Title:

Author(s):

Source:

Peer Reviewed:

ISSN:

Descriptors:

Identifiers:

Abstract:

Notes:

Language:

Publication Type:

Availability:

Journal Code:

Entry Date:

Accession Number:

Database:

Full Text Database:

Record: 1

Characteristics and Competencies of Teachers of Gifted Learners: The Hong Kong Teacher Perspective.

Chan, David W.

Roeper Review, v23 n4 p197-202 Jun 2001.

N/A

0278-3193

Chinese, Elementary Secondary Education, Foreign Countries, Gifted, Teacher Characteristics, TeacherCompetencies, Teacher Education, Teacher Surveys, Elementary Secondary Education

Hong Kong

Fifty Hong Kong Chinese teachers rated the importance of 25 characteristics and 14 competencies for teachers ofgifted learners. Characteristics classified as philosophical ideals were rated most important, followed bycharacteristics related to professional predispositions. Personal attributes were rated as least important.Implications for the education of teachers of the gifted are discussed. (Contains references.) (DB)

Theme Issue: Gifted Teachers: Teachers of Gifted Learners.

English

Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative

Not available from ERIC

CIJMAR2002

2002

EJ632565

ERIC

CHARACTERISTICS AND COMPETENCIES OF TEACHERS OF GIFTED LEARNERS: THE HONG KONGTEACHER PERSPECTIVE

Fifty Hong Kong Chinese teachers rated the importance of 25 characteristics and 14 competencies for teachers of gifted learners.While all 39 characteristics and competencies were endorsed as important, the characteristics classified as philosophical ideals were

rated most important, followed by characteristics related to professional predispositions. Personal attributes were rated leastimportant. Regarding competencies, specific skills related to identifying, teaching, and counseling gifted learners were rated moreimportant than global strategies. While the selection of teachers of gifted learners might proceed with selecting teachers with thedesirable characteristics to meet the needs of gifted learners, the present findings indicated that the development of philosophical,professional, and personal characteristics conducive to effective teaching should not be neglected in teacher preparation programs.Further, desirable skills and competencies that teachers require to teach the gifted well could be made the objectives, goals, andoutcomes of teacher preparation programs for teachers of gifted learners. It is believed that the development of teacher preparationprograms for teachers of gifted learners in Hong Kong and elsewhere might benefit from integrating Chinese thinking with Westernempirically supported findings on the characteristics and competencies of teachers of gifted learners.

Gifted and talented children have special learning and social-emotional needs, and require a differentiated curriculum with an optimallearning environment. Since teachers have a significant influence on this learning environment, and are critical to the success ofgifted programs (Renzulli, 1968), the characteristics, skills, knowledge, and training of teachers who implement gifted programsshould be the concerns of all gifted program providers. These concerns are particularly relevant in Hong Kong where thedevelopment of programs for gifted and talented students is relatively new (Chan, 1998), and successful programming for the gifteddepends on the support of teachers trained to teach gifted learners (Hansen & Feldhusen, 1994).

Past studies on effective teachers have contributed to the understanding and the construction of the ideal profile of the characteristicsand competencies of teachers of gifted learners. Qualities of spontaneity, acceptance, creativity, and self-realization have beenimplicated in promoting the development of human potential (Iannon & Carline, 1971). In addition, high levels of positive regard weredirectly facilitative of high cognitive functioning in the classroom (Aspy & Roebuck, 1972).

Studies focusing more specifically on the characteristics of teachers of gifted learners have also accumulated (e.g., Bishop, 1968;Whitlock & DuCette, 1989) and been systematically reviewed (Hultgren & Seeley, 1982; Maker, 1975). Feldhusen (1997), forexample, observed that the characteristics found in these successful teachers were similar to those found in gifted and talentedstudents, and were desirable in all teachers. These characteristics include: being highly intelligent, achievement oriented,knowledgeable and flexible; having cultural and intellectual interests; respecting individual differences; and relating well with giftedindividuals. He further suggested that it was more productive for teacher preparation to focus on competencies, skills and knowledgethan on personal traits, as competencies were modifiable teacher behaviors that could become objectives and outcomes of teachereducation programs.

