International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–20

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Educational Research

jo u r nal h o mep age: w ww.els evier .c o m/lo c ate / i jed ur es

The appearance of equity in understandings of academic

excellence

Lesley Williams a,*, Grady Venville b,1, Sandy Gordon c,2

a Graduate School of Education, The University of Western Australia, M428, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australiab The University of Western Australia, M465A, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australiac Exercise, Health and Sport Psychology, The University of Western Australia, M408, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:

Received 4 February 2013

Received in revised form 19 May 2013

Accepted 3 June 2013

Available online 21 July 2013

Keywords:

Academic excellence

Schooling

Students

Parents

Teachers perspectives

A B S T R A C T

The aim of this empirical study was to deepen understandings of academic excellence as it

is conceptualized by high achieving secondary school students (n = 22), their parents

(n = 20) and teachers (n = 19). Two primary themes emerged from the interviews.

Unsurprisingly for this group of participants, one of these was the traditional

understanding of outstanding scholastic achievement. Less expected was another strong

theme, of academic excellence as personal best achievement. The latter finding, with

implications for equity, is an understanding of academic excellence accessible to all

students.

Crown Copyright � 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The research reported in this paper began with a simple premise, that recently graduated, high achieving studentstogether with supportive parents and teachers are in a unique position to offer potentially valuable insights into the processof academic talent development that would be of use to researchers and educators. Because empirical research into theexperience of academic excellence is limited, decisions at all levels of education have been made to promote excellence inschooling without reference to key players, students, parents and teachers (Miretzky, 2007). This study was an attempt toredress this oversight by providing new information and a new lens with which to view the subject.

Reported in this paper are the findings to a question guiding the research, ‘‘How do participants understand academicexcellence?’’ This question was triggered by pervasive references to academic excellence in mainstream descriptions of highachieving students (Edwards, 2008; Mathews, 1999; Mukombozi, 2010) and in self-promotional literature of schools(Greenhaigh, 1995). Despite its import for education, and prevalence, an extensive search of empirical literature revealedvery little on the meaning of the term. The central aim underpinning the study was to contribute inductively derived findingsabout academic excellence and new understandings grounded in participants’ experience (Williams, 2010).

Academic excellence is an umbrella term often used to describe high achievement (Ferrari, 2002c; H. Gardner, 2002;Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2003). Certain achievements can only be deemed excellent in relation to others which results in the

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 417 931 031.

E-mail addresses: lesley.williams@uwa.edu.au, lwilliamsphd@gmail.com (L. Williams), grady.venville@uwa.edu.au (G. Venville),

Sandy.Gordon@uwa.edu.au (S. Gordon).1 Tel.: +61 6488 3811.2 Tel.: +61 6488 2375.

0883-0355/$ – see front matter . Crown Copyright � 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.06.001

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–2012

‘others’ being labelled as less than excellent. This traditional understanding of academic excellence is therefore, inequitableand exclusionary; only one person in any group can ever be ‘the best’. This paper offers an alternative definition of excellencegenerated from semi-structured interviews with academically excellent students and their parents and teachers.

1.1. The appearance of academic excellence in the literature

References to academic excellence are frequent in educational discourse, suggesting this term is a prime descriptor of asought after level of achievement. While acknowledging the need for nuanced understandings of academic excellence whichare suited to the diverse contexts in which the term is used, it has been argued that the centrality of the construct toeducation and the need to maximize the resources of schooling compel further investigation (Ferrari, 2002c). This studysought to answer this call for empirical research to address this gap in the literature.

References to academic excellence are ubiquitous so the following discussion is by no means comprehensive; rather itaims to contextualize understandings of excellence that emerged from the findings within the existing literature. In thearea of gifted and talented literature for example, academic excellence is commonly constructed as the outcome of atalent development process, ‘‘Talent development is the systematic pursuit over a significant period of time, of astructured programme of activities aimed at a specific excellence goal’’ (Gagne, 2011, p. 12). Another reference toacademic excellence is in terms of supportive external resources, for example successful school environments provide,‘‘opportunities to learn how to think and solve problems, and models of academic excellence’’ (Feldhusen, 2005, p. 74).Freeman (2005) concludes a discussion about what is known to foster academic excellence by saying, ‘‘What we do haveis very clear information about what the gifted and talented need by way of support for excellence–a challengingeducation, high-level opportunities, and someone who believes in them.’’ (2005, p. 94). It has been said that, ‘‘Giftednessis, ultimately, expertise in development’’ (Sternberg, 2003, p. 109) therefore further references to excellence, academicincluded, are to be found in expertise research (Ericsson, 2002, 2005; Ericsson, 2006). Expert performance is seen to bethe result of an extended process of skill acquisition (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Romer, 1993). Speaking more to theresearch reported in this paper and perhaps as a response to the ‘‘significant challenges of the field’’ (Robinson &Clinkenbeard, 1998, p. 117), Ziegler (2005) proposed that ‘‘a theoretical regeneration of the actual object of giftednessresearch should be undertaken, that of excellence in various areas’’ (p. 413).

Another lens through which academic excellence may be viewed is in terms of the quality of the educationalinstitution in question (Ferrari, 2002a; Simon, 2002). Although academic excellence is often understood to meanindividual attainment, most individuals spend a large portion of their formative years in educational institutions whichnotionally promote fulfilment of individual potential. This extensive field of enquiry has a strong history in highereducation, school improvement and management literature (J.W.Gardner, 1961).

Any discussion of excellence by necessity raises the question of standards, traditionally strongly contested territory(Aldrich, 2006). According to Ziegler and Heller (2002) an absolute standard, or norm referenced standard3 (Strike, 1985) isthe attainment of a high standard of performance or achievement described in terms of a state, national or world classstandard of performance. Achievement of an absolute standard is not taken to mean the fullest extent of a person’s potential.

