Abstract
The purpose of this article is to shed light on the state of gifted education in Lebanon and to describe the efforts underway to establish programs for gifted learners in the country. The article starts with a description of the Lebanese system of education followed by research conducted in Lebanon on an instrument called Discovering Intellectual Strength and Capabilities While Observing Varied Ethnic Responses (DISCOVER), developed at the University of Arizona for the purpose of identifying gifted students from diverse ethnic groups. Next, the results that showed that DISCOVER could be used effectively in Lebanon are presented. Finally, a model for the development of a comprehensive system of education for the gifted nationwide is proposed.
Lebanon is one of the smallest countries in the Middle East, with an area of 10,452 square kilometers, roughly the size of the state of Connecticut. Programs for the gifted are essentially nonexistent in the country. In Beirut, the capital, a few private schools that cater to students from high socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds offer some enrichment programs to high-achieving students. However, these programs are limited in content and scope and are not comparable with the firmly grounded programs available to gifted students in countries where education of the gifted is prevalent. Rather, these programs are mere attempts to nurture the talent and ability of students with high grade point averages through a variety of enhancement activities (Sarouphim, 2010, 2011).
The reason for this deficiency in gifted education in the country is due, to a large extent, to the lack of a fundamental understanding of the construct of giftedness. Also, the country lacks measures and assessment procedures for identification purposes. The only tools used to assess intelligence in Lebanon are tests imported from the West (mostly France and the United States) and translated into Arabic, the native language of the Lebanese. On occasion, these tests are administered in English or French, as most Lebanese students are fluent in at least one of these two foreign languages (Diab, 2006). Consequently, these measures yield a rough estimate of the students’ ability. Determining an individual’s intelligence based on these instruments constitutes a process loaded with dangerous consequences. For example, if a child is misdiagnosed with a learning disability based on these instruments, that child’s future might be compromised irreversibly. Hence, a great need exists for reliable and valid instruments for the identification of gifted Lebanese students, as well as for programs for gifted students grounded in well-established theories.
The purpose of this article is to shed light on research conducted on the Discovering Intellectual Strength and Capabilities While Observing Varied Ethnic Responses (DISCOVER; Maker, 1993) assessment in Lebanon with the aim of establishing a system for the education of the gifted in the country. A description of the Lebanese system of education is presented first, followed by research on DISCOVER assessment and its application in Lebanese schools. Finally, a model for the development of a comprehensive system of education for the gifted nationwide is proposed.
The Lebanese System of Education: An Overview
Schools in Lebanon follow a lock-step system, with grade levels extending from K–13. Thus, students in Lebanon finish high school at about 18 years of age. As such, the freshman year is completed at school, and students who pursue a college education start at the sophomore level and graduate with a bachelor’s degree in about 3 years. Upon successful completion of the ninth grade, students are given a choice of one of four possible tracks: mathematics, natural sciences, economics, and philosophy (Ayyash-Abdo, Bahous, & Nabhani, 2009). These tracks are fundamental and preset a student’s choice of a college major. Students who choose to follow the mathematics track at school typically will study engineering or mathematics in college. Similarly, students who choose the natural sciences track will study biology and medicine, and those in the economics track will most likely choose business as their major in college. Students in the philosophy track will end up selecting a major in either humanities or social sciences.
The first national Lebanese curriculum was established when Lebanon was still under the French mandate (1920–1943). It consisted of a duplicate of the French curriculum at the time, with the addition of four subject matters taught in Arabic: Arabic language, local history, geography, and Arabic philosophy. The first revision of that curriculum happened about four decades later in 1968, with a focus on learning a large body of information and little emphasis on “the development of analytical, evaluation, critical thinking and other necessary skills and competencies” (Frayha, 2003, p. 84). However, the latest curriculum revision in 1995 witnessed a major shift in emphasis from that of rote memorization to a focus on hands-on activities and the development of students’ higher order skills (Frayha, 2003). The objectives were to promote sound educational practices and increase students’ learning outcomes for the sake of rebuilding the country after 16 years of a brutal civil war (1975–1991). Specifically, the aims of the educational reform were to “strengthen national affiliation and social cohesion among students, and to provide the new generation with the basic knowledge, skills, and expertise, with emphasis on national upbringing and authentic Lebanese values, such as liberty, democracy, tolerance and rejection of violence” (National Center for Educational Research and Development [NCERD], 1995, p. 8).