In this connection, Feldhusen (1997) also summarized the competencies of successful teachers of gifted learners based on the

results of past surveys (e.g., Hultgren & Seeley, 1982; Nelson & Prindle, 1992), and studies on teachers working with gifted andtalented students (e.g., Silverman, 1982; Starko & Schack, 1989; Story, 1985). These competencies include skills in teaching thinkingskills, problem solving, and creativity; in interacting with students; in using appropriate motivational techniques; in conducting student-directed activities; and in facilitating independent research. However, Feldhusen (1997) cautioned that the competencies needed forteaching certain specific content domains, such as science and mathematics, could be very different from those needed for teachingother domains such as art and music.

Compared with the voluminous findings in Western countries, Chinese literature has little to say about the characteristics orcompetencies of teachers of gifted learners, although the Chinese valuing of talents, education, and academic achievement has beenvery much a part of Hong Kong's heritage. Even for teachers in general, the Chinese classic text on education Xue-ji (Handbook ofLearning), said to be written by one or more students of Confucius some 2000 years ago, relates only general principles or methodsas guidelines for effective teaching (see Kao, 1982; Liu, 1984). The assumption was that a scholar or an expert in a knowledgedomain could become a teacher when the scholar or expert was sought by students as a mentor or role model. Becoming a scholaror an expert was a lifelong process of ever-continuing self-improvement and self-development. In a special way, this time-honoredconceptualization of scholarship is considered inseparable from the role of an expert teacher, mentor, and master.

In today's Hong Kong, it is recognized that many of the principles and methods alluded to in the ancient Chinese text might apply, butthat care must be exercised since a scholar might not necessarily be a good or effective teacher. Becoming one may indeed requirethat lifelong process of self-improvement and self-development just mentioned. Teacher preparation is seen as necessary fordeveloping a positive learning and teaching environment for students with diverse abilities and special needs in this ever-changingworld. Currently, teacher education provided by universities and teachers' colleges in Hong Kong emphasizes pedagogic strategiesand techniques associated with teaching specific academic content areas such as mathematics, science, and art. Skills in relating,motivating, and counseling students, in contrast, have been generally underemphasized if not entirely ignored (see Chan, 1992).While teachers have options in acquiring training in special needs education, training is largely confined to teaching the specificpopulations of students with sensory impairment, mental retardation, and learning disabilities. With the increasing public awarenessof the special needs of gifted and talented students, and the rapid development of gifted programming for this specific population, it isanticipated that corresponding changes in teacher preparation and education will be initiated.

The present study was designed to assess the perception of a sample of Hong Kong teachers regarding the characteristics andcompetencies of successful or effective teachers of gifted learners, and to determine the extent to which practicing teachers endorseand aspire to these characteristics and competencies. Both the perceived importance and the clustering of these characteristics andcompetencies were explored.

MethodParticipantsFifty teachers (15 men, 33 women, and 2 who did not report their gender)1 enrolled part-time in the postgraduate in serviceeducation program at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, participated voluntarily in the study. They were between the ages of 25and 51 (mean = 31.59, SD = 6.52; n = 44; 6 did not report their age), and had 1 to 30 years of teaching experience (mean = 7.89, SD= 5.92) in either primary school (n = 11) or secondary school (n = 34) or both (n = 2). (Three teachers did not report whether theirteaching experience was with primary or secondary schools). Fifteen teachers (4 primary school teachers and 11 secondary schoolteachers) reported that they had experience teaching gifted and talented students, 32 reported no experience, and 3 did not respondto this item. All teachers reported that they had no previous training in gifted education.

Measure and ProcedureA checklist of 25 characteristics and 14 competencies of teachers of the gifted were compiled from the list of characteristics andcompetencies summarized by Feldhusen (1997). All respondents were requested to judge and rate the importance of each of the 25characteristics and 14 competencies for a good teacher of gifted learners. Ratings were made on a five-point scale ranging from 1(not at all important) to 5 (most important).