Another relative standard of excellence is the comparison of an individual’s present achievements with their earlierachievements, also known as the ipsative viewpoint (Messick, 1989). This standard is based on intrapersonal or intra-individual norms (Ziegler & Heller, 2002), also considered to be criterion referenced standards. An analogous term is thepopular personal best, measuring oneself against oneself. These standards of excellence align with exhortations to do one’sbest, the concept of doing one’s best was another representation of John Gardner’s (1961) notion of doing ordinary thingsexceptionally well. A further dimension to the notion of personal standards is with regard to creative individuals. Thoseintroducing novelty into a domain are recognized to have developed internal criteria of excellence with respect to thatdomain (Csikszentmihalyi & Wolfe, 2000, p. 88).

Perhaps it is not surprising in light of the discussion above, that few definitions of academic excellence arerecorded in the research literature. In fact, a number of researchers have acknowledged both the complexity of the termand the absence of definitions, asserting, that the pursuit of academic excellence is ‘‘what matters the most’’ (Duke,1985, p. 1; Ferrari, 2002b). Trost (2000) noted the lack of an accepted definition and posits that the common factor indefinitions of excellence is outstanding achievement or achievement far above average. More generally, excellence hasbeen defined as ‘‘consistently superior achievement in the core activities of a domain’’ (Ericsson, 2002, p. 22). Howacademic excellence is constructed by those directly involved in schooling is a topic that receives little attention in theliterature.

However, VanTassel-Baska (1997) has discussed excellence in education as ‘‘both the process of working towards anideal standard and attainment of a consistently high standard of performance in a socially valued endeavour’’ (p. 9).Working towards an ideal standard represents an ‘‘attainment that is respected, it indicates accomplishment of the taskat hand; and it is a predictor of success at the next level of that task’’ (Baldus et al., 2009). The notion of respected

3 Talent development programmes traditionally use norm-referenced standards in selection criteria. These standards are routinely employed to

determine selection for advanced placement in college programmes. Their long history and national respect as markers of academic excellence have

ensured their on-going use and predictive power according to some (Baldus, Assouline, Croft, & Colangelo, 2009).

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–20 13

accomplishment adds a further important dimension to understanding this issue. It incorporates constructivist-stylenotions of social value, also identified by Mascolo, Li, Fink, and Fischer (2002). Ultimately, academic excellence is asocial construct, determined inter-subjectively through human interaction. Awareness of the importance of inter-subjectively and personally constructed notions of reality (in this case how we perceive academic excellence and ourown ability to achieve it) underpin this paper and its call for a paradigm shift towards personal best as the primary aimof formal education.

2. Methods

This research was conducted within the qualitative, interpretivist paradigm to enable the investigation of a complexsocial phenomenon; academic excellence (Punch, 2000). It employed a multicase design, which allowed for closeexamination of the subject matter from different viewpoints, as well as the development of converging lines of enquiry (Yin,1994, 2008). The starting point for the research were the students, 22 school graduates who achieved a marks in the top 5% oftheir cohort for tertiary entrance.4

For student participants, only two inclusion criteria were stipulated; the first was achievement of a Tertiary EntranceRank (TER)5 of 95.00 or above. A TER score of 95 or above was considered as being in the top 5% of the State’s age cohort. Thisscore was designed to rank all the students of high school leaving age in the State from 0 to 99.95 and was calculated usingthe results of non-compulsory state-wide Tertiary Entrance Examinations (TEE)6 which were then statistically adjusted. Atthe time this study was conducted, TER scores were used as the primary criterion for admission to university courses inWestern Australia and recognized worldwide. Although the study was located in Western Australia and used these localrankings, the findings are of interest worldwide (Williams, 2010; Williams, Venville, & Gordon, 2012). The second criterionfor inclusion was that students be no more than 24 years of age when interviewed. The only other inclusion criterion was adesire to participate.

Student participants were asked to nominate a supportive figure from home and from school. These nominees wereinvited to join the study, 20 parents and 19 teachers participated. Collectively, 61 participants contributed to the findings ofthe study.

High level academic achievement (and excellent performance) can only be recognized after it occurs (Bloom, 1985b; Cote,Ericsson, & Law, 2005) therefore, retrospective interviews were regarded as useful for this research (Bloom, 1985a).Interviews were conducted within a few years of secondary school graduation which helped to address concerns (Berney &Blane, 1997; Martyn & Belli, 2002; Shavinina, 2009) regarding recall bias due to extended time periods between significantevents and time of interview.

Purposive sampling (Miles & Huberman, 1994), was effectively used to identify student participants who were nothomogeneous in their profiles. From the list of ‘‘Dux of Public Schools’’, published in The West Australian newspaper at thebeginning of the new academic year also was used to recruit student participants. Using the information provided (names ofstudents and schools attended) and by consulting The White Pages of the online telephone directory contact was establishedthrough use of home telephones. Among the students there were wide distinctions in cultural and family backgrounds,economic circumstances, schooling experiences, abilities and interests.

The data collection and analysis methods used in this study were consistent with grounded theory (O’Donoghue, 2007;Punch, 2005) in that the research was not conducted with a view to confirming or denying any hypothesis of the researcherbut rather to examine the whole phenomenon in question (Stake, 2006). As such, the interviews were semi-structured, inthat they were guided by research questions but the interviews deviated from the protocol to explore relevantunderstandings. The interview protocol employed in the study followed a recent approach of Gucciardi and Gordon (2008)grounded in Personal Construct Psychology (Kelly, 1955, 1991). The following is a sample interview question, ‘Pleasedescribe what you consider academic excellence to be. Can you offer a phrase, definition or quote to describe academicexcellence?’

