Exogenous and Endogenous Learning Resources and Their Significance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Exogenous and Endogenous Learning Resources and Their Significance for Talent Development

• Prof. Dr. Dr. Albert Ziegler

Chair of Educational Psychology and Research on Excellence University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H. (2017). Systemic gifted education. A theoretical

• introduction. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61, 183–193.

What is is not a System? A A set

It It consists of

• f ele

lements wit ith no no shared fu function

What is is not a System? A A set

It It consists of

• f ele

lements wit ith no no shared fu function

What is is not a System? A A set

It It consists of

• f ele

lements wit ith no no shared fu function

A A set is is best understood as as the sum of

• f it

its parts

Sets might develop into systems

A A system consists of

• f ele

lements wit ith a a shared function

• The analytic approach inherently depromotes the

relationships between the components

• The analytic approach inherently depromotes

functional aspects

• The analytic approach works well when there is a

low level of interconnectivity and interdependency

Problems of

• f an

an analyt ytic research strategy

What about giftedness?

• 1. The key elements share a common

function

• 2. They are highly connected
• 3. The processes are dynamic
• 4. The processes are mainly nonlinear

Strength of an analytic approach: Static, decomposable systems There is no either-or: Analytic and holistic research strategies are complementary and should be always combined! Strength of a holistic approach: Dynamic, interconnected systems

What is the first step in gifted education?

Step 1: Diagnose the learning resources

• f the child

Two kinds of learning resources: Endogenous

Two kinds of learning resources: Exogenous

Exogenous resources: Schools for the gifted, teachers specialized in gifted education and enrichment programs

Two kinds of resources:

• Endogenous resources =

Learning Capital

• Exogenous resources =

Educational Capital

Educational Capital

1. Economic 2. Cultural 3. Social 4. Infrastructural 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

1. Organismic 2. Actional 3. Telic 4. Episodic 5. Attentional

Economic Educational Capital

Adam Łukasz Examples of what Adam´s parents could afford in contrast to Łukasz´s parents:

• Summer school
• Chemistry box
• Language course holidays in Great Britain
• Piano
• Expensive private school

Economic educational capital is every kind of wealth, possession, money,

• r valuables that can be invested in the initiation and maintenance of

educational and learning processes. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 27)

Cultural Educational Capital

Anna Nora Examples of what Anna experienced in contrast to Nora:

• Parents have an academic background and envision for Anna an academic career, too
• Parents talk frequently with her about school and want their daughter among the best
• Anna´s friends like learning
• Anna´s teachers are highly motivated

Cultural educational capital includes value system, thinking patterns, models and the like, which can facilitate—or hinder—the attainment of learning and educational goals. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 27)

Social Educational Capital

Victor Karl Examples of Victor´s social environment:

• Mother stayed at home to raise her boy
• Victor´s family are all academics
• Victor has a personal mentor, a retired math teacher
• Victor is a member of the “Math Club” at his school

Social educational capital includes all persons and social institutions that can directly or indirectly contribute to the success of learning and educational processes. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 28)

Infrastructural Educational Capital

Emily Lucy Examples of Emily´s environment:

• More than 1000 books at home
• Own room, quiet place to work
• Stimulating toys and learning material at home
• Excellent schools nearby
• Library around the corner

Infrastructural educational capital relates to materially implemented possibilities for action that permit learning and education to take place. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 28)

Didactic Educational Capital

Tiago Rodrigo Examples of Tiago´s didactic environment:

• His father teaches physical education
• Tiago plays for one of the best Portuguese football clubs
• His coach has a training license for football and develops individual training routines
• His football club employs a physiotherapist for the youth teams
• He receives health education

Didactic educational capital means the assembled know-how involved in the design and improvement of educational and learning processes. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 28)

Educational Capital

1. Economic 2. Cultural 3. Social 4. Infrastructural 5. Didactic

“Smart people or smart contexts?”