ResultsMean Ratings of Teacher Characteristics and CompetenciesThe responses of the 50 teachers to the 39 items of teacher characteristics and competencies were aggregated and averaged. TableI presents separately the mean ratings of the list of characteristics and the list of competencies in descending order of importance.From Table 1, it can be seen that teacher characteristics rated as most important include such characteristics as being imaginative,flexible, stimulating, innovative, facilitative, self-confident, knowledgeable, and considering individual differences. Thesecharacteristics are all related to higher order values and ideals that one would like to see in good and effective teachers regardless ofwhom they teach. Characteristics rated as less important are more related to personal and individual attributes, such as being highlyintelligent, less critical, more approachable, cooperative with other personnel, and having control over one's personal life.

Table 1 also shows the mean ratings on teacher competencies or skills deemed to be important for teachers teaching gifted students,in general, lower mean ratings than those obtained for characteristics were observed. The most important skills had to do withteaching or teaching-related activities, such as teaching creativity and problem solving, and developing gifted curriculum andmaterials. The skills rated as less important were those related to career education and training other teachers for gifted programs.

To explore whether there were any differences in ratings on teacher characteristics and competencies according to gender, school

level, and level of experience in teaching gifted students, t-tests were performed. The results, after adjusting the significance levelbecause of multiple t-tests, indicated that there were no significant differences in any of these variables.

Dimensions of Teacher Characteristics and CompetenciesTo explore whether certain characteristics and competencies were perceived to go together, exploratory factor analyses wereperformed separately on the importance ratings on teacher characteristics and teacher competencies. Specifically, the 25-itemcorrelation matrix of teacher characteristics, and the 14-item correlation matrix of teacher competencies were each subjected toseparate maximum likelihood factor analyses.

Regarding the analysis of the data of teacher characteristics, an initial estimate yielded seven factors with eigenvalues greater thanunity, accounting for 73% of the total variance. Accordingly, one to seven factor solutions were estimated, and their correspondingchi-square values as indices for the lack of fit were computed. The results indicated that an adequate representation of the data ofteacher characteristics, one that yields a non-significant chi-square, would be the three-factor solution (chi = 273.07, df = 228, p <.022), or the four-factor solution (chi = 234.90, df = 206, p < .082), accounting for 48% and 52% or the total variance, respectively.

Regarding the analysis of the data of teacher competencies, an initial estimate yielded three factors with eigenvalues greater thanunity, accounting for 65% of the total variance. Consequently, one to three factor solutions were estimated, and their correspondingchi-square values were computed. Based on the results of a non-significant chi-square for the two-factor solution (chi = 82.55, df =64, p < .059), which accounted for 52% of the total variance, the two-factor solution could be regarded as an adequate representationof the teacher competencies data.

To ensure adequate representation of the data, each of the seven factor solutions of teacher characteristics and each of the threefactor solutions of teacher competencies were rotated using the varimax procedure and carefully examined for simple structure andinterpretability. The three-factor solution of teacher characteristics and the two-factor solution of teacher competencies were eachfound to yield dimensions that were most readily interpretable and meaningful. The two separate varimax-rotated factor solutions ofteacher characteristics and teacher competencies of gifted learners are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2 presents the three-factor solution of teacher characteristics. Factor I was defined saliently by heterogeneous characteristicsrelated to organization, enthusiasm, accessibility, cooperativeness, facilitation, and guidance. This dimension could be interpreted asone representing professional predispositions or management qualities desirable in the teaching profession.

Factor 2 was loaded saliently by characteristics reflecting educational values and ideals. These characteristics included respect,

2

2

2

responsibility, flexibility, empathy, and the consideration of individual differences. This was a dimension reflecting philosophical idealsand a commitment to individual differences.

Factor 3 captured some of the more personal attributes deemed to be important for teachers of the gifted and talented. They includedhaving cultural and intellectual interests, being innovative, highly intelligent, knowledgeable and achieving. This was a dimension ofpersonal attributes.

Table 3 also presents the two-factor solution of teacher skills or competencies. Factor I included global skills or competencies relatedto general principles in philosophy and methods, group processes, career education, process orientation, research, and multiculturalconsiderations. This was a dimension describing global competencies.