The analysis employed a process of induction to distill themes and generate concepts. The data were then organizedinto coherent patterns through the development of categories, to illuminate the phenomenon under study (Strauss &Corbin, 1990). To substantiate and contextualize the presentation of findings reporting drew heavily on directquotations. The use of participants’ own words substantiated findings and conveyed vividly their lived experiences.Visual data displays addressed criteria for thick description and level of conceptual abstraction (Miles & Huberman,1994, p. 91) thus reducing dependence on extended, unreduced text in reporting combined data from 61 interviews. Thisstrategy not only ensured easy reading of summary data, but provided a visible contrast between representative views

4 Calculated from raw scores achieved per subject from external examinations (generally of 3 hour duration. The length of time is an essential inclusion

duration) in the final year of school, in addition to school based assessment and examinations two years prior, Raw scores are statistically moderated,

standardized, and scaled through a process described by Birch and Miller (2007, pp. 5–6).5 A number of reforms have been instituted in the West Australian education system since this study was conducted, as a result, the system described

here differs slightly from that currently operating.6 The Tertiary Entrance Score is calculated by multiplying the better mean of four or five TEE subjects by 5.1, the maximum TES is 510 (Tertiary Insitutions

Service Centre, 2008).

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–2014

and divergent views thus addressing an important issue in qualitative analysis. The Gucciardi and Gordon (2008)protocol recommends the use of such visual data displays.

3. Results

The interviews revealed diverse understandings of academic excellence among participants. Conceptual understandingsof academic excellence were consistent across the three groups and, most strikingly, included a notion of universal access.The semi-structured nature of participant interviews enabled a number of characteristics of excellence to be identified inaddition to views of the nature of excellence. These were distinguished from one another and distilled as follows during theanalysis of research findings: Outstanding scholastic and personal best achievements described the nature of academicexcellence, which was understood to be characterized by: high level thinking and communication; ability; love of learning;aspiration; focus; motivated work ethic; responsibility; self-efficacy; opportunity; and, recognition and reward. The current paperpresents the findings on the nature of excellence; the characteristics will be reported in a future publication. To assistanonymous attribution, quotations were numbered. For example, (s5) was the fifth student interviewed, (p/s5) and (t/s5)refer to their nominated parent and teacher respectively.

3.1. Student understandings of academic excellence

Table 1 presents a summary of participating student’s understandings of academic excellence. The emergent categorieshave been depicted together with representative and divergent quotations in a visual display of the data.

The question of academic excellence’ elicited various responses from the younger participants, commonly beginning withthe seemingly self-evident, such as, ‘‘The easiest way to measure it across the board is just results’’ (s5). Academic excellencewas linked by nearly all student participants, to outstanding results. For example, ‘‘of course it is getting good grades’’ (s11)and ‘‘for me it’s always been measured against your grades and your achievements in your tests’’ (s20). Another said,‘‘academic excellence is achieving high grades, probably generally A’s and marks of probably 80% plus’’ (s1). Academicexcellence was seen as the successful product of focussed academic enquiry and high marks in examinations were a by-product of that way of thinking and time management. Student participants understood excellence in terms of an acceptedstandard relative to a specific cohort.

Successive comments however, revealed a deeper understanding of the nature of academic excellence. Outstandingpersonal performance was described as ‘‘striving to achieve the best that you could possibly achieve’’ (s13). It is notsurprising personal best was mentioned in the current context given participants would be familiar with its use in sport,activities in which many engaged. In general terms, personal best is a current, temporary standard of achievement used byindividuals and coaches to exhort further effort for improvement to one’s personal best:

Table 1

Studen

Natu

Outst

Perso

ach

Excellence essentially is doing the very best you can with what you’ve been given. I always believe that you’re bornwith a potential intelligence and as you go through life it’s that that is nurtured and developed, you can either reachthat potential or not reach that potential. (s14)

One student commented, ‘‘I don’t really think it’s a particular person’s best work because I sort of define that as personalacademic achievement’’ (s1). Personal best achievements, ‘‘Each student achieving their best no matter, regardless of whatgifts they’re born with’’ (s5) was a dominant understanding of academic excellence for this group of participants.

On the topic of academic excellence, student participants responded with quick and simple answers on this topic, it wasoutstanding grades, specifically getting high grades in system wide end-of-school examinations. It was also the best youcould possibly achieve. In summary, there were two dominant understandings of the nature of excellence, outstanding grades

and personal best achievements.

3.2. Parent understandings of academic excellence

Table 2 presents a summary of participating parent’s understandings of academic excellence. The emergent categorieshave been depicted together with representative and divergent quotations in a visual display of the data.

t understandings of academic excellence, together with representative and contrasting quotations.

re of excellence Description Representative quote Contrasting quote

anding grades Meeting standards of excellence,

achieving success

Be outstanding in areas of

education as in relation to

other people also doing the

same sort of thing you’re

doing (s4)

Being able to do what you think and being

focussed in what you are doing is academic

excellence, not so much getting the marks.

That’s just the result of the way you think

and how you manage your time (s12)

nal best

ievements

Excellence is doing the very best

you can with what you’ve been given

Each student achieving their

best no matter, regardless of

what gifts they’re born with (s5)

I don’t really think it’s a particular person’s

best work (s1)

Table 2

Parent understandings of academic excellence, together with representative and contrasting quotations.

