Free Successful Reflective Practitioners Essay Example

Reflection Paper:

Introduction
This reflection paper presents a personal view and thoughts about how our group presented a TV documentary on the curent situation of the gifted and talented children in the UK. According ot Gagne (Swift, 2012, p. 1), “gifted students have above average potentials in one or more of these intellectual domains: intellectual, physical, social, and creative. Meanwhile, the talented students are those whose skills are also above the normal students’ and this is reflected in their performances in one or more area such as in music, arts, etc.
In taking into consideration the content, process and feedback of our presentation, this paper emphasizes Gagne's term “potential” (2012, p. 1). Our group affirmed the nature and nurture factors in the development of the gifted and the talented children. Hence, it was not just enough for us that these children have raw talents and mental capacities. It was also pertinent that the said potentials are properly developed. Hence, we also called attention to the need to discover more of their talents, traits and characteristics. It was also significant for us to bring about further development in the way the gifted and the talented are being nurtured in our society.
This paper leads us to categorize each and every aspect of how we handled the topic and answered our problem - Should more support be given to gifted and talented children? This is not a moral probe but more of the institutional and financial support towards their potentails and further growth. Aside from this, these children should be further integrated in the social and emotional spheres of the majority. Usually, gifted and talented children are put on a special spot. However, we aimed to show that they are also as human as we are.

The topic on “Gifted and Talented Children in the U.K.” is a timely topic. However, by reflection, I realized that the relevance and the urgency of the matter were not fully emphasized by the content of our documentary. There was a specific lack of information on the following areas:
1. Academic definition of the “gifted” and “talented” children.
2. Who are these gifted and talented children, around how many are they now or last year? Where are they enrolled now, among others?
3. What are the special issues pertaining to their giftedness and talents which are problematic nowadays, i.e. lack of funds for their programs, lack of social and emotional development and support for their total integration among the normal or average students, etc. ?
4. The lack of programs was cited as one of the gifted and talented children’s problems yet there was no counter data on what the UK educational agencies are doing to manage these special children.
For these realizations, I think we could have produced a more balanced and more informed documentary if we have a wider grasp of the issue before we pursued the topic in the angle which we explored – Should more support be given to gifted and talented children? For this, I guess we have been less effective in bringing home the point. Specifically, we were not able to cover the content in such a way that it would lead to the answer the question we set.
The theoretical foundations of the topic should also be more extensive and authoritative. I should have included the definition of giftedness by Betts and Neihart (Shurkin, 1992, p. 22). These authorities in giftedness enumerated the six types of gifted students with specific needs. This identification grid is a useful to define the gifted and talented children and how are they better managed.
According to Li (1996), the foundations of giftedness and human intelligence are founded by the following:
Binet (1905) – conceived the idea of "mental age” and created the first structured intelligence test;
Renzulli (1978) – created the “three-ring conception of giftedness,” the dynamics between above average intelligence, high levels of commitment to tasks, and high levels of creativity.
Gardner (1981) – founded the theory of Multiple Intelligences – the musical, mathematical, spatial, linguistic, body-kinesthetic, social skills, and intra personal skills. Tannenbaum (1983 ) – defined the “psychosocial definition of giftedness” which equates giftedness to potential, while defining talent as “developed abilities.” There are five main elements in this concept and these are: general ability, special ability, non-mental elements, environmental factors, and the element of chance (Zusne, 1984, p. 38).
Gagne (1985 ) – established the “differentiated model of giftedness and talent.” He described how the child develops from giftedness (high potential) to talent (high performance) by the process of learning as supported by intra-personal and environmental factors (Colman, 1994, p. 29).

Bloom’s taxonomy is also a special baseline for the topic of giftedness and talent.

