s m o d e l , the  study,  T h i s model a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l  curriculum,  problem-solving  this  above r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s  recommended  be t r i e d :  of  with  problems. In  found t o  out-  the opportunity  135 to  share  and  and  discuss their  thus prove  able they  ideas with  to themselves  are to deal with  the  opportunity to  have  consider  with  capable  (teachers, parents,  between g i f t e d learns This  and  supervision  the  might  life  m i g h t be A classes,  in  the  study  which  budget,  only  performance  with bridge  population  well  other. prepared  a generally  enrichment,  and  relaxed  g r o w t h , and  better  of both  populations  examines  etc.),  the  resources  (manpower,  which  such  a  model  demands  is  this  study  should  be  undertaking.  It  is  recommended  with  other  drawn f r o m present  There  conducting  study.  study  I).  solving  that  representative  a wider  were  this  (See C h a p t e r problem  each  under  hand,  discuss  a  and  enhanced.  area than  Such  r e s e a r c h r e g a r d i n g gender  5)  other  r e f e r e n c e of the  in creating  problem-solving  replicated children  which  achieved  the  the  (c) t o e s t a b l i s h in  peers  practical  r a t h e r than  frame o f  t h a t succeeds  worthwhile  4.  etc.);  be  a t m o s p h e r e . I n t h i s way, real  peers  non-gifted  to understand purpose  t o o t h e r s how p r o b l e m s . On  will  adults  non-gifted  life  the n o n - g i f t e d ideas  and  their  The  i t was  samples  may  of  gifted  possible to enable  use  further  differences.  unavoidable due  samples  compromises  to i t s l i m i t a t i o n s RLPSSS  performance  which in  the  made  in  and c o n s t r a i n s .  measured present  real study,  life was  136 achieved  by  adaptation  employing  o f two  TOPS. A l t h o u g h in  any  there Test  i t i s believed bias  i s obviously developed  pursuing  and  a  in  b o y s and  line  that  the  This  reliable  this  essentially United  of  the  girls  instrument  local  PEPSI  Israeli  Life  should  can  States:  of  Real  test  a  RLPSSS d i d n o t  scores  need f o r a  locally.  items to which  was  t e s t s from the  significant  validated  what  relate is  Solving  situational  equally.  required  result  children,  Problem  include  and  for  Such  a  further  research.  Concluding Remarks This in  present  studying  children daily  to  life.  the  research  i s b e l i e v e d t o be  e f f e c t s of a n x i e t y  solve  the  I t i s no  problems  on  the  likely  more t h a n an  a new  departure  efforts  t o be  of  gifted  encountered  e a r l y shot  i n the  in  struggle  t o u n d e r s t a n d young c h i l d r e n ' s p e r f o r m a n c e u n d e r  conditions  of a n x i e t y .  impact  stress  and  The  Israeli  threat  some c o n d i t i o n s  are  a s s e t s . With t h i s cultivating most a b l e , fear  of  in the  living  of  child  cannot escape the  h i s environment.  unavoidable,  in  amidst d a i l y  may  find  i n c l u d i n g the  strengths  that  peril  when  needs t o t u r n them i n t o  mind, t e a c h e r s  a l l children, inner  one  Consequently,  of  the  means  of  brightest  and  one  needs t o combat  the  and  f a c i n g an  uncertain  future. It the  i s hoped t h a t  this  approach toward the  education;  (b)  provide  study w i l l  dealing with a  method o f  help  to:  anxiety  (a)  change  within  formal  anxiety-induction  for  137 research the  purposes;  ability  and a b o u t  of gifted their  with  children  their  a new will  non-gifted  common i n t e r e s t  opinions  to solve real  life  under a n x i e t y ;  the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  (e) i n i t i a t e  gifted  children  performance  reassessment of and,  (c) c o r r e c t commonly h e l d  process  (d) of  leave  their  special  counterparts  and common  need.  to  problems lead  the  model i n g i f t e d - e d u c a t i o n  about  in  gifted which  classes to share  to  studies  meet of  I.  138 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams,  J.L.  (1976).  better  i d e a s . New  Antonovsky,  A.  Francisco,  Atkinson,  Conceptual blockbusting: York,  (1979) .  L o n d o n : W.W.  Health,  J.W.  L.A.  to  Norton.  stress  and  Feather,  N.T. New  and  Challenging  the  Dilemmas  (1966).  York,  ( 1 9 8 9 ) . S o m e t h i n g ' s Wrong  Journal  guide  coping.  San  CA: J o s s e y - B a s s .  achievement m o t i v a t i o n .  Bell,  A  theory  of  NY: J . W i l e y .  Here and I t ' s N o t  that Block  f o r the Education of  A  Girls'  the G i f t e d  12,  Me:  Success. ( 2 ) , 119-  130.  Blank,  S.S.  (1982).  thinking  The  challenge:  and p r o b l e m  CA: San D i e g o  solving  Unified  School  Encouraging  i n the g i f t e d .  creative  San  District.  B o g i e , C.E. a n d B u c k h a l t , J.A. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . R e a c t i o n s t o and  success  Gifted  Burg,  B.  Child  among G i f t e d ,  A v e r a g e and  Quarterly,  ( 2 ) , 70-74.  (1984). S p e c i a l  Gifted  31,  EMR  Programs f o r t h e G i f t e d  International,  2,  Diego,  ( 2 ) , 30-43.  failure  students.  in  Israel.  139 Casteneda,  A.,  Complex  Palermo,  learning  anxiety  in  and  of  R.B.  and  McCandless,  and  as  task  B.R.  a  (1956).  function  difficulty.  of  Child  327-332  Scheir,  neuroticism  and  performance  children  D e v e l o p m e n t , 27,  Cattell,  D.S.  and  I.H.  The  anxiety.  meaning and Ronald  measurement  Press.  New  York,  mathematically  gifted  1961.  Chang.  L.L.  (1985).  elementary  Who  are  the  school children?  R o e p e r Review,  8,  (2),  76-  79.  Chin-Li  Tzeng.  classes  (1981).  In  Kuo,  for  the  gifted  in  the  R e p u b l i c of  research presented  at  the  Talented Children.  World (4th,  and  Wei-Fan talented: China.  Conference  B.  (1983).  potential  of c h i l d r e n  Columbus, O h i o ,  Clark,  H.  and  Growing  R o e p e r Review 8,  N.  review  on  Paper  Gifted  and  Canada).  ERIC  Developing  the  at school.  (2nd  Ed.)  Merrill.  ( 1 9 8 5 ) . G i f t e d n e s s and  50-53.  of  212119.  gifted:  a t home and  C h a r l e s E.  Hankins,  up  a  Special  (Taiwan).  M o n t r e a l PQ,  Socument R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e No.  Clark,  (ed.).  conflict.  140 Cox,  T.  (1978) .  Stress.  Baltimore,  MD:  University  Park  Press.  Cox,  D.W.  (1985).  The  Purdue  Inventory  (PEPSI),  status:  preliminary  29,  A  level,  study.  (1989). A t t i t u d e s  towards (3),  and  Solving  socioeconomic  Gifted Child  Quarterly,  of  math: A q u a l i t a t i v e  gifted  boys  and  girls  s t u d y . R o e p e r Review,  11,  128-131.  Cramond,  B.  Martin,  Generalizability to r e a l - l i f e Gifted,  Davidson,  H.B.  problems.  and in  Quarterly,  and  DeBono, E .  and  Journal  28  Sternberg,  (2)  Connel,  29,  (1985).  Shaw,  E.L.  solving  (1990). procedures  f o r the E d u c a t i o n of  the  141-155.  R.J  intellectual  achievement  Quarterly,  C.E.  of c r e a t i v e problem  (2)_.  