In 1980, Renzulli suggested that it is counter-productive to focus on teacher characteristics; instead, he argued, the focus should be on teacher behaviors. An analysis of the literature into qualities of the effective teacher of gifted students demonstrates that while different nomenclature is used by the various researchers, their conclusions inevitably incorporate a complex combination of personality characteristics, knowledge and skills, professional attitudes, and teaching approaches and strategies.

The writers who have researched and subsequently listed the characteristics that are essential or highly desirable in effective teachers of the gifted have drawn on a variety of sources including gifted education experts, teachers, students, and/or parents. A synthesis of their conclusions reveals a number of characteristics (see Table 1 for summary) as recurring themes. These themes can be grouped along three dimensions relating to the teachers' knowledge and skills; their teaching and classroom management style; and their interpersonal qualities.

Table 1

Characteristics of Effective Teachers of the Gifted

Other studies conducted in the US have pointed to a preference by gifted students for the personal characteristics over the intellectual qualities of their teachers. For example, Lewis (1982) worked with small groups of gifted students in grades three through seven in the US to identify the characteristics of successful teachers of the gifted. The students agreed on a list of 22 essential characteristics, the most important of which included creativity, understanding, patience and honesty. The majority of items listed related to the personal qualities of the teacher.

Abel and Karnes (1994) used the Preferred Instructor Characteristics Scale (PICS) (Krumboltz & Farquhar, 1957) with 49 gifted students from rural, lower socioeconomic background and 49 gifted students from suburban, advantaged backgrounds in the US. They found that the students strongly preferred the personal-social characteristics of their teachers.

Dorhout (1983) also used the Preferred Instructor Characteristics Scale (Krumboltz & Farquhar, 1957) with his study of 279 gifted students drawn from grades five to twelve and 110 of their teachers in the US. Dorhout compared the students' preferences with those anticipated by their teachers. The students preferred the personal-social characteristics of their teachers; secondary teachers believed that students would respond more closely to the intellectual-cognitive end of the continuum. The researcher concluded that secondary teachers need to be more aware of their students' preferences if they are to adequately respond to their needs.

In stark contrast to the findings of these US studies, are the findings reported by Milgram in her study of Israeli children. Milgram (1979) studied 459 gifted and non-gifted students in grades four through six in Israel. One of the instruments used was a self-designed survey called the Student Perception of Teachers Scale (SPOT). Like the PICS, this instrument sought students' preferences for the personal and intellectual qualities of their teachers but Milgram also added the dimension of teacher creativity. This final category relates to the teachers' approaches to classroom organisation, presentation of material and so on. Milgram's subjects demonstrated a strong preference for the intellectual qualities of the teacher above the other two dimensions.

Maddux, Samples-Lachmann & Cummings (1985) used an American version of the SPOT with gifted junior high school students. Unlike Milgram, they found that their students preferred the personal-social characteristics of their teachers over the intellectual and "creativity" characteristics.

Like other parts of the world, there has been comparatively little Australian research into the qualities of effective teachers of gifted students. Most research related to teachers and the gifted in Australia has focussed on teachers' attitudes toward, and understanding of, gifted students. Whitton's (1997) study of the practices of 606 primary school teachers in New South Wales, for example, found that these teachers demonstrated a lack of knowledge about gifted children and made only minor modifications to their curriculum. Similarly, McKinnon's (1998) study of early childhood teachers found that they had little awareness of the nature and needs of gifted students and were unable to differentiate the curriculum for such students. This finding was consistent across the research sample despite differences in the age and experience of the teachers. The younger the gifted children, the less likely that their needs would be recognized and met by classroom teachers, according to Wellisch (1997).

In a modified replication of Tannenbaum's (1962) research, Carrington (Carrington & Bailey, 2000) examined the attitudes of preservice teachers toward gifted students. He found that preservice teachers were significantly more positive toward gifted students who were not studious compared to those who were. Although less significant, he also found that gifted girls were less well regarded than gifted boys by preservice teachers.

The importance of changing teacher attitudes to gifted students through training in the field was clearly demonstrated by Gross's (1994) study. Gross reported strong positive shifts in the attitudes of inservice teachers, undertaking a course in gifted education, toward gifted children. Similar conclusions linking teacher training and positive teacher attitudes were drawn by Wellisch (1997) and Whitton (1997).