In addition, the transition of the topics on giftedness and talented children has been unclear and swift. At one instance, the definition of giftedness was stated then the topic went to the sufficiency (or insufficiency) of the funds and programs for the gifted and talented children. Then, the next question jumped into the dynamics of home and school support for these children and it led to the stages or levels of education and how it affects the gifted and the talented children.
In retrospect, these topics were initially thought off to convey a complete scenario of what the gifted and talented children need and how they must be addressed. However, the transitions did not provide enough leeway for the inner points to be established first. The relationships between each topic were not also properly bridged.
This may be due to the fact that the presenters already assumed the prior knowledge of the audience with regards to the topic. This is a miscalculation because the documentary should have sweetly introduced the topic from the problem towards the present scenario then what and how it could be resolved. It should be a matter of fact revelations (The Free Dictionary, 2015, p. 1). In an instance, I sometimes thought that perhaps we should have presented the gifted and talented children and let the story reel from there. It is now a puzzle if the topic should have been more effectively presented if we interviewed the gifted and talented children themselves and their families, how they deal with the high level intelligence and how the external world remains inadequate for them. In retrospect, perhaps we should presented a current issue on how the government is supporting the gifted and talented children of UK and then move from there, with specific interviews or documentary of these children and how the government failed in sustaining their special educational and social needs (Henry, 2010).
Meanwhile, the veracity and equal treatment of the content has been good enough. We did not do injustice to certain matters and we directly stated the facts at they are. This is a success in itself because we presented the truth, no matter how incongruent it may seem.

Feedback on the Documentary

The peer feedback we received on our work basically reflects the ideas I have shared in the content reflections. Basically, our peers also indicated the segmented or fragmented presentation of the issue involved in the gifted and talented children of UK. They did not have any problem or comment in the way we side by side exposed the sub issues and problems of the gifted and talented children in the country. I was just amazed by the general and instant recognition of the said problem. They themselves are familiar with this inadequacy. It makes me realized that the problem of the gifted and the talented children have been a long standing concern. Hence, it gratified us to know that by way of our documentary, we have contributed to bring more awareness of the said problem to a larger audience.
Similar to us, our peers also showed support of the topic and commended us on exploring this educational problem. They also believed that their problems are one of the mainly neglected aspects of educational institutions and government, in particular. While they have a different approach to the issue, they also acknowledged that the vastness of the problem is also a main barrier towards the full exposition of the topic. Hence, we felt quite relieved that the scope was too much and we can accept criticism on this lack of insight. We shall be more careful in our next work.
On the more positive side, the feedback on the theoretical baseline was little. Unlike my reflection on the supposed grand theories and sources, they did not criticize this part. They believed that the theories presented were enough as a jump off point to the greater portion of the documentary. Perhaps, I was just very academic in this respect as I have discovered ample resources to qualify the topic even more. In retrospect, perhaps, it is not necessary to dig into scholarly resources. However, this could be a very special jump off point when the documentary presented opinion of educational experts. Our knowledge of giftedness and the theoretical gaps were limited yet it was enough for the purpose of the presentation.
The general feedback was on the present situation and we have answered most of the questions or problems raised, according to them. This was a good review for us, since I have been thinking we presented an inadequate work. The content has been sufficient and this surprised me. Perhaps, as I already mentioned, I am just too scholarly in my reflections.