Nature of

excellence

Description Representative quote Contrasting quote

Scholastic

excellence

Evidence of excellence

in scholastic activities

Academic excellence is the demonstrated

ability to perform, achieve, and, or excel

in scholastic activities (p/s9)

If you have a child with limited intelligence,

they could have an excellence in their academic

studies as well but at their own level, to know

that there was the achievement of the best that

they could possibly do (p/s3)

Personal

excellence

Developing one’s talent,

personal best achievements

[In terms of ‘personal best’] All I look for

is, ‘okay, are you moving along that

continuum?’ not in comparison to

someone else?’’ (p/s15)

It probably requires an achievement that puts

you with the top few per cent in your particular

cohort in any particular subject (p/s4)

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–20 15

Initially parents described academic excellence as ‘‘objectively measured levels of high achievement’’ (p/s2). Successivecomments however pointed to an understanding of it as maximizing personal academic achievement. Academic excellencetherefore was viewed in two ways, as scholastic excellence and personal best.

To excel in scholastic activities was the first aspect of academic excellence mentioned by parents and is summed up in thefollowing quote:

Academic excellence is the demonstrated ability to perform, achieve, and, or excel in scholastic activities. Academicexcellence has been identified with achieving high grades and superior performance. But academic excellence is morethan just making good grades. (p/s9)

Good grades, ‘‘an achievement that puts you with the top few per cent in your particular cohort in any particular subject’’(p/s4) were but one part of parental understanding. Parents spoke of scholastic excellence as an indicator of academicexcellence at one particular time. Similarly, in sport, a tennis player might note winning an under 18’s club championship in2002.

However, academic excellence was a broader concept to parents than simply final school examinations, as shown in thefollowing quote:

Jake often spent time studying everything and anything on the subjects he did, rather than focusing on the key aspectsthat would most likely be in an exam. Whilst this helped him gather perspective on much deeper issues and improvedthe quality of his work, it meant he would devote too much time discussing such things in an exam. (p/s9)

Accordingly, exam results throughout schooling could mask academic potential in students not skilled in examinationtechniques. One parent spoke of the importance of the journey, not the destination, the idea of ‘‘it being about developmentand about a journey and a process, and that that goes on, I would like to think, for everybody. I’d like them to remain engagedin the process’’ (s22).

There was a report from one parent, of having negative connotations in respect of the topic, ‘‘excellence makes my skincrawl a bit. It, for me, evokes ideas about people being genius, people either having it all, or you haven’t, you’re eitherexcellent or you’re not’’ (p/s22). This parent’s dislike of absolutist constructions of excellence was attributed to people eitherreaching or not reaching, in other words, many would fail. The same parent proposed an alternate understanding that wasalso representative of many other parent participants, that is, ‘‘thinking about academic excellence as something that is anongoing state or part of a process’’. According to parents, academic excellence was a developmental process analogous to ajourney, it’s ‘‘much more about a journey [than a destination]’’ (p/s22).

There was a personal dimension in parent participant constructions of academic excellence, ‘‘you want them to do theirbest and you put everything in their way to help them do that’’ (p/s7). Of this aspect one parent stated, ‘‘academic excellenceis for the highly able working close to their capacity, or potential’’ (p/s11).

The dominant attitude of parent participants was that children make the most of their abilities, that they put in effort todeveloping their talents over time. An all-encompassing perspective, it was explained by one parent in the following way,‘‘even if you had a child with limited intelligence they could have an excellence in their academic studies as well but at theirown level’’ (p/s3). Personal best (p/s14) outcomes were seen to be more likely in environments with others of like interests,‘‘collaboration is important to foster commitment to achieving a person’s personal best’’ (p/s9). In terms of thischaracteristic one parent said, ‘‘all I look for is, ‘okay, are you moving along that continuum?’ not in comparison to someoneelse?’’ (p/s15).

3.3. Teacher understandings of academic excellence

Table 3 presents a summary of participating teacher’s understandings of academic excellence. The emergent categories havebeen depicted together with representative and divergent quotations to explicate representative and contrasting views.

Academic excellence in the teacher view was rather holistic, entailing a whole of life perspective. Largely, teachers viewedtheir role as creating environments to nurture learning, described by one teacher as academic learning communities (t/s16),

Table 3

Teacher understandings of academic excellence, together with representative and contrasting quotations.

Nature of excellence Description Representative quote Contrasting quote

Outstanding performance Outstanding performance

dependent on society’s parameters

The demonstrated ability to

perform, achieve and/or excel

in scholastic activities (t/s9)

The parameters that we place around

academic excellence confine us a little.

If we could imagine beyond the TER

score we would probably get better

TER scores (t/s22)

Fulfilling potential Personal achievements in

scholastic activities, a mindset

for doing their best

It’s a strive for a personal

result–it’s measured externally–

but I think it’s a strive for a

personal result driven by a

person’s sense of standard (t/s3)

Academic excellence is realizing that

what you’re learning today is not the

end of it, you are constructing a base

on which further learning is going

to come (t/s14)

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–2016

to engender interest (t/s20), to stimulate thinking and facilitate students becoming independent learners (t/s4). Participatingteachers conceptualized academic excellence in the following ways, as outstanding performance and fulfilling potential.

One aspect identified by teacher participants is represented in the following quote, ‘‘academic excellence is an outstanding

performance by students’’ (t/s6). It was ‘‘the demonstrated ability to perform, achieve and/or excel in scholastic activities’’ (t/s9), ‘‘not only compared to their mates, but compared to fellow local students or even on the national scale’’ (t/s20). This viewaligns with the standard used in the current study, students placed in the top 5% of school graduates in state-wideexaminations. Teachers went on to speak of questions of criteria and context, ‘‘Our practice has been defined by industrystandards, by systemic requirements’’ (t/s22).