13,  J.E.  insight  and  grade  Problem  ( 2 ) , 72-73.  Cramer, R.H.  Davis,  Elementary  giftedness.  The  role  Gifted  of  Child  58-64.  J.P.  status (3)_,  (1984).  (1985) . The on t h e s e l f  effect system.  of  aptitude  Gifted Child  131-136.  Conflicts:  A better  Harmondsworth, M i d d l e s e x ,  England:  way  to solve  Penguin  Books.  them.  141  D e r e v e n s k y , J . and Fears.  Dewey,. J .  Dirkes,  Coleman,  Gifted Child  ( 1 9 3 3 ) . How  M.A.  J.F.  and  Anxiety  Houtz,  Problem S o l v i n g no.7121.  Feldhusen,  Thinking ed.)  Forsyth,  P.  (2-3)  6,  J.C.  (2)  NJ:  ( 2 ) , 65-59.  D.C.  gifted:  Heath.  Pluses  In  Purdue  Tests  Educational  in  Elementary Microfiche,  Testing  D.J.  (1985).  Service.  Creative (3rd  Kendall-Hunt.  A study  of c h i l d r e n i n classes.  and  68-70.  (1977) The  Treffinger,  Children's  Problem S o l v i n g i n G i f t e d E d u c a t i o n .  (1987).  regular  S.  and  Dubuque, IA:  security  Freud,  and  i n the  Inventory.  Princeton,  J.F.  23,  t h i n k . B o s t o n , MA:  M i n u s e s . R o e p e r Review,  Feldhusen,  (1989). G i f t e d  Quarterly,  we  (1983).  E.B.  of  self-concept, anxiety,  gifted,  French  Canadian Journal  immersion,  of C o u n s e l l i n g ,  and and 21  153-56.  ( 1 9 3 6 ) . The  Psychoanalytic  problem  Quarterly  of  Press  anxiety. and  W.W  New Narton  York: Co.  The  142 Fuchs, D .  and  Fuchs,  meta-analysis  J.  Research  ( 1 9 8 5 ) . The  responding  (1986). T e s t  Ppocedure b i a s :  of eExaminer f a m i l i a r i t y  of E d u c a t i o n a l  Galbraith,  L.S.  56  (2)  Review  243-262.  eight great  to s p e c i a l  effects.  A  gripes  of g i f t e d  n e e d s . R o e p e r R e v i e w . 8,  kids:  (1),  15-  18.  Gallagher,  J.J  (1975), T e a c h i n g  Boston: A l l y n  Gallagher,  J . J . and  children  Galton,  F.  G a r d n e r , H.  E.  S.A.  educational  (3rd  (1979) E d u c a t i n g  genius.  ( 1 9 8 3 ) . Frames o f  and  child  ed.).  exceptional  Houghton-Mifflin.  (1962) H e r e d i t y  New  gifted  Bacon.  Kirk,  Boston;  intelligence.  Gaudry,  and  the  London: C o l i n s .  m i n d : The  York: B a s i c  Spielberger, achievement,  CD.  theory  of  multiple  Books.  (1971) .  Sydney, New  Anxiety  York: J . Wiley  and &  Sons, A u s t r a l a s i a .  G e o r g e . P.G.  and  Gallagher.  J.J.  (1978). C h i l d r e n ' s  about the  f u t u r e : A comparison  students.  Journal  33-42.  f o r the  of g i f t e d  Education  and  of the  thoughts nongifted  Gifted,  2,  143  Getzels,  J.W.,  and  giftedness Travers Chicago,  Gibney,  T.  problem  J.T.  and t h e e d u c a t i o n  (Ed).  Second  111. Rand  (1982).  elementary  Gross, T.F.  Dillon,  (1973).  nature  of the g i f t e d .  Handbook o f R e s e a r c h  In  of  R.M.W.  on T e a c h i n g .  McNally.  The  gifted  as  problem-solvers  s c h o o l s . R o e p e r Review,  (1984). S t a t e solving.  The  4,  ( 4 ) , 13-14.  A n x i e t y , memory  ERIC  Document  in  and  children's  Reproduction  Service  No.248986.  Guilford,  J.P.  and H o e p f n e r ,  intelligence.  Guilford,  J.P.  Creative  Guilford,  New Y o r k ,  (1977).  NY:  ( 1 9 7 1 ) . The  analysis  of  McGraw-Hill.  beyond t h e  IQ.  Buffalo,  NY:  Education Foundation, Inc.  J.P.  (1979) I n t e l l e c t  Gowan, J . K h a t e n a , the  Way  R.  ablest.  and  the g i f t e d .  a n d E.P. T o r r a n c e  (2nd  ed.)  (Eds.).  (pp.24-40).  In  J.C.  Educating  Itasca,  IL:  F.E.Peacock.  Hai C h i g L i n (1981). I n for  the g i f t e d  Kuo W e i - F a n  and t a l e n t e d :  the R e p u b l i c of China.  a  (Ed.).  Special  classes  review of research  (Taiwan). Paper  in  presented at the  144 World  Conference  Montreal  PQ,  S e r v i c e No.  Harris,  D.G.  Two  Canada).  and  five  and T a l e n t e d C h i l d r e n . ( 4 t h , ERIC  Document  Reproduction  212119.  Blank,  approaches  grade  on G i f t e d  to  S.S.  (1983).  A comparative  study:  enhance c r e a t i v e p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g  s t u d e n t s . B.C.  in  J o u r n a l of S p e c i a l Education,  7, 12J_, 129-152.  Henk M.  van  der  Ploeg  academic  behavior  Schwazer  (Ed.).  depression. Company  (1984).  Worry,  intelligence  Dutch  school  children.  in The  self  (pp.115-124).  Inc.  in  anxiety,  Elsevier  North-Holland,  and  I n ' R.  stress  Science  Amsterdam,  and  Publishing New  York,  Oxford.  Houtz,  J . C . and F e l d h u s e n , J . F . ( 1 9 7 6 ) . The m o d i f i c a t i o n  f o u r t h g r a d e r s ' problem of  Houtz,  Psychology,  J.C.  93,  solving  abilities.  of  The  Journal  Training  problem  229-237.  and F e l d h u s e n , in  J . F . (1977).  solving  skills  fourth-graders:  analysis.  The J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y ,  96,  Supplementary 309-313.  145 Houtz,  J.C.,  Rosenfield,  Creative Gifted  thinking  S. and  in gifted  Child Quarterly,  Howley, A., Howley, C.B., gifted  Jung,  (1954).  Fordham, and G. CG.  Karnes,  F.A.  and Gifted  Jung  Khatena, New  Khatena,  Brown  gifted  Adler,  ( v o l 1 7 ) . New  and D ' l l i o ,  York,  NY:  Child  Khatena,  Quarterly,  J.  Buffalo,  Landau, E.  (1984). NY:  Teaching  ( E d s . ) . The c o l l e c t e d work  of  V.R.  child.  In  Pantheon  H.  Books.  (1989). L e a d e r s h i p among g i f t e d =  Educational  J . (1983).  (1986).  M.  33, (2J ,  John  children.  Read,  sex r o l e s t e r e o t y p i n g  J . (1982).  school  (1978).  and Company: C a n a d a .  York:  =  T.J.  ( 4 ) , 513-519.  & P e n d a r v i s , E.D.  The  Child Quarterly.  elementary  22,  children. Little,  C.G.,  Tetenbaum,  positions  children.  76-79.  psychology  of the  gifted.  Wiley.  What s c h o o l i n g 27,  the g i f t e d .  Gifted  ( 2 ) , 51-56.  Imagery  Bearly  for  and  and C r e a t i v e  (1976). C h i l d r e n  of mankind In Gibson,  creative  imagination.  Education Foundation.  ask q u e s t i o n s about J . and C h e n n e l s ,  P.  the (Eds).  future  146 Gifted  children  looking  to  their  future,  pp.  268-275).  London: L a t i m e r .  Lazarus,  R.S.  (1966).  p r o c e s s . New  Ludlow,  B.L.  York,  and  strategies  Psychological NY:  discrimination  and  the  coping  McGraw-Hill.  Woodrum,  of g i f t e d  stress  D.T.  and  (1982)  average  task. Gifted  Problem  learners  Child  on a  Quarterly,  solving multiple 26,  (3),  99-104.  L u d w i g , G.  and C u l l i n a n ,  gifted  and  Gifted  Child  Maccoly,  E.,  nongifted  and  differences.  Maker, C . J . An  D.  elementary  Quarterly.  Jacklin,  (1984).  28,  C.N.  development  N.A.  characteristics  of g i f t e d  Israeli  of G e n e t i c Psychology,  and D a v i s , M.A.  sex  Press.  f o r the  Maryland,  Milgram,  L.W.  of  gifted.  A s p e n Systems C o r p o r a t i o n ,  and  Morris,  boys.  psychology  Stanford University  (1982). C u r r i c u l u m  R.H.  and  of  UJ_ 37-40.  Systems C o r p o r a t i o n , R o c k v i l l e ,  Milgram,  school g i r l s  ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The  S t a n f o r d , CA:  Aspen P u b l i c a t i o n .  Behavior problems  Aspen  London.  (1976).  Personality  children.  The J o u r n a l  129,  ( 2 ) , 185-194.  