While it may be possible to extrapolate some of the desirable qualities of teachers of gifted students from these studies, a more complete picture may be gained by exploring the attitudes of gifted students to their teachers. In an exploratory study, Vialle (1998) questioned primary school students (Years 5 and 6) enrolled in a gifted program. In semi-structured interviews, the students were asked to describe the qualities that make a good teacher. The findings from these interviews clearly demonstrated that personal qualities were as highly regarded as academic qualities, a finding that is reminiscent of the study conducted by Abel and Karnes (1994). The students in Vialle's study rated understanding and helpfulness as the key qualities in their ideal teacher. Although their teachers needed to be smart according to 15% of the students, the ability to facilitate their learning through setting challenging tasks was described as a key factor by a large majority of the sample. A sense of humor, creativity and curiosity were also qualities in their teachers that were highly valued by the students. Finally, the students required their teachers to make the work interesting and to be well organized.

In New South Wales, Australia, academically selective schools were established to provide an appropriate learning environment for high school students of above-average ability. The students gain entry by undertaking a standardized entrance test, similar to an IQ test. There are currently 19 such schools in the state among a total of 391 government high schools. While students are required to qualify to attend a selective school, there has been no compulsion for teachers in these schools to have any training whatsoever in gifted education. As a result, it is not uncommon for teachers with little insights into the specific needs of gifted students to be responsible for their education. Given that the teacher is one of the most important elements in an effective education for all students (Ramsey, 2000; Renzulli, 1968), the question arises as to how students in these selective schools regard the quality of their teachers.

This project aimed, therefore, to identify the qualities of good teachers from the perspective of students at a selective high school. The students were asked to identify qualities related to their teachers' academic abilities, personalities, and teaching styles/approaches. This initial phase of the project was designed to form a baseline position on which future research would be built. The ultimate aim of the research is to understand what qualities and behaviors are needed for effective teachers of gifted students and whether gifted students differ from mainstream students in their preferences.

A total of 387 students from Years 7, 9 and 11 participated in the study.

The PICS is a forced-choice, 36-item questionnaire that seeks to identify whether the academic or personality characteristics of teachers are more important to the students. Each item requires the students to select either a personal-social attribute or a cognitive-intellectual attribute. An example is:

Krumboltz and Farquhar (1957) reported a test-retest reliability coefficient of .88 for the PICS and of .90 when the Hoyt's Analysis of variance technique was utilised. Validity was established through correlations with established measures of study habits and attitudes.

Three open-ended questions were added to the PICS to gather additional information that would augment the PICS results. In these questions, the students were asked to describe the qualities of good teachers, effective teachers and ineffective teachers respectively.

The complete breakdown of means and standard deviations for our study appears in table 2. We have considered the dimensions of gender and grade level to see if any differences exist among these groups. We would like to have included ability level as well but because of the anonymity of the survey were unable to do so.

One trend that may be observed from a comparison of the grade means is that as students progress through high school, they come to appreciate the intellectual characteristics of their teachers more. There was a statistically significant result between the Year 7 and Year 11 sample (t = 4.453, df = 256, p > .000). This is not really surprising given that Year 11 students are about to embark on their final high school examinations. Females generally have a higher preference for the personal-social characteristics than do the male respondents (see Figure 1). However, the only statistically significant differences for gender were within the Grade 9 sample (t = 1.966, df = 117, p > .05). This finding needs to be treated with some caution because the sample sizes were uneven because the Year 9 football team was absent when the survey was administered. Despite the patterns noted above, the means all still remain firmly within the personal-social end of the continuum.

Table 2

Means and Standard Deviations of Selective High School Students

The results of our preliminary survey with NSW selective high school students supported the findings of the Abel and Karnes (1994) research and Dorhout's (1983) study wherein students preferred the personal-social characteristics of their teachers to their intellectual-cognitive factors (see Table 3).

Table 3

A Comparison of Means and Standard Deviations Across Three Studies

A score of 0, 1 or 2 represents a high preference for personal-social attributes (n=66). Some of the typical responses of these students included:

Despite the fact that these students' comments emphasised personal and social attributes, there were several comments that also touched on the teacher's intellectual qualities. These references to intellectual qualities were usually combined with statements regarding personal and social qualities, thereby indicating the complexity of the dynamics involved in effective teaching. Overall, the notion of learning and "covering the curriculum" were important to these students. Some interesting comments included:

Some of the recurring ideas related to the qualities of an ineffective teacher were: boring, too strict (or too lax), criticising or ridiculing students, expecting too much and giving too much homework, shouting, disorganised, not interested in their students.