Limitations were recognized in traditional measures, industry standards were considered to be narrow. ‘‘The parametersthat we place around academic excellence confine us a little. If we could imagine beyond the TER score we would probablyget better TER scores’’ (t/s22). Thus the restrictions of systemic requirements may limit opportunity for outstandingperformance for some students. Teachers had a broader, more holistic perspective of academic excellence, ‘‘I really don’tthink [students] would be aware of my wider view of an academically excellent student’’ (t/s4). The following quote isrepresentative of the wider view:

Academic excellence is realising that what you’re learning today is not the end of it, you are constructing a base on whichfurther learning is going to come . . .it’s also realising that this is a long road you’re on, probably a life-long one. (t/s14)

Outstanding performance was also represented as personal or private achievement, against the standard of previousoutstanding results, ‘‘something concrete to measure themselves by’’ (t/s14). Consequently, with this understanding it couldbe said, ‘‘high marks do not equal academic excellence, although that’s the view that many people have’’ (t/s4). Context,therefore, is an important dimension of academic excellence and outstanding performance may be in the order of a private orpublic achievement.

Teachers were of the view that outstanding performance was only one aspect of academic excellence, ‘‘it’s a whole lotmore than coming first in subjects, it’s a much broader thing than that’’ (t/s4). While outstanding performance was a keyunderstanding, another was the notion of fulfilling potential.

The notion of fulfilling potential was described in the following way, ‘‘The great students, this is where their potentialsomehow converges to their performance’’ (t/s12). ‘‘The student who is striving for academic excellence is actually looking togain the most they can out of their personal potential’’ (t/s16). It was also explained in terms of an individual aiming, ‘‘to dobetter’’ in terms of ‘‘self’’ (t/s1), ‘‘it’s a strive for a personal result driven by a person’s sense of standard’’ (t/s3).

With this view academic excellence was conceptualized as, ‘‘the achievement of the standards s/he sets her/himself andonce those were reached raising the bar again. . . reaching one’s potential at any given moment and lifting the bar again’’ (t/s3). This was in contrast with, ‘‘a lot of students who aren’t achieving in any way, their potential is a long way from theirperformance’’ (t/s12).

For participating teachers measurement of outstanding performance, through levels, marks or grades, indicated astandard achieved or potential realized at any particular point. Academic talent markers, therefore, were tangible evidenceof an individual’s progression towards academic excellence. The inter-connectedness of the two dimensions of academicexcellence was expressed by a teacher as follows, ‘‘Be the best they can be. . .. thinking, ‘I gave it my best shot and I know myresults are a true indication of my effort and my experience and my talent’’’ (t/s7). Providing opportunities for academictalent development was how teachers saw themselves. They recognized outstanding performance as dependent ondevelopment and performance opportunities.

3.4. Student, parent and teacher understandings of academic excellence

In summary, the standout finding was the prominence of personal academic standards of excellence inconceptualisations of academic excellence held by high achieving school graduates, their parents and teachers. Asexpected, outstanding scholastic achievement was associated with academic excellence, in keeping with the literature. One ofthe most striking aspects of the findings is that the similarities emerged independently and the convergence shows the

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–20 17

strength of the analysis and the common threads that run through the responses of the three participant groups but thesubtle differences are also illuminating.

Teachers and parents were strongly of the belief that parameters surrounding academic excellence in the context ofschooling were restrictive. Teachers, in particular, held the view that the potential of many students was unknown andtraditional end of school examinations were a glass ceiling, posing a challenge to further realization of potential in a wayreminiscent of the ideas of Duke (1985) and Aldrich (2006). In view of the outstanding attainment by student participants, itis interesting that participants viewed current provision, scope and opportunity within the school system to have too low aceiling.

Among participants, there was a sufficiently wide understanding of academic excellence to encompass the notion ofpersonal best achievement. This finding, somewhat surprisingly incorporates a notion of universal access. Academic talentdevelopment was commonly described as a process and the road towards excellence an incremental one. This progressiveview is reflected in the use of journey metaphors to describe developing academic excellence. Understanding excellence as apersonal journey is inclusive of all students.

Outstanding achievement or achievement far above average is the common denominator in existing definitions (Ericsson,2002; Trost, 2000; Ziegler, 2005). In this respect, the nature of academic excellence is an absolute or norm-referencedstandard (Baldus et al., 2009; Strike, 1985; Ziegler & Heller, 2002). The personal standard of excellence in participantunderstandings, as previously been referred to in the literature as ‘‘intra-individual norms’’ (Ziegler & Heller, 2002, p. 10) orthe ‘‘ipsative’’ viewpoint (Messick, 1989) and there has been an acknowledgement that educational excellence requires anindividual to strive for new levels of personal achievement (Van Tassel-Baska, 1998).

Lack of agreement over the definition of key terms is not a problem confined to the field of education. In his seminal workon globalisation Scholte (2005) reflects on the purpose and importance of definitions:

Definitions fundamentally shape descriptions, explanations, evaluations, prescriptions and actions. If a definition of acore concept is slippery, then the knowledge built upon it is likely to be similarly shaky and, in turn, the actionspursued on the basis of that knowledge can very well be misguided. (p. 54)

For these reasons it became an aim of the study to synthesize the rich data arising from the multi-perspective design inthe form of a definition:

Academic excellence is the culmination of outstanding personal or socially valued academic achievements through acombination of beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviours enabling individuals to optimise potential throughdevelopment opportunities.

