I don't think teachers should totally set aside their views of what students should be able to do. Their professional experience should guide their practice in creating challenging learning opportunities. Educators need to look at the individual student to guide their learning and provide opportunities to build on strengths as well, as building skills in areas that a student struggles. As good pedagogical practice self direction and guided discovery are best for students. WEBB's Depth of Knowledge definitions for strategic and extended thinking lend themselves to self directed learning opportunities. I also think that Problem Based Learning approaches are an excellent way to engage students. What other skills do G&T students need to be able to guide their learning? (e.g. decision making skills, self management, goal setting, communication skills, collaboration, conflict resolution skills). How do teachers build these skills to allow student build on their potential? 

As a former G&T kid, I would have preferred guided discovery teaching instead of rigidly following a Bloom's taxonomy model. What one should be to do doesn't always mean that's best. 

I think G&T kids should be as self-directed as possible. Too often we, as educators, can get in their way (developmentally speaking). While all children will need guidance, G&T students have a unique need to shape their own learning experiences. I wonder if using Depth of Knowledge rather than Bloom's would render any better results?

I don't think teachers should totally set aside their views of what students should be able to do. Their professional experience should guide their practice in creating challenging learning opportunities. Educators need to look at the individual student to guide their learning and provide opportunities to build on strengths as well, as building skills in areas that a student struggles. As good pedagogical practice self direction and guided discovery are best for students. WEBB's Depth of Knowledge definitions for strategic and extended thinking lend themselves to self directed learning opportunities. I also think that Problem Based Learning approaches are an excellent way to engage students. What other skills do G&T students need to be able to guide their learning? (e.g. decision making skills, self management, goal setting, communication skills, collaboration, conflict resolution skills). How do teachers build these skills to allow student build on their potential? 

Thank you Evelyn , Larry and James for enriching me with your answers. I am seeking experienced answers  from professionals like you . In my opinion,  talented students may need guidance from gifted teachers or teachers who have good competence and experience in that specific talent .,but they need more freedom to express their talents in their way.

There is always a danger that G&T students will pigeonholed into a box that encourages them to focus solely on exam results. Personally I would get them to create their own learning, whether it be discovery learning or even structured play for younger ones. That way they can enrich their experiences of learning and the success in exams is a byproduct rather than a focus.

Thank you Peter , i agree with what you said :"  the success in exams is a byproduct rather than a focus." , but not every educational system agree with it.

Great answers. As a teacher for 11 years with many G&T students of varying strengths, I offer another question that is possible of equal importance. How would a teacher allow a G&T student to decide their own method of education or be self-directed? While that is what many educators intend to do or think is best, teachers are so resource dependent. Not all teachers have the time to create challenging learning opportunities based on individual student abilities. And to prioritize a G&T student over another student (say a struggling student or a low-income student) presents ethical challenges. Many teachers don't have access to high quality online programs that are interactive and responsive to the success and failures of the student. I know this is probably not the response you were looking for, in which case the other responses are great. But my practical response, as a former teacher and a father of 5, is that maybe the teacher does their best to provide those opportunities to the extent that they are able and supported.

I also thought it was interesting how you mentioned that not every educational system agrees with the idea that "the success in exams is a byproduct rather than a focus". Just coming back from China and interviewing many students and hearing a lot about the Gao Kao, I understand what you might be referring to. However as Peter stated, pigeonholing G&T students into this mold of a "test taker" seems to go against what you might be hoping for: "a suitable type of curriculum or plans for each method and according to the different potentials of each G&T". So can the two ideas coexist...individualizing a curriculum suitable to the strengths of a G&T while also focusing on national tests? I'm not sure. 

This is a curious topic! What age do you propose G&T kids should decide this method? I wonder what would happen if they changed their mind? Does an attitude of adaptability to pedagogical differences help the learner? 

Dear Dustin , thank you for your answer and the great experienced discussion that enriched our thoughts. My question is :Do we really have to make all our G&T students sit for national tests ? Those tests are already made to identify the G& T students from regular ones , but we already know who are the G&T students , so why don't we put them in a different type of education that makes them more able to choose and decide what they need depending on their skills and under G&T teachers supervision  ? I agree with what you said (Not all teachers have the time to create challenging learning opportunities based on individual student abilities) , but do we want any teacher to work with G&T students ? Don't we have to choose the qualified G&T teachers who are able to do that for G&T students ?