and  H u t c h i n g , C.H.  (1981) .  147 Cognitive  and  e m o t i o n a l Components  Review and a  Revised  Worry-Emotionally  of E d u c a t i o n a l - P s y c h o l o g y .  N e w e l l , A. a n d  Simon. H.A.  Englewood C l i f f s .  Nezu, A.M.  (1985).  Journal  of Counselling  Nezu, A.M.  solving 58,  (1972).  Journal  in  Psychology,  life  solving.  Hall.  psychological  and i n e f f e c t i v e  problem  32, ( 1 ) ,  distress  solvers.  135-138.  s t r e s s and a n x i e t y :  as a moderator v a r i a b l e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l  Problem Reports,  OJ_, 279-283.  N o t t e l m a n , E.D. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . T e s t in  Scale.  Human p r o b l e m  NJ: P r e n t i c e  (1986). N e g a t i v e  Literature  73 (4) 541-555.  Differences  between e f f e c t i v e  of Anxiety;  evaluative  anxiety  and o f f - t a s k  s i t u a t i o n s . (ERIC  DOCUMENT  behaviour REPRODUCTON  SERVICE No. 1 1 3 0 2 2 ) .  Ortar,  G. a n d M o r i e l i ,  Jerusalem. Education  A. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . M i l t a I n t e l l i g e n c e  Israel: and  Hebrew  Israel  University  Ministry  of  Scale,  School  of  Education.  (in  Hebrew).  O'Tuel,  F.S.  ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Sex  intellect Quarterly,  d i f f e r e n c e s on  (SOI-LA) G i f t e d S c r e e n i n g 33, ( 2 ) ,  73-76.  the structure Form. G i f t e d  of  Child  148  Parnes,  S . J . (1967). C r e a t i v e b e h a v i o r  g u i d e b o o k . New  York:  C. S c r i b n e r and S o n s .  Perrone,  P.A.  and  Male,  R.A.  (1981) .  The  developmental  education  and g u i d a n c e o f t a l e n t e d l e a r n e r s . R o c k v i l l e ,  MD:  Systems  Perrone, and  Aspen  P.A.  Corp.  (1985). D i f f e r e n t i a l  t a l e n t e d elementary  characteristics  school  students.  of g i f t e d  R o e p e r Review,  7, U ( 3 ) , 190-192.  Prystav,  G.  (1979-80). P r e d i c t a b i l i t y  aversive fur-  Renzulli,  stimuli  as s t r e s s - i n d u c i n g v a r i a b l e s .  Psychologie,  J.S.  Kappa,  Renzulli, real  enrichment t r i a d model: A  d e f e n s i b l e programs  talented. Wethersfield,  Renzulli,  (1978).  What makes  guide  f o r the g i f t e d  Conn: C r e a t i v e L e a r n i n g  giftedness?  and  Press.  Phi  Delta  60, 180-184.  J . S . (1983). G u i d i n g problems:  Journal  Archiv-  132, ( 2 ) , 121-138.  J . S . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . The  for developing  and c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y o f  the g i f t e d  The t r a n s f o r m e d  of Creative Behaviour,  role  i n the p u r s u i t of  the  17, ( 1 ) , 49-59.  of  teacher.  149 Reynolds, of  C.R. and B r a d l e y ,  intellectually  peers  as e s t i m a t e d  C.R.  (1983). E m o t i o n a l  superior children by c h r o n i c  p s y c h o l o g y Review,  Reynolds,  M.  stability  versus  nongifted  anxiety levels,  school  12, (2) 190-194.  (1985). M u l t i t r a i t  validation  of the  Revised  Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale f o r Children  of  intelligence.  402.  R o e p e r , A.  P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports,  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . How t h e g i f t e d  R o e p e r Review 5,  Roome, J.R. gifted  cope w i t h t h e i r  D.M.  (1985).  Reducing  c h i l d r e n by i n d u c i n g r e l a x a t i o n .  Rosenfield,  (2),  emotions.  (2) , 21-24.  and Romney,  7, _(3)_,  anxiety  Roeper  in  Review,  177-179.  S.  and  Houtz,  patterns  in  abilities  in gifted  presented  at  problem  the  J.C.  solving elementary  Annual  E d u c a t i o n a l Research  S.B., D a v i d s o n ,  and Ruebush, B.K.  (1977). and  Developmental  creative  thinking  school children.  meeting  of  A s s o c i a t i o n . New  Document R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e  Sarason,  56,  High  the York,  American NY.  ERIC  F.F., Waite,  R.R.,  No. 140529) .  K.S., L i g h t h a l l ,  (1960) . A n x i e t y i n e l e m e n t a r y  c h i l d r e n . New Y o r k ,  NY. J o h n  Paper  Wiley.  school  150  Schafer,  W.  (1978) .  Responsible  Schill,  T.  Stress,  distress,  defining  validation  efficient  and  P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports,  E.  anxiety  growth.  CA:  method  for  Action.  (1984). C o n s t r u c t  Scholwinski,  and  and  54,  Reynolds,  among h i g h  of a  inefficient  coppers.  (3), 969-970.  C.R.  (1985)  Dimensions  IQ c h i l d r e n . G i f t e d C h i l d  of  Quarterly,  29, 13JL, 125-130.  Selye,  H.  (1983). The  future  (pp.1-20).  research  Shafran,  E.  Facts 131,  Shore,  Sieber,  In  concept: Past,  Cooper,  New Y o r k , NY: John  (1989). The and  gifted  opinions.  C.L.  present  (Ed.).  and  Stress  Wiley.  i n the  (Hebrew).  Kibbutz  Hachinuch  Movement, Hameshutaf,  62-74.  B.M.  and  intelligence 31,  stress  Dover,  and  A.C.  (1987).  giftedness. Gifted  Metacognition, Child  Quarterly,  J l ) _ , 37-39.  J . E . (1970) . E f f e c t  solving  ability  Educational  of  o f memory s u p p o r t  test  Psychology,  anxious 61,  of the problem  children. Journal  (2), 159-168.  of  151 Simon, H.A.  and  analysis I n H.A. New  Simon,  Barenfeld,  of p e r c e p t u a l Simon  (Ed.)  Haven, CT:  H.A.  Yale  (1981).  Information  Science,  CD.  and  Models  of  (pp.363-372).  processing American  models Society  of for  364-377.  (Ed.).  research,  solving.  Press.  the  32,  processing  i n problem  of thought.  (1972) . A n x i e t y  Spielberger  theory  processes  Information  Journal  CD.  (1979).. I n f o r m a t i o n  University  cognition.  Spielberger,  M.  as  an  emotional  state.  In  Current  trends  in  Anxiety:  ( p p . 2 3 - 4 9 ) . New  Y o r k , NY:  Academic  Press.  Spielberger, J.  CD.,  Edwards,  & Platzek,  the  D.  State-Trait  Alto,  California,  Spielberger CD. anxiety.  Cross-cultural Co.,  New  Spielberger,  Inventory. Press.  Anxiety  Inventory  Consulting  The  Spielberger  Test  Psychologists  & R.  and  Halsted  CA:  for Palo  Press.  Diaz-Guerrero  (1980) . Manual f o r t h e Alto,  Manual  measurement  a n x i e t y . W a s h i n g t o n , DC:  Palo  Montuori,  for Children.  nature  Y o r k : D i s t r i b u t e d by  CD.  L u s h e n e , R.E.,  (1973). P r e l i m i n a r y  (1976).  In C D .  CD.,  of  (Ed.),  Hemisphere  Pub.  Press.  S t a t e - T r a i t Anxiety  Consulting  Psychologists  152  Sternberg, of  E.P.  (1983). Problem c o m p l e x i t y  the  transfer  s t r a t e g i e s i n computer-presented problems.  American  Educational  Sternberg,  R.J.  Research Journal,  20,  ( 1 9 8 4 ) . What s h o u l d  13-28.  intelligence  Implications  of a t r i a r c h i c  intelligence  testing.  Educational  (1985).  Critical  Sternberg,  R.J.  measurement and on  the  Supervision  Sternberg,  R.J.  Giftedness.  Sternberg,  R.  Scientist,  T a i c h m a n , Y.  theory  of  intelligence  thinking:  Alexandria,  tests test?  Researcher,  improvement. I n F.R.  intellect.,  and  Its  Link,  VA:-  and  Curriculum  Development.  and  Davidson,  J.E.  (1986).  (1986).  74,  137-143.  