Factor 2 represented skills that were more specifically related to teaching or behaviors associated with teaching. These skillsincluded those related to teaching creativity and problem solving, identification, questioning, and meeting the needs of the gifted. Thiswas a dimension interpretable as representing specific skills or teaching-related competencies.

Developing Scales of Perceived Characteristics and Competencies of Teachers of Gifted LearnersBased on the results of factor analyses, it was possible to construct scales of perceived teacher characteristics and competencies byassembling the items with salient loadings on the relevant factors. To keep these scales relatively independent of each other, and tomaintain the same number of items in each scale of characteristics or competencies, items with salient cross-loadings and leastsalient loadings were omitted in the item composition of the scales. Table 4 summarizes the mean scores on three scales of teachercharacteristics and two scales of teacher competencies and their internal consistency measures of coefficient alpha. It can be seenthat teachers rated in descending order of importance, philosophical ideals, professional dispositions, and personal attributes asreflected in the three scale scores of characteristics, and specific skills and global strategies as reflected in the two scale scores ofcompetencies. Separate multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) using the three scales of characteristics as dependentvariables, and two scales of competencies as dependent variables revealed no significant effects of gender, school level, and level ofexperience in teaching gifted students.

DiscussionThis study extends the findings of the characteristics and competencies of teachers of gifted learners in Western countries tries intothe Chinese cultural setting. Hong Kong teachers by and large endorsed the importance of the list of characteristics andcompetencies of teachers of gifted learners. Characteristics related to high order educational ideals were rated more important thancharacteristics related to personal attributes; specific teaching skills targeted to meet the needs of gifted learners were also rated

more important than more global strategies. The order of importance was supported by the results of factor analyses and the scoresof the five newly developed scales of characteristics and competencies. The classification of characteristics into philosophical,professional, and personal characteristics are reminiscent of the classification of Maker (1972), and the five scales of characteristicsand competencies give new meanings and reinforce some of the time-honored Confucian thinking of a good and effective teacher.

The emphasis of Confucian thinking, as recorded in the classic text of education Xue-ji, on the philosophy, beliefs, and attitudes ofeffective teachers was reflected in the greater importance Hong Kong teachers in this study placed on the philosophical andprofessional characteristics than personal attributes. According to Xue-ji, a scholar could become a teacher only if he or sheunderstood the factors contributing to the success and failure of teaching (Kao, 1982; Liu, 1984). Successful teaching came fromadhering to the four principles of Yu (anticipating), Shi (timing), Sun (sequencing), and Mo (discussing and processing). Sun Yu-Shiemphasizes learning readiness and pacing, and Mo emphasizes the creating of a relaxed learning environment in which teacher andstudents interact in teaching and learning. In this learning environment, teachers had to recognize individual differences in abilitiesand interests, and teach to meet the specific needs of individual students. Thus, it is said in Xue-ji that a teacher should teach usinganalogies and metaphors, for in this manner a teacher inspires or enlighten students through multiple channels to meet the needs ofstudents of diverse abilities and learning styles. In addition, through the use of examples and metaphors, a good teacher guides butdoes not direct, encourages but does not coerce, facilitates but does not impose conclusion thus insuring a learning environment thatis conducive to harmonious relationship (He), relaxed learning (Yi), and independent thinking (Si). Further, effective teachers,according to Xue-ji, should be able to interpret complex concepts in simple to-the-point explanations, explain in details but within abroadened context, and enhance understanding with the choice of the best metaphors.

While the Chinese principles of Yu. Shi-Sun-Mo, and He-Yi-Si are by and large consistent with Western thinking of the characteristicsof effective teachers, the Chinese literature says little about teacher skills and competencies. The exception in Xue-ji is about thetechniques of responding to student questioning in the analogy between questioning-responding and the act of tolling a bell. Studentswho pose questions are compared with bell-ringers. The different degrees of forcefulness in the act of tolling represent the differentlevels of the students' questions to which the effective teacher responds accordingly. Light stroking and forceful tolling elicit differentchimes from the effective teacher who considers the student's different levels of understanding and receptivity. Nonetheless, theeffective teacher always puts the students at ease for the reverberating chimes to take effect even long after the act of tolling.Although an effective teacher may be able to bring abstract principles to bear on the practicalities of teaching with flexibility andcreative options, Hong Kong teachers generally appreciate acquiring skills and strategies that are more carefully spelled out. Thus,an integration of Chinese and Western thinking on effective teaching may enrich teacher preparation programs and appeal toChinese teachers.