(Barab & Plucker, 2002)

Educational Capital

1. Economic 2. Cultural 3. Social 4. Infrastructural 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

1. Organismic 2. Actional 3. Telic 4. Episodic 5. Attentional

Organismic Learning Capital

Mia Lena Examples of Lena´s organismic capital compared to Mia´s:

• Regular sleeping time in a quiet room, no media use the last 60 minutes prior to sleep
• Her mother puts emphasis on healthy nutrition
• No health problems worth mentioning
• Preferred learning time when she is in her best shape at day

Organismic learning capital consists of the physiological and constitutional resources of a person. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 29)

Actional Learning Capital

Ivo Milan Examples of Ivo´s Actional Learning Capital:

• He has a much better command of his mother tongue (including an active vocabulary of

double size)

• He had taken two courses in learning strategies
• He possesses already advanced skills in searching for specific information
• He is a skilled reader

Actional learning capital means the action repertoire of a person—the totality of actions they are capable of performing. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013,

• p. 30)

Telic Learning Capital

Elena Liana Examples of Elena´s goal system:

• Wants to have an academic career
• Likes the company of peers who are learning oriented
• Enjoys in her leisure time reading very much
• Doesn´t like to party

Telic learning capital comprises the totality of a person’s anticipated goal states that offer possibilities for satisfying their needs. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 30)

Episodic Learning Capital

Mark Jakov Examples of Jakov´s experiences with learning:

• His mother read to him books from early on
• He watched his family members frequently reading
• In kindergarten he learned early math in a playful way
• Learning progress was reinforced by his social environment
• His elementary school teacher provides a safe learning environment

Episodic learning capital is the positive and negative experiences associated with learning. “It concerns the simultaneous goal- and situation-relevant action patterns that are accessible to a person.” (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 31)

Attentional Learning Capital

Ella Julia Examples of Julias´s experiences with learning:

• Julia has problems to focus during learning
• Her effective learning time is only 32%
• She loves to play computer games
• She loves to hang out with friends

Attentional learning capital denotes the quantitative and qualitative attentional resources that a person can apply to learning. (Ziegler & Baker, 2013, p. 31)

What about the empirical evidence?

Resilience and the Educational and Learning Capital of Students

China

Confidence Failure Coping Stability Modifiability Achievement

economic

.261** .233** .147* .248** .148*

cultural

.175* .344** .235** .296** .112

social

.372** .556** .477** .477** .112

infrastructural

.448** .619** .585** .575** .286**

didactic

.477** .664** .578** .583** .273**

• rganismic

.362** .556** .447** .430** .132

actional

.501** .624** .599** .580** .275**

telic

.454** .619** .586** .544** .214**

episodic

.469** .605** .593** .537** .196**

attentional

.403** .597** .562** .545** .319**

Confidence Failure Coping Stability Modifiability Achievement

economic

.093 .233* .202 .194

• .039

cultural

.067 .048 .071 .270* .020

social

.402** .310** .107 .408**

• .026

infrastructural

.434** .364** .191 .359** .257*

didactic

.214* .355** .106 .211* .338**

• rganismic

.428** .255* .067 .213* .292**

actional

.512** .443** .296** .454** .229*

telic

.255* .380** .215* .301**

• .010

episodic

.497** .419** .118 .395** .230*

attentional

.353** .299** .245* .279** .278**

Germany

Confidence Failure Coping Stability Modifiability Achievement

economic

.328** .262** .350** .268** .202**

cultural

.303** .397** .451** .449** .252**

social

.403** .459** .460** .481** .315**

infrastructural

.444** .475** .448** .406** .294**

didactic

.450** .464** .389** .463** .428**

• rganismic

.339** .409** .315** .394** .285**

actional

.363** .513** .444** .374** .333**

telic

.385** .469** .412** .425** .327**

episodic

.424** .483** .486** .426** .277**

attentional

.451** .506** .489** .484** .355**

Turkey

Do learning resources have an incremental value over IQ?

