The Impact of Grouping Gifted Students on Motivation

IntroductionAs educators we strive to see students reach their potential. Special classes for gifted and talented children can yield successful educational experiences for highly gifted students (Feldhusen, 1991; Feldhusen & Sayler, 1990). Research indicates that the outcome of selective class placement for gifted students often results in increased motivation for learning (Goldberg & Cornell, 1998; Gross, 1993). Research on achievement orientation has delineated different types of goal orientations among students and the motivational processes in play (Ames & Ames, 1984; Ames & Archer, 1988; Dweck, 1986; Urdan & Mestas, 2006). Different goals bring out different motivational patterns and impact on student learning in a classroom setting. Ames (1992) refers to dichotomous achievement goal constructs which have been labelled as learning and performance goals ( Brophy, 2010; Dweck, 1986; Dweck & Leggett, 1988), task involvement and ego-involvement goals (Maehr & Nicholls, 1980) and mastery and performance goals (Ames & Archer, 1988). She refers to these different named goals as 'convergent'. Academic achievement is impacted by motivation. Research also indicates that goal orientation, classroom climate as well as perceived efficacy impact student achievement (Ames & Archer, 1988; Zimmerman, Bandura & Martinez-Pons, 1992). For gifted students, grouping becomes an important issue if integration or segregation of the gifted impacts on mastery goal orientation which is a focus in learning and achievement.MotivationGifted children, like all children, need to be motivated to learn, especially in school settings. Meeting the emotional and academic needs of gifted students has been extensively researched (Colangelo, Assouline and Gross, 2004;Feldhusen, 1991; Gottfried and Gottfried, 1996 , 2004; Gross, 1995; Robinson, 2006). There is evidence that appropriate educational interventions as well as a focus on social and emotional needs are necessary to optimise the learning of gifted children (Foster, 1983; Gagne, 1995; Hoekman, McCormick & Barnett, 2005). Feldhusen and Hoover (1986) stated that a focus on maintaining motivation should be the goal of all gifted programs. What is less clear is what motivates gifted students to learn and whether special class settings improve the motivation of gifted pre- adolescent school children.From social cognitive theories, (Bandura, 1986; Deci and Ryan, 1985; Dweck 1986, 2000; Nicholls, 1984; Ryan & Deci, 2000), it is evident that there is an interaction between social-contextual and personal factors impacting human motivation. However, Dai, Moon and Feldhusen (1998) propose that personal and social-cognitive factors are mediated by self-processes such as self-regulation and ability to goal set, to influence achievement factors. Stemming from Ryan and Deci's research (2000) when individuals feel competent, their intrinsic motivation is enhanced.Some researchers (Anderson & Rodin, 1989 ; Vallerand, Gagne, Senecal & Pelletier, 1994) speculated that in a homogenous class of gifted students, their intrinsic motivation is enhanced if they are able to pursue learning goals at their own pace whereas, in a heterogenous class these students may be held back by proceeding at a slower pace. In this situation, intrinsic motivation may be compromised and gifted students may in fact feel controlled and less able to achieve at their own pace.Gottfried and Gottfried (1994) reported that intrinsic motivation was evident in gifted children from the age of 8 and continued into adolescence when students were immersed in cognitively appropriate tasks. They proposed a construct called 'gifted motivation' which relates to significant intrinsic academic motivation and results in higher academic achievement (Gottfried, Cook, Gottfried & Morris, 2005). Most achievement goal and intrinsic motivation theorists believe that mastery goals are facilitative of intrinsic motivation (Elliot & Harackiewicz, 1996; Kaufman & Dodge, 2009). …