and  Malinek,  Inside  C.  for  Conception  of  f o r the  trait  (Hebrew). T e l - A v i v U n i v e r s i t y .  Taylor,  J.A.  (1953) . M a n i f e s t  o f A b n o r m a l and  Social  Press.  Anxiety  Psychology,  American  S.H.M.T. ( S T A I C ) ;  questionnaire anxiety  assessment  Essays  Association  Intelligence,  (1984).  5-15.  nature,  (Ed).  Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y  J.  13,  for  of s t a t e a n x i e t y  Scale 48,  (MAS)  .  A and  Journal  ( 2 ) , 285-290.  153 Taylor,  J.A.  (1968).  Educational  and  Children  Manifest  Anxiety  P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measurement.  Scale.  28,  1189-  1192.  Tennenbaum  (1991).  presented  i n the Conference  Jerusalem,  Thorensen, in  Israel,  C.F.  and  children  HI,  Torrance,  Characteristics  and  June  of G i f t e d n e s s .  Paper  on E x c e l l e n c e i n E d u c a t i o n .  1991.  Eagleston,  J.R.  adolescents.  (1983). C h r o n i c  Theory  and  stress  Practice,  22,  48-56.  E.P.  Cliffs,  Torrance,  (1962). G u i d i n g  NJ;  Prentic  E.P.  talent.  Englewood  Hall.  (1965).  personality,  creative  Constructive  and  mental  behaviour:  health.  Stress,  Belmont,  CA:  Woodsworth.  T o r r a n c e E.P. youth.  (1980). In  exceptional 564).  Torrance,  W.M.  Psychology of Cruickshank  children  and  Englewood C l i f f s ,  E.P.  (1986).  R o e p e r Review,  8,  youth. NJ:  Glimpses (4)  gifted (Ed.), (4th  children  and  Psychology  of  Ed.).  (pp.  528-  Prentice-Hall.  of  246-251.  the  "Promised  Land".  154 Treffinger, for  D.L.  everyone!  (1),  Response.  D.J.  Quarterly,  Trumbull,  R.  Stress  Child  scores  Quarterly,  (1986) R e s e a r c h on c r e a t i v i t y . 30,  26,  gifted  and a n x i e t y .  and  United  Vygotsky,  Spielberger,  Society:  (CLPW  M.  The  processes.  U.S.  to  the Congress  Publication Government  Cole,  &  (pp.58-75). London  Kogan,  children:  A  (pp.131(Eds.),  No.  Printing  of  the  of  the  81-102947). Office.  (1976) . Program f o r t h e g i f t e d  of Harvard  and  18665-18666.  S. S c r i b n e r ,  Development  C a m b r i d g e Mass.  and  Child  Hemisphere.  ( 1 9 7 8 ) . P r o b l e m s o f methods  E . Souberman,  young  stress.  (1972). E d u c a t i o n  The F e d e r a l R e g i s t e r ,  L.S.  of  W a s h i n g t o n , D.C:  of E d u c a t i o n .  M.A.  and C D .  t a l e n t e d : Report  States.  talented.  aspects  of Education.  W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.  Office  Gifted  ( 1 ) , 15-19.  I.G. S a r a s o n  Commissioner  Wallach,  Gifted  (1976) C u l t u r a l  140). In  U.S.  need t o have same  20-21.  Treffinger,  U.S.  ( 1 9 8 2 ) . Myth: We  higher  In V . J . S t e i n e r , (Eds.) M i n d  in  psychological  University  Press.  England.  N.,  (1965).  study  of  Modes o f t h i n k i n g the  creativity  in  155 intelligence and  ( 1 9 8 1 ) . I n Kuo,  the g i f t e d  and  York,  World  Conference  Montreal  PQ,  S e r v i c e No.  G.H.  NY:  Holt,  Rinehart  (1984).  Journal  Whimbey, A.  Whitmore,  in  presented at the  Document  School Mathematics  of  influence  relevant  (4th,  Reproduction  Report  and  of  from  J.R.  (1980) .  test  Gifted  63,  the  problem  560-565.  a lack 30,  on  information.  t o be b e t t e r  Giftedness,  Quarterly,  Purdue  ( 2 ) , 51-52.  M e l r o s e , Mass: A l l y n  Child  anxiety  irrelevant  learn  (1986). U n d e r s t a n d i n g  84.01,  Science Center.  E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p , 37,  underachievement.  excel.  ERIC  (1980). S t u d e n t s can  Whitmore, J.R.  classes  and T a l e n t e d C h i l d r e n .  of E d u c a t i o n a l Research,  solvers.  Special  review of r e s e a r c h  MEPS T e c h n i c a l  ( 1 9 6 9 ) . The  selection  A  (Taiwan). Paper  of G i f t e d  Canada).  (ed.).  212119.  University.  West, C.K.  Wei-Fan  talented:  the R e p u b l i c of C h i n a .  Weatley,  New  Winston.  Wen-Ching L i n for  distinction.  conflict  and  & Bacon.  of m o t i v a t i o n to  ( 2 ) , 66-69.  156  Woods, D.R.  (1988). Problem s o l v i n g c o r n e r :  research.  Journal  of C o l l e g e  Science  Books,  courses,  Teaching,  17,  (3),  243-245.  Wooding, G.S.  and  Bingham, R.D.  Responses  to  a  Quarterly,  32,  ( 3 ) , 330-334.  Wu-Tien, the  Cognitive  ( 1 9 8 1 ) . i n Kuo gifted  Republic  and  of  Wei-Fan  China.  PQ,  s e r v i c e No.  Zachman, L.,  Journal  of r e s e a r c h  G i f t e d and  Talented  Canada).  Child  (Ed.). S p e c i a l c l a s s e s  Paper p r e s e n t e d  Jorgensen,C.,  (ERIC  for  in  the  at  the  Children.  Document  Of  Huisingh,  a  R.,  Problem S o l v i n g  (4th,  Reproduction  students'  psychological health  of E d u c a t i o n a l  and  Barrett,  (TOPS).  Moline,  M., IL  Inc.  (1988). Enhancing  Report of  Gifted  (Taiwan).  61265. L i n g u i S y s t e m s ,  M.  Children's  212119).  (1984). T e s t  Zeidner,  Stressor.  t a l e n t e d : A review  W o r l d C o n f e r e n c e on Montreal  (1988). G i f t e d  Psychology,  test  coping  education 80,  (1),  skills: program.  95-101.  157  APPENDICES  158  Appendix A :  Anxiety measurements: T A I and S A I  HOW-I-FEEL QUESTIONNAIRE Developed by C. D. Spielberger, C. D. Edwards, J . Montuori and R. Lushene STAIC FORM C-1  NAME  I59  AGE  DATE  DIRECTIONS: A number of statements which boys and girls use to describe themselves are given below. Read each statement carefully and decide how you feel right now. Then put an X in the box in front of the word or phrase which best describes how you feel. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not spend top much time on any one statement. Remember, find the word or phrase which best describes how you feel right now, at this very moment.  ...  •  very calm  •  calm  •  not calm  . .  ...  •  very upset  •  upset  •  not upset  .......... .  ...  •  very pleasant  •  pleasant  •  not pleasant  ...  •  very nervous  •  nervous  •  not nervous  .  ...  •  very jittery ,  •  jittery  •  not jittery  . .  . .  ...  •  very rested  •  rested  •  not rested  I feel  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very scared  •  scared  •  not scared  8.  I feel  .  .  . .  ...  •  very relaxed  •  relaxed  •  not relaxed  9.  I feel  . . . .  ...  •  very worried  •  worried  •  not worried  10.  I feel  .  .  . .  ...  •  very satisfied  •  satisfied  •  not satisfied  J,  I feel  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very frightened  •  frightened  •  not frightened  12.  I feel  .  .  . .  ...  •  very happy  •  happy  •  not happy  13.  I feel  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very sure  •  sure  G  not sure  14.  I feel  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very good  •  good  •  not good  15.  I feel  .  .  .  . ...  •  very troubled  •  troubled  •  not troubled  16.  Ifeei  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very bothered  •  bothered  •  not bothered  17.  I feel  .  .  .  . ...  •  very nice  •  nice  •  not nice  18.  I feel  .  .  .  .  ...  •  very terrified  •  terrified  •  not terrified  19.  I feel  .  .  .  .  very mixed-up  •  mixed-up  •  not mixed-up  20.  