M SD GPA HMT 4–6 (IQ) Educational and learning capital GPA 76.01 15.94 – HMT 4–6 (IQ) 11.90 5.02 .48** .78 Educational and learning capital 25.36 8.26 .53** .41** .94

Hierarchical regressions with GPA as dependent variable (N=365) Variable Beta p R² Model 1 HMT 4–6 (IQ) .48 < .001 .23 Model 2 HMT 4–6 (IQ) .31 < .001 .37 Educational & learning capital .41 < .001

What predicts the professional success of musicians?

Participants

• 52 professional musicians with local successes
• 21 musicians with successes in the Federal State
• 7 musicians with successes on an international level

Possession of Educational Capital of Musicians Differing in Their Later Success at the Point of Time When They Made the Decision to Pursue a Professional Career

Possession of Learning Capital of Musicians Differing in Their Later Success at the Point

• f Time When They Made the Decision to Pursue a Professional Career

World class swimmers

Educational Capital of swimmers at a regional, national, and international level

3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 Regional Level National Level International Level

3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 Regional Level National Level International Level

Learning Capital of swimmers at a regional, national, and international level

Learning Resources 2.0

Learning Resources 2.0

A system consists of interacting elements or components that make use of resources to maintain a certain level of internal stability and function as a whole in order to produce certain behaviors (Ziegler & Stoeger, 2017).

Learning Resources 2.0

A system consists of interacting elements or components that make use of resources to maintain a certain level of internal stability and function as a whole in order to produce certain behaviors (Ziegler & Stoeger, 2017).

Learning Resources 2.0

A system consists of interacting elements or components that make use of resources to maintain a certain level of internal stability and function as a whole in order to produce certain behaviors (Ziegler & Stoeger, 2017).

Table 5. Means and standard deviations of the scales for runners with success on different levels Control District level Federal State level National level Availability 2.70 (.66)a 3.23 (.68)ab 363 (.55)bc 3.93 (.44)c General Usage 2.70 (.72)a 3.36 (.76)b 3.75 (.47)bc 4.32 (.45)d Framework conditions 2.65 (.72)a 3.33 (.87)ab 3.56 (.59)b 4.02 (.62)b Performance growth 2.62 (.83)a 3.42 (.79)b 3.57 (.61)bc 4.17 (.47)c Top performance level 1.80 (.77)a 2.60 (.80)b 3.10 (.67)bc 3.87 (.68)c

• Note. Different superscripts differences represent significant (p < 0.05) differences between the

groups.

Table 5. Means and standard deviations of the scales for runners with success on different levels Control District level Federal State level National level Availability 2.70 (.66)a 3.23 (.68)ab 363 (.55)bc 3.93 (.44)c General Usage 2.70 (.72)a 3.36 (.76)b 3.75 (.47)bc 4.32 (.45)d Framework conditions 2.65 (.72)a 3.33 (.87)ab 3.56 (.59)b 4.02 (.62)b Performance growth 2.62 (.83)a 3.42 (.79)b 3.57 (.61)bc 4.17 (.47)c Top performance level 1.80 (.77)a 2.60 (.80)b 3.10 (.67)bc 3.87 (.68)c

• Note. Different superscripts differences represent significant (p < 0.05) differences between the

groups.

Table 4. Means and standard deviations of the scales of the STEM adapted Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital Control Professor Top position private company Availability 3.99 (.47)a 4.29 (.71)b 4.73 (.65)b General Usage 3.67 (.49)a 3.98 (.83)ab 4.24 (.76)b Framework conditions 3.79 (.48)a 4.23 (.72)b 4.66 (.74)b Performance growth 3.83 (.47)a 4.02 (.72)a 4.71 (.68)b Top performance level 3.75 (.75)a 3.91 (.72)a 4.75 (.75)b

• Note. Different superscripts represent significant (p < 0.05) differences between the groups.