A score of 34 to 36 represents a high preference for intellectual-cognitive attributes. Only four students scored at this end of the continuum. The most insightful comment to me was from a Year 11 male who had scrawled on the side of the survey, "I could be in physics now happily learning the wonders of magnetism. Why am I doing this?" Other comments included the following:

In responding to the question about ineffective teachers, these students all agreed that teachers who were too friendly encouraged their students to slacken off.

Our preliminary findings reinforce the need for teachers to be adequately prepared for teaching gifted students. We would suggest that the training of gifted teachers needs to be mindful not only of the characteristics of gifted students but also of the complex mix of intellectual skills and knowledge of appropriate teaching strategies that teachers of gifted students require. Further, the selection of teachers for gifted students should be cognisant of the need for such teachers to have extensive discipline knowledge but, above all, an enthusiasm for the subjects-and students-they teach.

Bernal, E. M. (1994). Finding and cultivating minority gifted/talented students. A paper presented at the National Conference on Alternative Teacher Certification. Washington, DC.

Bishop, W. E. (1980) Successful teachers of the gifted. In Renzulli, J. S. and Stoddard, E. P. (Eds), Under One Cover: Gifted and Talented Education in Perspective (pp. 152-160). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Burg, B. (1988). Programs for gifted children in Israel. Gifted Education International, 5 (2), 110-113.

Davalos, R. & Griffin, G. (1999). The impact of teachers' individualized practices on gifted students in rural, heterogeneous classrooms. Roeper Review, 21 (4), 308-314.

Dorhout, A. (1983) Student and teacher perceptions of preferred teacher behaviors among the academically gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27 (3), 122-125.

Emerick, L. J. (1992). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students' perceptions of factors that reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36 (3), 140-146.

Feldhusen, J. F. (1991, Spetember/October). Full-time classes for gifted youth. The Gifted Child Today, 10-13.

Lewis, J. F. (1982 May/June). Bulldozers or chairs? Gifted students describe their ideal teacher. The Gifted Child Today, 16-19.

Goertz, M. J. & Phemister, L. (1994). The new challenge: A relevant program for the disadvantaged gifted. In D. Montgomery (Ed.), Rural partnerships: Working together. Proceedings of the Annual National Conference of the American Council on Rural Special Education, (pp. 205-209). Austin, TX: ACRES.

Gross, M.U.M. (1994) Changing teacher attitudes to gifted students through inservice training. Gifted and Talented International, 9 (1), 15-21.

Hansen, J. B. & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994) Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38 (3), 115-121.

Krumboltz, J. & Farquhar, W. (1957) The effect of three teaching methods on achievement and motivational outcomes in a how-to-study course. Psychological Monographs, 71 (14), 1-26.

Maddux, C. D., Samples-Lachmann, I. & Cummings, R. E. (1985) Preferences of gifted students for selected teacher characteristics. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29 (4), 160-163.

McKinnon, A. L. (1998) Teachers' responses to giftedness in early childhood. Unpublished Honours thesis, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.

Milgram, R. M. (1979). Perception of teacher behavior in gifted and nongifted children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71 (1), 125-128.

Nelson, K. C. & Prindle, N. (1992). Gifted teacher competencies: Ratings by rural principals and teachers compared. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15 (4), 357-369.

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

Renzulli, J. S. (1980). Will the gifted child movement be alive and well in 1990? Gifted Child Quarterly, 24 (2), 3-9.

Tannenbaum, A. (1962). Adolescent attitudes toward academic brilliance. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Vialle, W. (1998). Unpublished raw data.

Wellisch, M. (1997). A pilot study: Teachers' views on the concept of giftedness in the early childhood setting. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 22 (2), 22-28.

Whitton, D. (1997). Regular classroom practices with gifted students in grades 3 and 4 in New South Wales, Australia. Gifted Education International, 12 (1), 34-38.

Whitlock, M. S. & DuCette, J. P. (1989). Outstanding and average teachers of the gifted: A comparative study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33 (1), 15-21.