I feel  .  .  .  .  very cheerful  •  cheerful  •  not cheerful  1.  I feel  . . . .  2.  I feel  .  3.  I feel  4.  I feel  5.  I feel  .  6.  Heel  7.  .  .  .  nnavn  • ...  •  CONSULTING °JBB2ES.  :  *77 COLLEGE  PSYCHOLOGISTS  AVENUE,  PALO  ALTO,  PRESS  CALIFORNIA  HOW-I-FEEL QUESTIONNAIRE  STAIC FORM C-2 AGE _  NAME  DAT£___L6H  DIRECTIONS: A number of statements which boys and girls use to describe themselves are given below. Read each statement and decide if it is hardlyever. or sometimes, or often true for you. Then for each statement, put an X in the box in front of the word that seems to describe you best. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not spend too much time on any one statement. Remember, choose the word which seems to describe how you usually feel.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  2.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  3.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  . . .  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  5. — It is difficult for me to face my problems .  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  6.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  7.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  8.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  1.  4.  9. 10.  I worry about making mistakes  . . . .  I have trouble making up my mind  I feel troubled Unimportant thoughts run through my  s.  11. 12.  I have trouble deciding what to do  . . .  13. 14.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  15.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  16.  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  hardly-ever  •  sometimes  •  often  •  sometimes  •  often  •  sometimes  •  often  •  sometimes  •  often  17.  I worry about things that may happen . .  18.  It is hard for me to fall asleep at night  hardly-ever  19.  I get a funny feeling in my stomach . . .  •  h3rdly-ever  20.  I worry about what others think of me  •  hardly-ever  _JLL1^1L\/MM':  4  CONSULTING PSYCHOLOGISTS PRESS  '^3f^'  :  *  "  C  0  L  « -  t  0  t  A V C N U C .  P A L O  A L T O .  CALIFORNIA  161  Appendix B  Real Life P r o b l e m Solving Situations Set ( R L P S S S )  162  girl  ()  boy  ()  Name School Class  In -front o f y o u a r e a number o-f p i c t u r e s . picture For possible  care-fully  and answer  each q u e s t i o n ,  t h e accompanying  Look a t e a c h questions.  t h e r e c o u l d be more t h a n  one  answer.  I f y o u do n o t h a v e enough continue  your  remember  t o w r i t e t h e number  continuation Thank  answer  of your  s p a c e t o answer,  on t h e b a c k "of t h e p a g e . of the q u e s t i o n  answer.  you f o r your  Enjoy! ! !  cooperation.  y o u may Please  with the  163  The c h i l d r e n h e a r a knock a t the  door of t h e i r  home.  They  open t h e d o o r d e s p i t e t h e warning  of t h e i r  t o do s o . standing  a) What a r e t h e p r o b l e m s t h i s  situation  p a r e n t s not  A stranger i s  there.  creates?  i-,  b >' S u g g e s t !. ways t o s o l v e t h e s e advise  c)  these  What c o u l d  situation?  problems.  (What  would you  c h i l d r e n t o do i n . t h i s s i t u a t i o n ? )  h a v e b e e n done  (Think  i n order  t o prevent  this  of several, suggestions).  Please  answer  on t h e back o f t h e p a g e .  164  2  a)  How  do  we  b)  c)  Why  Why  i s t h e boy  should  p l a y i n g the  t h e boy  not  music  on  at  p l a y the music  the  di 4 4 i c u l t a es  mmother h a s talking  know t h a t  the  such  telephone?  a high  at high  volume?  volume?  165  a) What, i n y o u r o p i n i o n ,  a r e t h e p o s s i b l e r e a s o n s -for h e r  s.  •feeling  cold?  b) What would y o u do i n h e r s i t u a t i o n  c) Suggest happening  ways -for p r e v e n t i n g i n t h e -future.  i n o r d e r t o warm u p ?  such a s i t u a t i o n  -from  166  b) What c a u s e d  c)  Why  the popsicle  won't t h e s i s t e r  d) T h e p o p s i c l e  dripped  boy h a v e done t o p r e v e n t  to drip?  l e ther brother  hold  on t h e b o y ' s s h i r t . his shirt  h e r hand  now?  What c o u l d t h e  from g e t t i n g  dirty?  167  5  a) How  c a n you t e l l  i s being  b) Why right  i s i t n o t recommended t o  painted?  shake t h e p a i n t e r ' s  hand  do i-f he d i s l i k e s t h e c o l o r  he i s  t o use?  d) The p a i n t e r the  house  now now?  c) What c a n t h e p a i n t e r asked  this  lawn.  happening?  was n o t c a r e f u l  What; c o u l d  he h a v e  enough  and s p i l l e d  done t o p r e v e n t  this  paint from  on  168  a)  How d a y o u know t h a t t h e  children -Fun, o-f  b)  Why a r e n ' t  c>  T h e boy s i t t i n g  order  to join  j u s t -for  r a t h e r than a r e a l  game  basketball?  the c h i l d r e n playing with  down w a n t s t o p l a y .  t h e game?  are playing  more t h a n one b a l l ?  What c a n he do i n  169  I The  boy s i t t i n g  the t e l e v i s i o n  i n •front o-f loves the  p r o g r a m . However, we c a n s e e •from t h e p i c t u r e , having  a)  What do you t h i n k  are the reasons  a di-f-ficult  that  he i s  time.  -for h i s d i -f -f i c u l t i e s ?  v  b) What c a n he do t o e n j o y t h e r e s t  c)  Suggest  ways t o p r e v e n t  such  o f t h e program?  a situation  i n t h e -future.  170  a) What p r o b l e m s d o e s t h e man  b) What p r o b l e m s d o e s t h e g i r l  c ) Recommand  a solution  d) Recommand  a s o l u t i o n f o r the  -face?  -face?  f o r t h e man  t o avoid  g i r l to  avoid  h i s problem.  her problem.  171  3 During  recess after  difficult teacher  how t h e p r o b l e m  h a v e been s o l v e d .  boy s i t t i n g  a) G i v e p o s s i b l e r e a s o n s  b) How c a n t h e s t u d e n t  c)  Suggest  different  f o r the student's  make h i m s e l f  ways t o p r e p a r e  test the  i s e x p l a i n i n g t o two  students should  Math  a  feel  looks sad.  bad mood.  better?  f o r an Math  test.  The  c) Why  don't  they  d) They o r d e r e d them  a pizza.  h a v e t o wash d i s h e s  a hamburger  and - f r i e s ?  What c o u l d t h e y  a-fter t h e m e a l ?  the waitress  brought  do?  e) What c o u l d t h e w a i t r e s s have done t o p r e v e n t  her mistake?  now  b> What c o u l d be t h e r e a s o n  c) What s h o u l d  d)  t h e -fami-ly d o ?  The -family was n o t r e a d y  they  -for t h e b l a c k o u t ?  -for t h e b l a c k o u t .  do t o be b e t t e r p r e p a r e d  i n t h e -future?  What  should  174  a) How  do we know t h a t  has been an  b) How  do you t h i n k  c)  i s there  Why  d) What s h o u l d  no  this  the accident  happened?  ambulance?  lady  i n t h e c a r do?  accident?  there  175  Two s i s t e r s mother  the  a>  What, i n y o u r o p i n i o n  increase  b) What  c)  their  To t h e i r  surprise,  was a sudden  price  a r e the reasons  increase i n  o-f a p p l e s .  -for t h i s  sudden  in price?  would y o u do i-f y o u were i n t h e s i s t e r s '  What c a n c o n s u m e r s  pri ces?  by  t o buy a k i l o g r a m o-f  apples. there  were s e n t  do t o p r e v e n t  unjusti-fied  place?  