This definition reinforces previous understandings of excellence as, ‘‘A consistently superior achievement in the coreactivities of a domain’’ (Ericsson, 2002, p. 22) and builds on VanTassel-Baska’s (1998) understanding of excellence inschooling as, ‘‘A process of working towards an ideal standard and attainment of a consistently high standard of performancein a socially valued endeavour’’ (p. 9). It is important to note that the definition arising from the current study is not intendedto be definitive, but is offered in the way Scholte (2005) describes, as a contribution to knowledge in a way that is tentativeand subject to reappraisal from further redefinition.

4. Discussion

The finding that study participants understood academic excellence as more than just outstanding achievement is adeeper, more complex concept that also embraced the notion of one’s personal best achievement has wide rangingimplications for how we might approach academic excellence and success in education policy, schooling and research.Firstly it suggests a newer, broader definition of academic excellence to impact educational debate and inform futureresearch, policy and practice. Secondly, it implies the possibility of universal access to academic excellence and the personalpride, satisfaction and the boost to intrinsic motivation that comes with it. These first two implications strengthen the casefor the third, the importance of students’ ability to track their own academic progress and the tools and information to allowthem to do so. Finally, the experience and perspectives of these highly successful people highlight the need for flexibility inschooling in order to enable all students to achieve their personal best.

The revelation that successful students, their parents and teachers conceptualized academic excellence at this personal,intrinsic level suggests the need for this understanding to be integrated in general usage and definitions of academicexcellence. This could be achieved by employing a definition, such as the one arising from the current study, which marriesnotions of outstanding personal achievement with traditional understandings of academic achievement in education policyand practice. In a case study of three Australian schools, Greenhaigh (1995) reported that the concept of personal best wasassociated with academic excellence only verbally, rather than in policy or in documents relating to practice in the schools.Furthermore, it made no appearance in the existing reward systems within schools. It is important, therefore, thatconventional practice be reviewed to more effectively encourage and recognize outstanding personal achievement. It isanticipated that only minor changes to current practice would be required to make substantial advances towards this goal.Employing a broader definition of academic excellence would, besides being inclusive of the understandings of successfulstudents, their parents and teachers, be inclusive of all students. The construct would no longer be the exclusive domain ofonly outstanding academic achievers in the conventional sense; rather students could have personal access to the construct

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–2018

through the element of personal best academic achievement. This perspective reflects a growth mindset (Dweck, 2006) thatwould welcome academic challenge and effort, key elements of effective talent development programmes. Academic talentwas regarded by participants as developing over time through cumulative personal best achievements, an equitableunderstanding of academic excellence in that none need be excluded from attaining academic personal bests and likewise,no pre-defined limit to what those personal bests could be. With the potential to be applied universally this is an inclusive,egalitarian notion. The summary of participant understandings in this respect may prove to be of practical use in educationpolicy and planning.

The prominence given to the incremental process, of personal milestones; in the definition of academic excellenceemerging from this research offers stakeholders a definition by which they can shape their explanations, evaluations,prescriptions and actions for academic talent development. With this approach a student’s ability to track their ownacademic progress, and the tools and information to allow them to do so, assumes greater importance. Such an approachcould draw on existing resources within and across disciplinary boundaries (Butler, Smith, & Irwin, 1993; Dweck, 2008a,2008b; Starkes & Ericsson, 2003; Vasilevska, 2006) and has myriad implications for policy and practice.

One significant implication for policy and practice is the need for flexibility in the structures of schooling in order tofacilitate all students to achieve their personal best. One of the major challenges, continuously reiterated in the research,including Colangelo, Assouline and Gross (2004); Gagne (2011); Hattie (2009); Rogers (2007); VanTassel-Baska (2005) isknown as lock-step schooling, where academic advancement is based solely on age and year level. Contrary to other talentdevelopment programmes such as for sporting and musical talent (Bloom, 1985b; Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen,1993; Ericsson, 1996; Gagne, 2011; Subotnik, 2004) Conventional organization of schooling offers little opportunity forscholastic progress based on mastery. Frequently overlooked in the public datable on maximizing the resources of schoolingis that traditionally, progress in schooling is restricted by age rather than, as for other talent areas, commensurate withmastery. Consequently, one of the most pressing and important findings to emerge from this study is, as VanTassel-Baska(2009) expressed it, how to re-direct attention on scholastic mastery as the appropriate calibration for talent developmentrather than age and grade level placement.

Teachers and parent participants advocated strongly for flexible pathways to outstanding academic achievement. Thesole focus in the current system on traditional end of school examinations as the measure of outstanding achievement wasreported to function like a glass ceiling for some, putting a lid on the highest achievement. Thus, the current parameterssurrounding academic excellence in the context of schooling were seen to be restrictive. Teacher and parent participants hadknowledge of student achievement that was not recognized systemically, that went beyond current curriculumrequirements and assessment. This finding builds on the work of Aldrich (2006):

Variations and confusions in the use of the term ‘standards’–for example, in respect of specified yardsticks and actuallevels of attainment, or between excellence and adequacy. It is also clear that educational and broader societal changesmean that it is difficult to try to maintain the same yardstick (or indeed metre length) of measurement over time. (p. 9)

It may therefore, be worth asking whether our systemic standards of excellence actually represent standards of adequacyin practice. The stringent adoption of absolute standards may constrict achievement of potentially higher, standards ofacademic excellence. Greater flexibility in the current system of determining outstanding academic achievement was seenas extremely important to capturing the highest standards of academic excellence possible.

In the current study, despite the outstanding results of the graduate students, parents and teachers, in particular, were ofthe view that the potential of students was unknown. It was noted that the full realization of potential for some studentsinvolves academic challenge surpassing that encompassed within traditional end-of-school examinations. This insightdraws into question current provision, scope and opportunity of the school system, it leads us to consider whether there isenough flexibility in the current system of schooling to effectively make the most of the academic abilities of all students.The study reported in this paper has implications for the development of policy, practice and future research, not onlyregarding conceptions of academic excellence, but also by way of providing insights for academic talent development inschooling.