Since teachers who receive training in gifted education are more effective teachers of gifted learners than untrained teachers(Hansen & Feldhusen, 1994), teacher preparation programs need to focus on training effective teachers of gifted learners. Whileadministrators of gifted programs might select teachers based on the list of important characteristics, the Chinese literature reviewedsuggests that the development of philosophical ideals, professional predispositions, and personal attributes conducive to effectiveteaching should not be neglected in teacher selection and teacher preparation programs. Specific skills and competencies directedspecifically to identify, teach, and counsel gifted and talented students are additional priorities. The Chinese way of teaching bymetaphors, which promotes self-regulated and autonomous learning, offers creative options that can be integrated with Westernpedagogy in teacher preparation. However, as Feldhusen (1997) has cautioned, the required competencies might differ for specificcontent domains and specific gifted subpopulations. Thus, desirable competencies of teachers of gifted learners should covereffective approaches to different types of gifted and talented children (e.g., disadvantaged, underachieving, creative), as fewprograms are so specialized for specific subgroups, and different subgroups are generally represented in most programs. However,there are exceptions such as meeting the specific needs of gifted and talented students in the area of visual and performing arts. Inthis connection, teachers should not only be aware of the needs of individual students, but also their capabilities to meet those needs(Dubner, 1980).

The perceived importance of the list of competencies in this study provided guidelines for specifying goals, objectives, and outcomesfor teacher preparation especially in this Hong Kong Chinese setting. The list of competencies should be made part of each trainedteacher's repertoires, available for use, depending on the specific population involved, the content domain, and the settings andsituations in which the teacher finds himself or herself. In addition, the scales of perceived characteristics and competencies ofteachers of gifted learners developed in this study provide a foundation for future scale refinements and further development ofreliable and valid assessment instruments for teacher selection and monitoring of teacher training. Further, the present findings andthe Confucian wisdom as expressed in Xue-ji some 2000 years ago remind educators and teachers that becoming effective teachersfor gifted learners and for all students require appropriate training. The principles and methods introduced in the ancient text of Xue-jihold promise for contemporary teachers, and might inspire them to look at the act of learning and teaching from a differentperspective and to reinvigorate their teaching with a new sense of excitement and possibility. Thus, the results of the present study,integrating Chinese thinking with Western empirically supported evidence, have great implications for the design and development ofteacher preparation programs that offer training to help transform teachers to become effective teachers of gifted learners in HongKong as well as in settings that extend far beyond the Hong Kong Chinese context.

Manuscript submitted May, 2000.Revision accepted November, 2000.

Table 1Ratings on the Importance of Characteristics and Competencies of Teachers of Gifted Learners (N = 50)Legend for Chart:

A - Characteristics or Competencies

B - Mean

C - SD

A B C

Item Characteristics

11. Is imaginative, flexible, open 4.52 0.68

to change, stimulating

13. Recognizes individual differences 4.36 0.75

12. Is innovative and experimental, 4.34 0.77

rather than conforming

7. Is mature, experienced, self-confident 4.26 0.80

9. Facilitates learning; does not direct 4.14 0.78

4. Is enthusiastic about talent 4.12 0.98

6. Has broad general knowledge 4.10 0.81

23. Seeks new solutions through 4.08 0.83

continued learning

8. Can see things from students' 4.06 0.93

point of view

15. Respects individuality, personal 4.02 0.82

self-images, and personal integrity

16. Sees need to develop students' 4.02 0.80

self-concepts

22. Guides rather than coerces 3.98 0.98

17. Can communicate the needs of gifted 3.94 0.87

children, muster support for the

gifted program

21. Can create a warm, safe, democratic 3.88 0.92

environment

2. Has cultural and intellectual interests 3.86 0.86

5. Relates well to talented people 3.86 1.09

3. Strives for excellence, high achievement 3.82 0.85

19. Can teach students to evaluate for 3.76 0.87

themselves

14. Accepts responsibility for 3.72 0.88

individual children

10. Is well organized, systematic, orderly 3.56 1.05

20. Aligns more closely with students 3.56 0.97

than a formal teacher

24. Can work closely with other members 3.52 0.84

of gifted staff, students, parents,

other professionals

1. Is highly intelligent 3.34 0.94

18. Is less judgmental or critical 3.18 1.10

25. Has control over his or her 3.06 1.06

personal life

Item Competencies

29. Is skilled in teaching higher 4.28 0.86

thinking abilities, including

creativity and problem solving

28. Can develop (or select) methods and 4.06 0.93

materials for use with the gifted

26. Has knowledge of the nature and 3.92 0.92

needs of the gifted

30. Is adept at questioning techniques 3.88 0.82

27. Can identify gifted and talented 3.88 0.98

students

39. Can focus on process as well as product 3.76 0.87

32. Can direct individualized learning 3.68 0.82

and teaching

34. Is skilled in counseling gifted and 3.64 0.83

talented youth

38. Can lead young people to successful 3.60 0.83

accomplishments

35. Is skilled in group processes, 3.50 0.99

teaching groups

33. Can work with culturally different 3.48 0.97

talented youth

31. Is skilled in facilitating 3.46 0.95

independent research

36. Can present career education and 2.96 0.92

professional options

37. Can conduct in-services for other 2.84 0.98

teachers regarding G/T philosophy

and methods

Note. Ratings were made from 1 to 5. Higher number indicates greater importance.

Table 2Varimax Rotated Three-Factor Solution of Perceived Important Characteristics of Teachers of Gifted Learners (N = 50)Legend for Chart:

A - Item Characteristics

B - 1

C - 2

D - 3

A B C D

10. Is well organized, systematic, orderly 74 -- --

4. Is enthusiastic about talent 72 -- --

22. Guides rather than coerces 66 -- --

5. Relates well to talented people 66 -- --

23. Seeks new solutions through 61 -- 44

continued learning

7. Is mature, experienced, self-confident 60 -- --

20. Aligns more closely with students 58 -- --

than a formal teacher

24. Can work closely with other members 56 -- --

of gifted staff, students, parents,

other professionals

15. Respects individuality, personal -- 81 --

self-images, and personal integrity

21. Can create a warm, safe, -- 64 --

democratic environment

14. Accepts responsibility for 41 61 --

individual children

8. Can see things from students' -- 60 --

point of view

11. Is imaginative, flexible, open -- 57 --

to change, stimulating

13. Recognizes individual differences -- 56 --

16. Sees need to develop students' -- 53 --

self-concepts

17. Can communicate the needs of -- 49 --

gifted children, muster support

for the gifted program

2. Has cultural and intellectual interests -- -- 88

1. Is highly intelligent -- -- 63

6. Has broad general knowledge -- -- 62

3. Strives for excellence, high achievement -- -- 52

25. Has control over his or her personal -- -- 44

life

12. Is innovative and experimental, -- -- 42

rather than conforming

18. Is less judgmental or critical -- -- 40

Note. Only salient loadings of magnitude .40 or above are shown. Item 9 ("Facilitates learning; does not direct") and Item 19 ("Canteach students to evaluate for themselves") had no salient loadings and are not shown. Decimals are omitted.