increases in  b) Why  wan't he h a v e t o go t o t h e h o s p i t a l ?  c> What s h o u l d t h e b o y do now?  a) P o i n t  o u t p o s s i b l e r e a s o n s why t h e b o o k c a s e  b) What c o u l d  i s tilting.  t h e boy do t o s t r a i g h t e n t h e b o o k c a s e ?  s.  c) What would the  side?  y o u do t o p r e v e n t - t h e b o o k c a s e  •from t i l t i n g  to  o  I  a) Why painted  b)  once a  decided  t h e man  he wants  t h a t he n e e d s h i s -fence  year?  I f you were one o f t h e c h i l d r e n ,  ask  c)  do you t h i n k t h e man  what q u e s t i o n s would  t o make s u r e y o u were p a i n t i n g  the fence the  you way  i t done?  What c o u l d t h e man  be p a i n t e d so o f t e n ?  do s o t h a t h i s f e n c e does n o t need t o  179  Appendix C :  Sample of Students' Responses to Real Life Problematic Situations of the R L P S S S  180  SAMPLES OF THE DIFFERENT ANSWERS TO THE RLPSSS SITUATION NUMBER 1 . . 1-A. The man a t the door i s a person with n e g a t i v e intentions, (criminal, thief, rapist, t e r r o r i s t , kidnapper, e t c . ) . The c h i l d r e n ' s problem i s : how t o a v o i d h i s entrance. The man a t the door i s a n i c e person with friendly intentions, (friend of the f a m i l y , r e l a t i v e from USSR, r e p a i r man, s a l e s man, doctor, e t c ) . Having opened the door i n the f i r s t p l a c e c r e a t e s the problem o f i n s u l t i n g a good person by r e f u s i n g h i s entrance. The c h i l d r e n ' s problem i s how t o say "NO" The c h i l d r e n f a i l e d t o f o l l o w the p a r e n t s ' t h e r e f o r e they f e e l g u i l t y .  instructions,  The parents might not t r u s t them i n the f u t u r e .  The parents might punish them.  1-B.  To ask the person t o r e t u r n l a t e r .  To a p o l o g i z e .  To c a l l the parents and ask them i f they know the person. While one of the c h i l d r e n t a l k s t o the person, the other one c a l l s f o r h e l p (parents, neighbors, f r i e n d s , p o l i c e ) .  181 Have t h e s t r a n g e r l e a v e a message stays behind the door.  Take a r i s k  f o r the parents, while  he  and l e t him i n .  1-C.  Learn  self  defense.  Make s u r e t h a t  Keep p a r e n t s '  Peek t h r o u g h To i n s t a l l device on communicate the door.  Have  t h e r e a r e more t h a n  instructions  t h e key h o l e  two c h i l d r e n  and n e v e r  open t h e  (arrange s p e c i a l  a t home.  door.  low peek  hole).  a chain, small peeking window o r some other the door f o r safety, so that the children with the person without a c t u a l l y r i s k i n g opening  the parents  instruct  them as t o whom t h e y m i g h t  To s t a y w i t h : a b a b y s i t t e r , n e i g h b o r , o r f a m i l i a r To have a t r a i n e d g u a r d dog, a l a r m s y s t e m , p o l i c e  expect.  adult. number.  182 SITUATION NUMBER  2.  2-A. Mother's f a c i a l etc.)  expressions,  (angry  face, plugging  one  ear,  M u s i c n o t e s coming o u t o f t h e r a d i o . 2-B. For To  the fun of i t . e n r a g e h i s mother,  (neighbors).  To draw h i s m o t h e r ' s a t t e n t i o n so much on t h e phone.  (to prevent  The b o y d o e s n o t s e e ( o r h e a r ) t h e phone.  t h a t h i s mother i s t a l k i n g  He h a s h e a r i n g  He i s s e l f i s h  her from  talking on  problems.  and t h i n k s  just  of himself.  2-C.  It bothers  h i s mother,  neighbors.  I t may harm h i s e a r s . It creates an a t m o s p h e r e a t home that nobody can talk q u i e t l y (concentrate on o t h e r t h i n g s : watch TV, prepare homework, t a l k on t h e t e l e p h o n e etc.).  183 SITUATION NUMBER 3 3-A. It  i s cold  a t home and t h e g i r l  does n o t e x p e n d  energy.  I t i s a l l i n h e r mind ( h e r e x h a u s t i o n may c a u s e h e r t o c o l d , s h e may have f a i l e d an exam, s h e f e e l s l o n e l y sad) . The g i r l w e a r s no s o c k s , when one's f e e t body i s c o l d .  Central  heating  not  are cold  feel and  the entire  functioning.  The  girl  i s not dressed  The  girl  i s sick.  sufficiently.  3-B. Use  a blanket,  Be a c t i v e etc.) .  or heavier  (exercise  clothes.  t o warm  Imagine (a h e a t e r , summer, that i t i s not cold).  Eat  and d r i n k  something h o t .  Check t h e h e a t i n g  Take a h o t b a t h .  system.  up,  dance, p l a y  s u n s h i n e on  ball,  t h e beach,  run,  pretend  Battery  operated  heater,  Prepare  warm c l o t h e s and b l a n k e t s .  Ensure a w e l l f u n c t i o n i n g h e a t i n g  system.  Practice exercising. Build a c l u b house problem.  t o which  To c o o r d i n a t e w i t h o t h e r s y s t e m works a l l d a y .  one c a n  tenants  go when  there  is  a  and e n s u r e t h a t t h e h e a t i n g  185 SITUATION  NUMBER 4 .  4-A. A stain  on t h e s h i r t  (he l o o k s  She c a n s m e l l  the smell  He i s t e a s i n g  her t h a t  dirty).  of the p o p s i c l e .  he a t e a p o p s i c l e  and she  didn't.  4-B.  The h e a t  of the sun.  He a t e t o o  His  slowly.  body h e a t c a u s e d t h e p o p s i c l e  to melt  quickly.  4-C. H i s hand i s s t i c k y and d i r t y . She i s a n g r y t h a t he d i d n ' t s h a r e t h e p o p s i c l e w i t h h e r . She wants t o t e a c h him a when he g e t s d i r t y .  lesson  to learn  4-D. Be c a r e f u l ,  Eat  faster.  may  take o f f h i s s h i r t .  what may  happen  Eat  i n the  shade.  To  bend f o r w a r d s  To  share  so t h e p o p s i c l e  i t with h i s s i s t e r  doesn't  so t h e y  drip  finish  on h i s  shirt.  before i t drips.  187  SITUATION  NUMBER 5  5-A. A painter buckets.  s t a n d s on  a ladder,  O n l y h a l f t h e house i s p a i n t e d  holding  a  b r u s h and  paint  so f a r .  Smell the c o l o r .  Paint  i s dripping.  5-B.  Our h a n d w i l l  The p a i n t e r  get d i r t y .  s h o u l d n ' t be d i s t r a c t e d .  The p a i n t e r m i g h t f a l l  He  seems s t r o n g ;  o f f the  ladder.  h i s h a n d s h a k e may  be p a i n f u l t o y o u .  5-C.  He h a s no c h o i c e ;  May  he i s b e i n g  paid  suggest a d i f f e r e n t colour,  f o r a job.  t r y convincing  Can q u i t t h e j o b , have someone e l s e  the  owner.  s u b s t i t u t e f o r him.  188  To p r e t e n d together.  that this  i s a c o l o u r he l i k e s ,  To add a frames.  different  colour  To p u t g l o v e s  of  his liking  or ignore to  the  i t a l l window  i n o r d e r t o keep h i s hands c l e a n .  To demand a h i g h e r  price.  5-D. Be  careful.  Protect  Clean  t h e lawn w i t h n e w s p a p e r s o r p l a s t i c  sheets.  afterwards.  Make t h e owner r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e lawn.  To a p o l o g i z e and compensate  the  owner.  189 S i t u a t i o n Number  6  6-A.  There i s court.  neither a  judge  Only three  (3)  They d o n ' t  i n c l u d e the  O n l y one  No  or a  trainer,  i n the  corner.  nor  an  adequate  players.  boy  basket rather  than  two.  audience.  