5. Conclusions

The insights generated from this study support the premise with which it began, that recently graduated, high achievingstudents together with supportive parents and teachers are in a unique position to offer potentially valuable insights into theprocess of academic talent development that would be of use to researchers and educators. Because empirical research intothe experience of academic excellence is limited, the findings make a contribution to understanding of this importantconstruct.

As anticipated, the traditional understanding of academic excellence, outstanding scholastic achievement, was a findingof the study. The second understanding of academic excellence, as personal best achievement, was more surprising. Bothunderstandings of academic excellence were incorporated into a definition that is presented in this paper. It is hoped that itwill provide greater clarity to future research, policy and practice. Participants from all three groups associated academicexcellence with the pursuit of a personal best result, a concept more familiar in a sporting context than in the classroom. Thissecond understanding of academic excellence is a profoundly equitable way of approaching academic achievement, becauseit is open to students of all levels of ability. Shifting the focus of schooling from mastering a set of concepts at each age to

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–20 19

pursuing personal bests would more closely target one of the main goals of education, realizing student potential. While theimplications are clear for students of lesser ability, such a paradigm shift also could fundamentally affect educationalapproaches to students with extremely high levels of ability. Another A for a straight-A student may constitute outstandingachievement in relation to their class or age cohort, but for that student it may not be a personal best. It is highly likely thatmany students are constrained in this way by present understandings of excellence. Ultimately, any understanding ofexcellence that does not incorporate a notion of personal best cannot be expected to be an accurate indication of a student’spotential.

References

Aldrich, R. (2006). Lessons from history of education: The selected works of Richard Aldrich. New York: Routledge.Baldus, C. M., Assouline, S. G., Croft, L. J., & Colangelo, N. (2009). The Iowa online advanced placement academy: Creating access to excellence for gifted and

talented rural students. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.). International handbook on giftedness pp. 1225–1234). (Vol. 2Berlin: Springer.Berney, L. R., & Blane, D. B. (1997). Collecting retrospective data: Accuracy of recall after 50 years judged against historical records. Social Science and Medicine,

45(10), 1519–1525.Birch, E. R., & Miller, P. W. (2007). Tertiary entrance scores: Can we do better? Education Research and.Perspectives, 34(2), 1–23.Bloom, B. S. (1985a). The nature of the study and why it was done. In B. S. Bloom (Ed.), Developing talent in young people (pp. 3–18). New York, NY: Ballantine.Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985b). Developing talent in young people. New York, NY: Ballantine.Butler, R. J., Smith, M., & Irwin, I. (1993). The performance profile in practice. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 5(1), 48–63.Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students. Iowa: Belin-Blank International

Center on Gifted Education and Talent Development.Cote, J., Ericsson, K. A., & Law, M. P. (2005). Tracing the development of athletes using retrospective interview methods: A proposed interview and validation

procedure for reported information. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17, 1–19.Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education.

In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 81–91). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Duke, D. L. (1985). What is the nature of educational excellence and should we try to measure it? Phi Delta Kappan, 66(10), 671–674.Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.Dweck, C. S. (2008a). Brainology: Transforming students’ motivation to learn. School MattersWinter: .Dweck, C. S. (2008b). Can personality be changed? The role of beliefs in personality and change. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), 391–394.Edwards, B. (2008). Role model teachers honoured: Academy for academic excellence students plant festival to benefit teacher with ALS. Daily Press 27 May.Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The aquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to excellence: The aquisition of

expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games (pp. 1–50). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ericsson, K. A. (2002). Attaining excellence through deliberate practice: Insights from the study of expert performance. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence

through education (pp. 21–56). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ericsson, K. A. (2005). Recent advances in expertise research: A commentary on the contributions to the special issue. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(2), 233–241.Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P.

Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge University Press: New York.Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.Feldhusen, J. F. (2005). Giftedness, talent, expertise, and creative acheivement. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 64–

79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Ferrari, M. (2002a). Personal and institutional pursuit of excellence. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. 195–220). Mahwah:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ferrari, M. (2002b). Preface. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. vii–xi). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Ferrari, M. (Ed.). (2002c). The pursuit of excellence through education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Freeman, J. (2005). Permission to be gifted: How conceptions of giftedness can change lives. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd

ed., pp. 80–97). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Gagne, F. (2011). Academic talent development and the equity issue in gifted education. Talent Development and Excellence, 3(1), 3–22.Gardner, H. (2002). Learning from extraordinary minds. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. 3–20). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.Gardner, J. W. (1961). Excellence: Can we be equal and excellent too? New York: Harper and Brothers.Greenhaigh, J. (1995). The definition and promotion of academic excellence in independent, protestant, secondary schools in N.S.W.: A case study. Canberra: Australian

Catholic University [Master of education thesis].Gucciardi, D. F., & Gordon, S. (2008). Personal construct psychology and the research interview: The example of mental toughness in sport. Personal Construct

Theory and Practice, 5, 119–130.Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.Kelly, G. A. (1991). The psychology of personal constructs: A theory of personality, Vol. 1, Routledge.Martyn, K., & Belli, R. (2002). Retrospective data collection using even history calendars. [LWWOnline]. Nursing Research, 51(4), 270–274.Mascolo, M. F., Li, J., Fink, R., & Fischer, K. W. (2002). Pathways to excellence: Value presuppositions and the development of academic and affective skills in

educational contexts. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. 113–146). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Mathews, J. (1999). Inside the schools; a push for excellence; students urged to try most difficult classes. Washington Post.Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). New York: Macmillan.Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications.Miretzky, D. (2007). A view of research from practice: Voices of teachers [Article]. Theory into Practice, 46(4), 272–280 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/