Exploring the Process

The process by which we produced the documentary was remarkable. We did not argue on the topic. Yet, on an instant, we wanted to pursue the topic because we believed its significance, especially in education. It led me to realize that the urgency of the topic unified us in making the documentary. We were unified in our belief that the main goal of education and what it ought to be is the main standard by which we look at how the current situation of the gifted and the talented children should be addressed (Davies, Gregory, & McGuinn, 2002).
With a simple goal of applying our knowledge to solve an educational problem, we resolved to tackle the issue in the best way we can. We tried to understand better the purpose of promoting giftedness and special talents and this led us to be inspired. We realized that the purpose and philosophy of education has been and shall remain abstracted (Kassem, Mufti, & Robinson, 2006). However, it is not hard to distinguish when an aspect of education is not working effectively. As many other aspects of institutional learning have been challenged or criticized as ineffective, the topic which we pursued seems very significant for our concern. It must be radically changed so as many children will benefit from it. If we could become instrument to its fulfillment, then we inherently see the value of our own education (Kassem, Mufti, & Robinson, 2006).
As Daniels, Lauder, Porter, & Hartshorn (2012) reiterated, the child’s right to education should be universally recognized. Hence, all children should receive basic education. In this light, the gifted and the talented children should also be well placed in terms of their educational requirements. It should be argued that there are many problems in our formal educational system and the problems of the gifted and the talented is but one of the few problems of the whole educational system. The way that we presented this was by random assignment.
I took the part of what was assigned for me to deliver. We did not have any major issues of who should address the main parts of the documentary. Likewise, we also contribute the best ways we can and we had a quick preparation for this script. In reflection, we should have made a longer part in the research aspect so that we have wholly covered the pertinent issues and concerns on gifted and talented children in the UK.
When we considered the mandate of education, we tried to establish what exactly was missing (Matheson & Matheson, 2000). This was a clear mandate for our team and we also assumed that there was a concrete answer to this. This goes back to the basic notion that education is the “acquisition of knowledge, comprehension and the development of skills to empower and equip a person for his/her success in the future” (Adey & Dillon, 2012).
In reflection, it was a conceptual process that we followed in making the documentary (Ball, 2007). My team mates thought that a side by side presentation of the issues as we gathered would be the best way to present the documentary. The segments which we showed covered the main issues which we wanted the audience to pay attention to.

Summary

This paper aims to reflect the different aspects of the making of a TV documentary on the specific topic of the gifted and talented children in the UK. It aims to present the problem they face on the more institutionalized level so as to give them better support. The group wanted the public to be more aware of their plight and how they could be of help to this marginalized sector in the educational sphere.
On the content side, I am very reluctant about the way we presented the scope of the topic. I also felt that we did not consult the more authoritative sources such as Binet, Bloom, Gagne, among others. The lack of resources and the fragmentation of the topic were not actually criticized by my peers. Hence, I might just have been very critical about our work.
Meanwhile, on the process side, I feel that the way we worked on the documentary was more indicative of our maturity in approaching the topic. This was beyond our preparations. If I could admit that we lacked the whole grasp of the topic or we had little research, it is also best to say that the good intention to solve the problem has been pressing. Hence, our group pushed on for it.
In the feedback, it was enough that I personally saw what was coming and how it could have been addressed. It was a humbling experience and we maturely accepted the comments and criticisms as ways of improving for our next work, whether we work individually then. We will take on the lessons we learned in making this special documentary.
The feedback reflects the familiarity of the other people on the problems of the gifted and the talented population in the UK. As mentioned, their problem has been a long standing concern. Hence, the process of making the documentary was already justified. We were able to present a relevant and a significant problem in the educational system. It has a universal appeal as other countries and societies face the same problem as well.

References:

Adey, P. & Dillon, J. (eds), Bad Education: Debunking Myths in Education, 2012. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Ball, S. J., Education plc: Understanding Private Sector Participation in Public Sector Education, 2007. London: Routledge.
Colman, Andrew M., Ed. Companion Encyclopedia of Psychology, Vol. 1. 1994. Routledge, New York, NY.
Daniels, H., Lauder, H., Porter, J with Hartshorn, S., Educational Theories, Cultures and Learning, 2012. London: Routledge.
Davies, I., Gregory, I. and McGuinn, N., Key Debates in Education, 2002. London: Continum.
Henry, Julie, Ministers pull the plug on gifted and talented academy, 2010. Available through: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/7062061/Ministers-pull-the-plug-on-gifted-and-talented-academy.html (17 February 2015).
Kassem, D, Mufti, E., and Robinson, J., Education Studies: Issues and Critical Perspectives, 2006. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Li, Rex, A theory of conceptual intelligence: thinking, learning, creativity, and giftedness, 1996. Westport: Praeger.
Matheson, C & Matheson, D., Educational Issues in the Learning Age, 2000. London: Continum.
Shurkin, Joel N., Terman's Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up, 1992. Little, Brown & Company Limited, Canada.
The Free Dictionary, 2015. “TV Documentary.” Available through: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/TV+documentary (17 February 2015).
Zusne, Leonard, Biographical Dictionary of Psychology, 1984. Greenwood Press: Westport, CN.