They d o n ' t seem l i k e s e r i o u s p l a y e r s (no u n i f o r m , shouting, one boy s i t t i n g l o s e t o t h e b a s k e t , d o n ' t f o l l o w t h e r u l e s ) . 6-B.  There i s only  They  just play  A second b a l l  one  ball.  f o r fun  may  or  cause  practice.  confusion.  6-C. He  should  L e t him  ask  offer  t o be  included.  another  ball.  190 Pick  up t h e b a l l  i f i t i s t h r o w n f a r away.  Suggest t h a t i t i s u n f a i r t o t h e y w i l l p l a y 2 a g a i n s t 2.  To  bribe the kids  Join  Act  play  ( l e t them r i d e  2 against  h i s bike,  1, i f he  joins  etc.).  them n a t u r a l l y .  as a judge,  e n c o u r a g e them and t e a c h  them some  tricks.  SITUATION NUMBER 7  7-A. His  family i s noisy  and d i s t u r b s h i m .  He d o e s n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h e m o v i e , ( f o r e i g n language, t h e TV i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e m o v i e e t c . ) .  He does n o t s e e w e l l ,  open  (needs g l a s s e s ) .  He i s p r e o c c u p i e d .  His  favorite  He f a i l e d  hero d i e s .  i n school  He i s e x p e r i e n c i n g  and h i s p a r e n t s  social  a r e angry w i t h him.  difficulties  with  h i s classmates.  191 The movie  i s a b o u t t o end.  He d e s e r v e s revenge. His  family  i t . He  i s not  disturbed  his family  and now  they  considerate.  7-B.  Ask h i s f a m i l y  Stop being  t o keep q u i e t ,  sad, i t ' s j u s t  or leave  t h e room.  a movie.  Ask h i s p a r e n t s t o t r a n s l a t e t h e m o v i e .  Get  h i s eyes checked.  R a i s e t h e volume  Try  to r a i s e  of the  T.V.  h i s family's  interest  R e c o r d t h e p r o g r a m on v i d e o  i n the program.  and w a t c h  i t later  7-C. Get  eye  glasses.  Make s u r e t h a t  his family  i s more  considerate.  on.  take  192 Retaliate.  Disturb  them when t h e y  Decide n o t t o argue of f i g h t  A r r a n g e a T.V. w a t c h i n g  To  ignore  a program.  i n f r o n t o f t h e T.V.  schedule  f o r everyone  i n the family.  the s i t u a t i o n .  Practice h i s fast A family others.  are watching  reading  d i s c u s s i o n on  Engage h i s s i b l i n g s  (for the  subtitles). subject  of  i n a f u n game so t h e y  consideration  for  won't b o t h e r h i m .  Be c o n s i d e r a t e t o w a r d h i s s i b l i n g s so t h a t t h e y t o r e s p e c t h i s needs a n d be c o n s i d e r a t e t o h i m .  will  learn  193 SITUATION NUMBER  8.  8-A. He r i s k s b e i n g h i t by t h e b i c y c l e .  He i s l a t e f o r work.  His  documents a r e g o i n g t o be s c a t t e r e d  He i s g o i n g  t o break h i s  He may bump i n t o may s u e h i m .  He i s r u n n i n g  a l l over.  glasses.  the g i r l  a n d i f she w i l l  away b e c a u s e he s t o l e  h u r t h e r s e l f she  the bag.  8-B  She r i s k s h i t t i n g  t h e man a n d h u r t i n g  So f a r i t d o e s n o t seem  like  herself.  s h e h a s any p r o b l e m .  The man may s u e h e r .  She wants t o g e t t o s c h o o l  early  She wants t o b r e a k t h e r e c o r d  so s h e c a n p l a y .  of speeding  She may be s t o p p e d by t h e p o l i c e on t h e s i d e w a l k .  biking.  w h o ' l l warn h e r n o t t o r i d e  194 8-C Get  up  earlier  and  a l l o w more  "You life  are b e t t e r o f f l o s i n g i n a minute"  Stop  and  wait  Take a bus  Get  i n the  bag  Approach the m u n i c i p a l e s Not  to v i s i t  i n the  a minute i n your  life  then  corner.  or a r i d e with  himself a proper  time.  a  friend.  for his  papers.  t o widen the  street.  stockmarket.  8-D Slow down and Increase Ride  Get  on  speed the  herself  look and  street  around. get to the corner b e f o r e the not the  a better bike.  s i d e walk.  man.  your  195 9.  SITUATION NUMBER 9-A He f a i l e d His g i r l  the t e s t . friend  His expensive  l e f t him.  pen b r o k e .  He h a s no f r i e n d s He i s a g i f t e d He w o r r i e s His parents The  and i s b o r e d .  c h i l d who  i n case  of f a i l u r e ,  t h a t h i s p a r e n t s m i g h t be a n g r y  i s i n mourning.  w i t h him.  a r e about t o g e t d i v o r c e d .  t e a c h e r n e g l e c t s him.  9-B F o r g e t a b o u t t h e exam. Have t h e t e a c h e r , him.  a friend,  a parent,  Treat  h i m s e l f t o s o m e t h i n g new  Think  of a l l the t e s t s  Have a p r i v a t e  (book,  e x p l a i n the problem t o  candy).  i n w h i c h he d i d w e l l .  tutor.  Make p e a c e w i t h h i s f r i e n d s .  196 9-C Study w e l l the m a t e r i a l . Study with a f r i e n d , parent,  teacher.  Create Math games f o r f u n . Memorize a l l the r u l e s . Study a l l year, s e v e r a l hours a day. Study the day before the exam, so t h a t the m a t e r i a l w i l l be f r e s h i n h i s mind.  SITUATION NUMBER 10. 10-A There are c h a i r s ,  tables, a waitresse,  By t h e way t h e f o o d  By t h e c o m f o r t a b l e  another  couple.  i s served.  apholstary.  W h i t e t a b l e c l o t h e , & a menu.  10-B They a r e c e l e b r a t i n g . No f o o d  a t home a n d t h e s t o r e s a r e c l o s e d .  They want t o g e t t o know e a c h  other.  They want t o f o r g e t a s a d e x p e r i e n c e .  They a r e on a t r i p They have i m p o r t a n t divorce).  and stopped matters  f o r t h e meal.  to discuss  (like  business,  10-C  It's  being  done b y t h e s t a f f ,  They a r e n o t a t home. They d o n ' t own t h e r e s t a u r a n t .  they p a i d f o r t h i s  service.  E a t t h e P i z z a , b u t p a y f o r t h e H. & C.  Ask t h e w a i t r e s s e  Complain  t o b r i n g H. & C.  t o t h e owner.  Leave t h e r e s t a u r a n t .  Tell  h e r t h a t she d i d n ' t l i s t e n  t o them.  10-E  W r i t e down t h e o r d e r  Recheck t h e i r  Tell  according  to the t a b l e .  order.  them t h a t t h e y a r e o u t o f H. & C.  Concentrate  on h e r j o b .  Get a h e a r i n g  aid.Get  better  organised.  Situation  number  11  11-A The TV d o e s n o t work. The h o u s e  There  i s dark.  i s a thunder-storm  outside.  11-B  t  Thunder h i t a n e l e c t r i c  Branches f e l l  pole.  on t h e e l e c t r i c  A car h i t the e l e c t r i c  There  i s an o v e r l o a d  There  i s a short  There i s a s t r i k e  pole.  pole.  i n the e l e c t r i c  company.  circuit.  i n the e l e c t r i c  company.  The f a m i l y d i d n ' t p a y t h e e l e c t r i c b i l l s , company s h u t - o f f t h e i r e l e c t r i c i t y .  The e l e c t r i c system.  There  company  i s an o v e r l o a d  i s making  so t h e  r e p a i r s i n the  of e l e c t r i c  appliances.  electric  electric  200 11-C  Call  an e l e c t r i c i a n  Light  Turn  Put  to f i x the e l e c t i c i t y .  a candle.  on a  flashlight.  on an emergency  light.  Wait.  Replace  the fuse.  Check what happened, w h e t h e r i t i s a l o c a l general problem.  Call  Try  the e l e c t r i c  problem  or a  company.  t o f i x the problem  by  themselves.  11-D  Prepare  c a n d l e s and m a t c h e s .  