Dear Stephanie, Thank you for your questions. I think G&T learners need to research more than anything else and while they do so , they may change their minds about what they wanted to do but they will still be able to learn if we designed a curriculum that makes them learn how to satisfy their potentials , be responsible for what they do and know more about success which is beyond tests and not only to memories other thoughts without discussing them.  

Dear Basema, thanks for the response. While I agree that national tests may be able to identify some G&T students, to think that we have already identified G&T students is a little shortsighted. My experience has shown me on several occasions that G&T students from lower SES backgrounds or G&T students who have strengths that may not be measured on some test are left out of the conversation.

But I think I'm gaining insight into your original question. For those who have been identified and who are fortunate to go to a school that has teachers who are trained to work with G&T students and a school that supports those teachers with small class sizes and more time for preparation...should the educators working with those students let go of their preconceived notion of what the students should be able to do and let the students play a larger role in how their education is delivered (home, online, at school, in the garden, etc...)? My answer is pretty simple. Build in formative assessments to engage the student (and parent) in reflection cycles about what is working and what is not. Sure, all of the other suggestions are still spot on, but make sure some quality assurance is built in because what might be great for one G&T student might not be for another. Thanks for the opportunity to think about this with you. I look forward to your comments.

Los educadores deben acompañar en el proceso a los aprendices, orientarlos, transferirles métodos de aprendizaje, impulsar la indagación, pero no imponer sus puntos de vista.

Creo que es importante que "el que enseña" en cualquier nivel y espacio, reflexione cuál es realmente su contenido de trabajo y evalue si necesita dejar viejas prácticas y aprender nuevas cosas ante nuevas funciones. Los educadores no necesariamente vemos como evoluciona nuestro quehacer y que nos representa esta evolución

After read this question, what occurred to me is that what we remembered the most is the things we learned by ourselves. This means teacher is better to scaffolding students, not only to the G&T students but to all of them. For G&T students, less scaffolding is enough. However, they are still normal person in many other ways so they still need some guidance. So I deem is better to keep observing and offer help properly.

Dear Dustin,I agree with all what you said above. Your answer is appreciated and i am grateful for the time you put  to explain carefully and descriptively what i need to know. 

"Do you agree that Educators should set aside their views of what G&T kids “should” be able to do ?"

Hi Basema,

I have taught Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Visual Art for a number of years. I have also taught Graphic Design and Animation in Adobe platform. Before that I was a working artist. I have had Gifted and Talented students who have interests outside of the regular curriculum, I teach the engineering design model with problem based learning which features identification of the problem, research to develop a few rough ideas or directions, and composite ideas or sketches presented before going on to develop the prototype or student answer.  I have worked as facilitator, guiding gifted students to develop and editor an online newspaper to satisfy one such interest, others creating 3D Maya characters and environments in animations, and some amazing musicians working in layered sound constructions. I believe that an entrance survey to understand your students interests and what they would like to get out of the course allows you to have insights into that student, to differentiate experiences that will launch their discovery and persistence in investigations. Writing student contracts to give them that freedom of discovery clearly defining procedures, and expectations makes this viable. Treating students as fellow conspirators, artists, engineers, and establishing a rapport of respect for them encourages their risk taking. I have learned not to set limits on my expectations of students by thinking what gifted and talented should do. I know that they will do when you spark their interests.

Basema,l greatly agree with Judith: Strong interest and personality/temperament tests  have been very useful to my students in terms of helping them and me, recognize their abilities and desires. I believe that the teaching-input will approximate the students' needs over time, and that for some of the G&T students, you can be a very 'laissez-faire' instructor, because they are very self-aware, self-directed, and capable of doing their own work-- but that usually doesn't come until late middle-school years. Just like 'non-advanced' kids, our G&T students may be more intelligent, but wisdom comes only with a little bit of experience, which means, they need to be old enough to 'get' certain social-organizational concepts of how to do things within existing school/classroom/etc. structures.

Thank you Judith , and as Lehman said , its the interest that motivates G&T students and teachers should recognize their abilities and desires . Once the teacher  spark their interest it will be easier to let hem learn alone.