Table 4. Means and standard deviations of the scales of the STEM adapted Questionnaire of Educational and Learning Capital Control Professor Top position private company Availability 3.99 (.47)a 4.29 (.71)b 4.73 (.65)b General Usage 3.67 (.49)a 3.98 (.83)ab 4.24 (.76)b Framework conditions 3.79 (.48)a 4.23 (.72)b 4.66 (.74)b Performance growth 3.83 (.47)a 4.02 (.72)a 4.71 (.68)b Top performance level 3.75 (.75)a 3.91 (.72)a 4.75 (.75)b

• Note. Different superscripts represent significant (p < 0.05) differences between the groups.

Qualitative Studies

In-depth interviews with

• Achiever and underachiever
• Students from lower vs higher achievement tracks
• Girls and boys in physics
• Succcessful vs struggling TE students

Educational Capital

• 1. Economic
• 2. Cultural
• 3. Social
• 4. Infrastructural
• 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

• 1. Organismic
• 2. Actional
• 3. Telic
• 4. Episodic
• 5. Attentional

Finding 1: Law of the minimum Average achievers performances have more frequently been limited by the amount of one or several scarce resources

Educational Capital

• 1. Economic
• 2. Cultural
• 3. Social
• 4. Infrastructural
• 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

• 1. Organismic
• 2. Actional
• 3. Telic
• 4. Episodic
• 5. Attentional

Finding 2: Replacing resources Average achievers were less able to compensate for temporarily smaller amounts of such resources.

Educational Capital

• 1. Economic
• 2. Cultural
• 3. Social
• 4. Infrastructural
• 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

• 1. Organismic
• 2. Actional
• 3. Telic
• 4. Episodic
• 5. Attentional

Finding 3: Positive feedback In the group of the high achievers more positive feedback processes among the learning resources could be observed, i.e. possession of one or more learning resources pushed the acquisition and/or use of other learning resources.

Educational Capital

• 1. Economic
• 2. Cultural
• 3. Social
• 4. Infrastructural
• 5. Didactic

Learning Capital

• 1. Organismic
• 2. Actional
• 3. Telic
• 4. Episodic
• 5. Attentional

Finding 4: Negative feedback After facing obstacles or setbacks negative feedback processes were more frequent among the learning resources in the group of the high achievers.

Step 1: Diagnose the learning resources

• f the child

Step 2 Design a learning pathway for the child Step 3 …

Further reading: Ziegler, A. & Baker, J. (2013). Talent development as adaption: The role of educational and learning capital. In S. Phillipson, H. Stoeger, & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Exceptionality in East-Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope model of giftedness (pp. 18-39). London: Routledge. Ziegler, A., Debatin, T., & Stoeger, H. (2019). Learning resources and talent development from a systemic point of view. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1435. Ziegler, A., Chandler, K., Vialle, W., & Stoeger, H. (2017). Exogenous and endogenous learning resources in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness and its significance for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 310-333. Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H. (2017). Systemic gifted education. A theoretical introduction. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61, 183–193. doi:10.1177/0016986217705 713 For reprints: albert.ziegler@fau.de

Thank you for your attention!

75

Further reading: Ziegler, A. & Baker, J. (2013). Talent development as adaption: The role of educational and learning capital. In S. Phillipson, H. Stoeger, & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Exceptionality in East-Asia: Explorations in the Actiotope model of giftedness (pp. 18-39). London: Routledge. Ziegler, A., Debatin, T., & Stoeger, H. (2019). Learning resources and talent development from a systemic point of view. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1435. Ziegler, A., Chandler, K., Vialle, W., & Stoeger, H. (2017). Exogenous and endogenous learning resources in the Actiotope Model of Giftedness and its significance for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 310-333. Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H. (2017). Systemic gifted education. A theoretical introduction. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61, 183–193. doi:10.1177/0016986217705 713 For reprints: albert.ziegler@fau.de