Put an emergency l i g h t i n a r e a c h a b l e p l a c e , j u s t i n c a s e . L i s t e n t o t h e w e a t h e r f o r c a s t and when t h e r e i s a s t o r m e x p e c t e d , t o be p r e p a r e d .  Buy a g e n e r a t o r t h a t w i l l blackout.  Prevent  over-usage  keep w o r k i n g  of e l e c t r i c i t y  when t h e r e i s a  a t home.  To  install  an a u t o m a t i c  SITUATION NUMBER  fuse.  12  12-A  Cars are very c l o s e  Cars  are  People  road.  are p i e c e s of g l a s s  A child  other.  smashed.  Cars b l o c k the  There  t o each  i s h u r t and  lying  on t h e  ground.  on t h e  ground.  are standing outside t h e i r  car.  12-B The  drivers  didn't  keep enough d i s t a n c e between t h e  The f i r s t c a r s t o p p e d u n e x p e c t a d l y couldn't stop i n time.  T h e r e was  an u n c l e a r  and  the second  visibility.  A p e d e s t r i a n jumped i n t o  the road  unexpectadly.  cars.  car  202  A child  didn't crossed  The  driver  fell  The  driver  was  the  road  in a  crosswalk.  asleep.  drunk.  12-C  T h e r e was  nobody b a d l y  T h e r e was  no  one  hurt.  that could c a l l  The  ambulance h a d n ' t a r r i v e d  The  ambulance had  already  an  ambulance.  yet.  left  the  place.  12-D  Stop the  car.  Call  help.  for  H e l p c a l m down t h e  Call  Not  the  t o do  police,  a  two  notify  thing.  ladies.  the  child's  parents,  call  a  tow-car.  203  Drive the c h i l d  to the h o s p i t a l .  To honk s o t h e y w i l l  clear  the road.  SITUATION NUMBER 13.  13-A Inflation.  There  i s no s u b s i d y on a p p l e s .  The p o o r c o n d i t i o n s f o r g r o w i n g expenses t o t h e farmers.  The  s h o p ' s c o m p e t i t i o n went  The  owner's d a u g h t e r  It  i s not the apple  The  salesman  increased  bankrupt.  i s g e t t i n g m a r r i e d a n d he n e e d s money.  season.  i s cheating the g i r l s .  13-B  Go home a n d a s k f o r more money.  Bargain.  apples caused  204 Buy  t h e a p p l e s and s i g n an  Buy  a p p l e s somewhere  Do c o m p a r a t i v e  Buy  I.Q.U.  else.  shopping.  less apples.  13-C  S t o p coming to. s t o r e s  Complain  that raise  prices.  t o t h e Government.  Buy i n more t h a n one s t o r e shopping.  so t h a t y o u c a n do c o m p a r a t i v e  Demonstrate! Organize a demonstration.  Find  out i f the increase  Can't  is justified.  do a n y t h i n g a b o u t i t .  E n c o u r a g e more f a r m e r s t o graw a p p l e s .  Buy  a p p l e s on  sale.  L  205  SITUATION NUMBER 14  14-A He i s c r y i n g c a l l i n g  We  see a b l a c k  spot  f o r help.  on h i s k n e e .  He i s b l e e d i n g .  He s i t s  on t h e g r o u n d , on a s t r e c h e r .  He h o l d s  h i s knee, c a n ' t  walk.  14-B Perhaps i t ' s a s u p e r f i c i a l F i r s t you use f i r s t to the h o s p e t a l .  wound, s m a l l , n o t s e r i o u s .  a i d , only  i f t h a t does n o t h e l p  y o u go  I t seems a s i f he d i d n o t b r e a k a n y t h i n g , so i t i s enough t o c l e a r t h e wound, s t e r i l i z e i t and p u t a bandage on i t . 14-C Go home. Sterlize applying  t h e wound, bandage i t , s t o p p r e s s u r e t o t h e wound.  C a l l f o r h e l p , go t o t h e s c h o o l school, t o get treatment. Ask a f r i e n d ,  a bypasser,  t h e b l e e d i n g by  n u r s e i f i t happens i n  t o c a l l home o r t o walk him home.  206  C r a w l home, wound.  l i m p home, t h e r e h i s m o t h e r w i l l  Keep c r y i n g  and g e t a t t e n t i o n .  Lie  i n bed and w a i t u n t i l  t h e wound  heals.  t r e a t the  SITUATION NUMBER  15  15-A It  is built  crooked  Somebody moved i t . The f l o o r , crooked.  wall,  t h e b a s e o f t h e b o o k c a s e , t h e house i s  The c h i l d  climbed  The c h i l d hard.  t o o k s o m e t h i n g o u t o f i t and p u l l e d on i t t o o  on i t , p u s h e d i t .  On one s i d e t h e r e a r e many b o o k s , empty.  on t h e o t h e r  The b o o k c a s e balance.  i t d o e s n ' t have  One  i s o l d and t h e r e f o r e  of i t s legs  fell;  i t isn't  Something  fell  T h e r e was  an e a r t h q u a k e .  i s t h e way  i tis  good  well.  b e h i n d , under t h e bookcase.  Somebody hammered a n a i l  That  built  side  on t h e o t h e r  the bookshelf  The c l o s e t w a s n ' t f a s t e n d w i t h i t to the wall are crocked.  side of the w a l l .  is built. screws, the screws t h a t  held  208 There i s a d i f f e r a n c e bookcase.  It  i n the n i g h t of the legs of the  i s an o l d b o o k c a s e .  15-B  The  child  c a n ' t do  anything.  Check what i s t h e r e a s o n . Push t o t h e o t h e r put i t s t r a i g h t . Balance t h e books, wall. Put  s i d e and t r y t o p o t h e r  take  s i d e and t r y t o  down t h e l o a d , p u s h t o w a r d s t h e  a book u n d e r t h e b o o k c a s e , o r f i x a l e g .  15-C  Put  something b e s i d e  Construct  a solid  i t f o r support.  base f o r i t .  Nail  the bookcase to the w a l l behind i t .  Find  a flat  s u r f a c e t o p l a c e t h e bookcase on.  P l a c e t h e books spread evenly.  on t h e s e l v e s , e n s u r i n g t h a t t h e i r w e i g h t i s  Not t o p u t t h e b o o k c a s e  i n the c h i l d ' s  room.  209 Replace  the bookcase.  P u t t h e h e a v y b o o k s on t h e l o w e r  SITUATION NUMBER  shelf.  16  16-A  Because t h e fence i s d i r t y , rusting.  So  i twill  He d o e s n ' t  look nice,  like  doesn't  l o o k good and t o a v o i d e  new.  the colour.  Maybe t h e k i d s s u g g e s t e d h i m and he a g r e e d w i l l have s o m e t h i n g t o d o .  The  so t h a t  the kids  c o l o u r h o l d s f o r o n l y one y e a r .  T h a t ' s t h e way i t i s e x p e c t e d t o b e . He i s p o o r year.  and c a n n o t manage t o p a i n t  i t more t h a n once a  16-B  Which c o l o u r w o u l d y o u l i k e  Is  there waterproof paint?  most f o r t h e f e n c e ?  Why do y o f us w o u l d y o u l i k e  Would y o u l i k e  something  Would y o u l i k e what way?  us t o p a i n t  to paint  your  fence?  special? both  sides,  how many  layers, i n  How many c o l o r s do y o u want us t o use?  To p e e l  the o l d paint,  or to paint  on t o p o f t h e o l d p a i n t ?  How b i g i s t h e f e n c e ? How much c o l o r does i t need?  How much money w i l l we  get?  When do y o u want us t o f i n i s h How much p a i n t the p a i n t ?  painting?  s h o u l d we buy? where i s a good s t o r e  S h o u l d we p a i n t  h o r i z o n t a l l y or  S h o u l d we p a i n t  something  How much t i m e  Which h o u r s  else  t o buy  vertically?  too?  s h o u l d we work?  a r e c o n v e n i e n t f o r y o u t o have us  working?  211 16-C  To grow some p l a n t s  on the fence.  To put something on the fence t h a t w i l l keep i t from rusting.  To c l e a n the fence p e r i o d i c a l l y .  To get a p r o f e s s i o n a l t o do the p a i n t i n g i n s t e a d of k i d s .  To take down the fence.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093085/manifest

Comment

Related Items