The Journal of the World Council for Gifted and Talented Children

The World Council for Gifted and Talented Children
took place twice, once immediately before the program and once two weeks after the program. The
rejected applicants were sent questionnaires by mail, but only once.
In order to investigate the input, information was gathered about the student’s intellectual
giftedness, performance-mediating cognitive and motivational characteristics, and socio-educational
variables of the students. To investigate the process, perceptions of participating students and
teachers at the academy school were measured by a self-report scale developed by the authors. The
scale covers instructional methods, students’ self-regulation, cooperation, and curricular objectives
as characteristics of the courses. To investigate the output, participants were given the same selfreport
instruments that were used to measure input, since it was assumed that participation in the
academy should further those motivational and cognitive catalyst variables required for attaining
high levels of excellence that had already been measured pre-participation.
The input evaluation confirmed that highly gifted students are selected for the program. The
participants have high intellectual potentials, as well as strong intrinsic interests in acquiring
knowledge and skills on specific domains. They also have very positive attribution patterns for
dealing with success and failure, and their family background is characterized by a high socialeducational
status. The process evaluation indicated that the instruction corresponds with the needs
of highly gifted students for self-regulated and discovery oriented learning.
The output evaluation focused on two questions: on whether the program had some impact
on individual cognitive and motivational prerequisites for utilizing the intellectual competencies
necessary for attaining high levels of excellence, and on possible intrapersonal and environmental
factors in explaining the impact. Heller & Neber (2002) reported strong effects were achieved on
domain-specific self-efficacy as a motivational belief required for high achievements in challenging
fields of excellence. In addition, preferences for competitive learning were strongly reduced
indicating an increase in willingness to work in teams on complex projects. Significant but weaker
effects were found for the acquisition of domain-specific self-regulatory learning strategies that
might be considered cognitive prerequisites for independent work on diverse academic fields. Very
low or no effects were found for some motivational characteristics, because of the already
developed high level of these characteristics prior to attending the summer-school program.
Students’ course-domain-related intrinsic interests were already extremely strong, while their causal
attribution patterns in dealing with domain specific successes and failures had been optimally
developed. In these respects, no further improvements could be expected (Heller & Neber, 2002).
The long-term effects of the summer academies were investigated in a study by Hany and
Grosch (2009). The authors hypothesized that the long-term effects might show in three areas: the
academic achievement, the personality development, and the social competence of the academy
participants. The study was conducted 10 years after the students had participated in a summer
academy. A total of about 800 subjects, 594 participants and 196 matched non-participants as a
control group, took part in the study, mainly through online questionnaires. Four different methods of
data collection were employed: (1) The participants were asked to submit a detailed personal resume
(2) The participants were asked to assess the effects of their participation on their technical and
methodical knowledge, social competencies, personality traits, as well as on interests, goals and
self-confidence (3) The participants were asked to compare the subjective effects of different
educational experiences like school and university to the effects of the summer academy, and (4)
Participants and matched controls were compared with regard to their professional success and
their social engagement.
The results showed that after ten years, the participants were still a highly able group in
comparison to the rest of the population. It was concluded that the selection process succeeds in
selecting especially able, talented, and motivated pupils for the summer academies. Furthermore,
the summer academies fulfill their expectations as an enrichment program: they are remembered as
more challenging and inspiring than school, albeit as less so than university studies. The integration
into a group of like-minded students was an especially unique positive experience for many
participants, more so than their school and university experience. The personal resumes as well as
the questionnaire data indicated that generally, the summer academy is seen as very positive for
one’s own further development by the participants. A clear majority of the subjects reported that
participating in the academy had a positive influence. The strongest subjective impact concerns
social and motivational aspects: subjects report a boost in self-confidence and optimism. A minority
reported that their participation did not have any long-term impacts. As far as the matched nonparticipants
were concerned, participants and matched controls did not differ very much in their
academic development or professional success.
56 Gifted and Talented International – 26(1), August, 2011; and 26(2), December, 2011.