00405840701593857Mukombozi, B. (2010). 50 students rewarded for academic excellence. The New Times.O’Donoghue, T. L. R. (2007). Planning your qualitative research project: An introduction to interpretivist research in education. London: Routledge.Punch, K. F. (2000). Developing effective research proposals. London: Sage.Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). London: Sage publications.Robinson, A., & Clinkenbeard, P. R. (1998). Giftedness: An exceptionality examined. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 117–139.Rogers, K. B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4),

382–397.Scholte, J. A. (2005). Globalization: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Shavinina, L. V. (2009). Scientific Talent. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.). International handbook on giftedness pp. 649–669). (Vol. 1New York, NY: Springer Science-

Business.

L. Williams et al. / International Journal of Educational Research 62 (2013) 11–2020

Simon, H. A. (2002). Achieving excellence in institutions. In M. Ferrari (Ed.), The pursuit of excellence through education (pp. 181–194). Mahwah: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Starkes, J. L., & Ericsson, K. A. (Eds.). (2003). Expert performance in sports: Advances in research on sport expertise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.Sternberg, R. J. (2003). WICS as a model of giftedness. High Ability Studies, 14(2), 109–137.Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). (2003). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. California: Sage Publications.Strike, K. (1985). Is there a conflict between equity and excellence? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7(4), 409.Subotnik, R. F. (2004). Transforming elite musicians into professional artists: A view of the talent development process at the juilliard school. In L. V. Shavinina &

M. Ferrari (Eds.), Beyond knowledge: Extracognitive aspects of developing high ability (pp. 137–167). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Tertiary Insitutions Service Centre. (2008, 3 January 2008). The tertiary entrance rank. Admission requirements for school leavers. Retrieved 26 March, 2010 from

http://www.tisc.edu.au/tiscguide/SLAR2008.html#TER.Trost, G. (2000). Prediction of excellence in school, higher education, and work. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International

handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 317–327). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd.Van Tassel-Baska, J. (Ed.). (1998). Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners (3rd ed.). Denver: Love.VanTassel-Baska, J. (1997). Excellence as a standard for all education. Roeper Review, 20(1), 9–12.VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). The development of academic talent: A mandate for educational best practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(10), 760–764.VanTassel-Baska, J. (2005). Gifted programs and services: What are the nonnegotiables? Theory into Practice, 44(2), 90–98.VanTassel-Baska, J. (2009). United States policy development in gifted education: A patchwork quilt. In Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.). International handbook on giftedness

pp. 1295–1312). (Vol. 2Berlin: Springer.Vasilevska. (2006). Building a culture of personal best. Paper presented at the gifted 2006 national conference.Williams, L. M. (2010). Towards academic excellence: a qualitative study of students, parents and teachers. Perth: The University of Western Australia [Ph.D. thesis].Williams, L. M., Venville, G., & Gordon, S. (2012). Supporting excellence: A guide to REAL equity. Paper presented at the 13th national conference on giftedness 12–15

July 2012.Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: design and methods (second ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.Ziegler, A. (2005). The actiotope model of giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 411–436). Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.Ziegler, A., & Heller, K. (2002). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In K. Heller, F. Monks, R. Sternberg, & R. Subotnik (Eds.), International

handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 3–23). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Dr Lesley Williams BEd (Dist), MEd, PhD (Dist) is an Honorary Research Fellow at The University of Western Australia, an education consultant and a companydirector. Her PhD thesis, which was awarded with Distinction, was awarded the Cameron Prize in Education by The Research Committee of the Faculty ofEducation of UWA. The Australian Association for the Education of the Gifted and Talented (AAEGT) recognized her research with the presentation of the JohnGeake Outstanding Thesis National Award. Dr Williams has teaching experience in primary, education support and tertiary settings, and experience as co-ordinator of a National Curriculum project. She has worked as an Education Support Centre Principal and is a past President of the Western Australian EducationSupport Principal’s peak body.

Grady Venville BSc, DipEd, GradScEd, PhD is Dean of Coursework Studies at The University of Western Australia. Grady Venville was appointed as the inauguralProfessor of Science Education at the University of Western Australia in January, 2007. She is known internationally for her research in science education,particularly in the fields of curriculum integration and students’ cognitive understanding of complex scientific ideas such as genetics. She has published more than40 papers in scholarly journals and is the co-author of the highly regarded ‘‘Let’s Think!’’ a cognitive acceleration programme for Year 1 students in the UnitedKingdom. She also is the co-editor of the widely used textbooks ‘‘The Art of Teaching Science’’ ‘‘The Art of Teaching Primary Science’’. Grady is passionate about theteaching and learning of science and believes that inspiring and motivating students in their science learning is as equally important as helping them to developappropriate cognitive understandings.

Sandy Gordon DipPE., DipEd, MEd, MA, PhD. Sandy is a Professor of Sport and Exercise Psychology at UWA. He is a Registered Sport Psychologist (WA), Fellowmember of the Australian Psychological Society (APS), Member of the APS College of Sport and Exercise Psychologists (CoSEP) and APS Interest Group in CoachingPsychology (IGCP). Accreditation also includes Advanced and Professional Development Executive Coaching certificates from the Institute of Coaching andConsulting Psychology (U. Sydney). He is accredited in Cultural Transformation Tools, Extended DISC, Health Coaching (HCA), Hogan, MBTI, and CAPP Realise2assessment tools, and is a facilitator in Appreciative Inquiry and Open Space Technology.