Table 3Varimax Rotated Two-Factor Solution of Perceived Important Competencies of Teachers of Gifted Learners (N = 60)Legend for Chart:

A - Item Competencies

B - 1

C - 2

A B C

37. Can conduct in-services for other teachers 92 --

regarding G/I' philosophy and methods

35. Is skilled in group processes, teaching groups 75 --

36. Can present career education and 74 --

professional options

38. Can lead young people to successful 60 --

accomplishments

34. Is skilled in counseling gifted and 56 --

talented youth

33. Can work with culturally different 55 43

talented youth

39. Can focus on process as well as product 52 --

31. Is skilled in facilitating independent 43 --

research

29. Is skilled in teaching higher thinking -- 71

abilities, including creativity and

problem solving

26, Has knowledge of the nature and needs -- 69

of the gifted

27. Can identify gifted and talented students -- 69

30. Is adept at questioning techniques -- 69

28. Can develop (or select) methods and -- 69

materials for use with the gifted

32. Can direct individualized learning and teaching -- 59

Note. Only salient loadings of magnitude .40 or above are shown. Decimals are omitted.

Table 4Mean Scores and Internal Consistencies of Scales of Perceived Characteristics and Competencies of Teachers of GiftedLearners (N = 50)Legend for Chart:

A - Coefficient: Scale

B - Number of Items

C - Mean

D - Standard Deviation

E - Alpha

A B C D E

Characteristics

Philosophical Ideals

7 4.11 0.59 .84

Professional Predispositions

7 3.84 0.72 .87

Personal Attributes

7 3.67 0.60 .78

Competencies

Specific Skills

6 3.95 0.69 .87

Global Strategies

6 3.38 0.71 .87

Note. Scale composition is based on results of factor analysis: Philosophical ideals (Items 8,11,13,15,16,17,21); Professionalpredispositions (Items 4,5,7,10,20,22,24); Personal attributes (Items 1,2,3,6,12,18,25); Specific skills (Items 26,27,28,29,30,32);Global strategies (Items 31,34,35,36,37,38).

REFERENCESAspy, D., & Roebuck, F. (1972). An investigation of the relationship between student levels of cognitive functioning and the teacher'sclassroom behavior. Journal of Educational Research, 65, 365-368.

Bishop. W. E. (1968). Successful teachers of the gifted. Exceptional Children. 34, 317-325.

Chan, D. W. (1992). Teachers as clinicians: Inadequacies in teacher education. Education Journal, 20, 37-42.

Chan, D. W. (1998). Development of gifted education in Hong Kong. Gifted Education International, 13, 150-158.

Dubner, F. (1980). Thirteen ways of looking at a gifted teacher. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 3, 143-146.

Feldhusen, J. F. (1997). Educating teachers for work with talented youth. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of giftededucation (2nd ed., pp. 547-552). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Hansen, J. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38,115-123.

Hultgren, H. W., & Sneley. K. R. (1982). Training teachers of the gifted: A research monograph on teacher competencies. Denver:University of Denver, School of Education.

Iannon, R. V., & Carline, J. L. (1971). A humanistic approach to teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 22, 429-433.

Kao, S. (1982). [A critique on Xue-ji.] Beijing, China: People Education Press (In Chinese).

Liu, Z. (1984). [Interpreting Xue-ji.] Jinan, China: Shandong Education Press (In Chinese).

Maker, C. J. (1975). Training teachers for the gifted and talented. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Nelson, K. C., & Prindle, N. (1992). Gifted teacher competencies: Ratings by rural principals and teachers compared. Journal for theEducation of the Gifted. 15. 357-369.

Renzulli, J. (1968). Identifying key features in programs for the gifted. Exceptional Children, 35, 217-221.

Silverman, L. K. (1982). The gifted and talented. In E. L. Meyen (Ed.), Exceptional children and youth (pp. 184-190). Denver, CO:Love.

Starko, A. J., & Schack, G. D. (1989). Perceived need, teacher efficiency, and teacher strategies for the gifted and talented. GiftedChild Quarterly, 33, 118-122.

Story, C. M. (1985). Facilitator of learning: A microethnographic study of the teacher of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 155-159.

Whitlock, M. S., & DuCette. J. P. (1989). Outstanding and average teachers of the gifted: A comparative study. Gifted Child Quarterly,33, 15-21.

~~~~~~~~By David W. Chan

David W. Chan is Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Education, the Chinese University of Hong Kong,Shatin.

Copyright of Roeper Review is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to alistserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individualuse.