All schools in Lebanon, public and private, follow a unified national curriculum mandated by the Ministry of Education. In the latest revision of this curriculum (NCERD, 1995), meeting the needs of and giving assistance to students with special needs were made mandatory. As stated, provisions include support services and remedial classes offered to students with learning disabilities but exclude mandated services of any sort to gifted students. In addition, Public Law 220, approved by the Lebanese Parliament in May 2000, has provided a legislative framework for “people with disabilities” (Wehbi, 2006, p. 323). Article 59 of the law guarantees the right to equal educational and learning opportunities for all people with disabilities. Also, Article 60 asserts that a disability should not restrict access to any educational institution or setting in Lebanon. However, no mention of the education of gifted students exists in the Lebanese law. Clearly, the scope of special education in Lebanon is limited to students with disabilities, as neither the Lebanese law nor the revised national curriculum mandates addressing the needs of gifted and talented students in Lebanese schools. In other words, the matter of educating gifted learners is neither encouraged nor discouraged in the Lebanese national curriculum, but rather simply ignored.
Lebanon has the highest literacy rates, the highest percentage of females in the workforce, and the best universities in the Arab world (Ayyash-Abdo et al., 2009). In such a thriving environment and at a time of national renewal, establishing a model for educating gifted learners in Lebanon seems timely and critical, as the country is in need of developing all potential talent in its citizens. As such, this article describes attempts to create programs for the education of the gifted in Lebanon, starting with research on a nontraditional identification procedure, DISCOVER, and ending with the proposal of a model for developing programs for gifted students nationwide.
The DISCOVER Assessment: Theory and Application
DISCOVER is grounded in Gardner’s (1983) theory of multiple intelligences (MI) and is based on Maker’s (1993) definition of giftedness: “the ability to solve the most complex problems in the most efficient, effective, or economical ways” (p. 71). DISCOVER was developed to identify gifted students from culturally diverse groups and was tested in many countries where English is not the native language. Since its inception at the University of Arizona (Maker, Nielson, & Rogers, 1994), DISCOVER has been administered to students in the United States as well as to thousands of other students from diverse populations in countries such as China, Taiwan, Australia, England, Lebanon, and Bahrain. The data collected have served as the basis for research on the reliability and validity of the instrument.
The DISCOVER assessment is performance-based and includes tasks that increase progressively in complexity and openness. Essentially, three activities are performed in class during the administration to assess spatial, mathematical, and oral linguistic intelligences. Logical-mathematical and written linguistic intelligences are measured a day or so following the classroom administration through paper-and-pencil tasks. Bodily kinesthetic and the personal intelligences are assessed by observing the behaviors of students throughout the group administration, which lasts about 2.5 hours.
In DISCOVER, the different intelligences are assessed by using separate activities across intelligences and age levels. Different tasks are designed for clusters of grade levels from kindergarten through Grade 12 (K–2, 3–5, 6–8, and 9–12). The version used for research in Lebanon is the one developed for elementary students (Grades 3–5).
Typically, the DISCOVER administration takes place in the classroom. Trained observers record students’ behaviors and products on standard sheets while the classroom teacher gives instructions in the children’s dominant language. Observers pay attention to the children’s problem-solving process as well as to their products. To avoid observer bias, observers rotate at the completion of each activity. Thus, each child is observed by at least two persons during the administration (Maker, 1993).
Following the administration, all observers meet to discuss the students’ strengths and complete a behavior checklist depicting each child’s abilities. Observers classify children’s strengths in each activity into four possible categories ranging from “no strength observed” to a “definite strength observed” using the ratings of Unknown, Maybe, Probably, and Definitely. The category Definitely corresponds to high ability or giftedness in that particular intelligence assessed by its corresponding activity. A child given a Definitely rating in at least two of the activities is identified as gifted.
Research on DISCOVER in Lebanon
The first step in conducting research on the use of DISCOVER in Lebanon was to create an Arabic version of the assessment. After the translation of the Grades 3 to 5 version of DISCOVER, a pilot study (Sarouphim, 2007) and a study on a larger scale (Sarouphim, 2009) were conducted. Both studies investigated the effectiveness of using DISCOVER in identifying gifted Lebanese elementary students in Grades 3 to 5. A description of these studies follows.
Study 1
Participants
The sample of this pilot study consisted of 49 students (25 boys and 24 girls) taken from two fifth-grade classes at a private school in Beirut, Lebanon. The participants were predominantly from middle SES backgrounds, as evidenced by their place of residence and parents’ occupation. The participants’ mean age was 10.2 years.
Procedure
All participants were given the Grades 3 to 5 version of the DISCOVER assessment. The researcher and two graduate students who administered the assessment were all trained in the use of DISCOVER. The administration took place over two consecutive days in the spring of 2006. Data were also collected through interviews with the classroom teachers, who answered questions on the participants’ academic performance and made the students’ grade records available to the researcher.
Instructions were given in Arabic, the native language of the participants. At first, instructions were read in English, as the teachers assured the researcher that all of the students were fluent in English; however, to be true to DISCOVER specifications and for validity purposes, the instructions were also repeated in Arabic.
As mentioned, data on the academic performance of participants were also collected through examining grade reports and interviewing the classroom teachers. These data served as a basis for comparing the students’ academic performance with their performance on the DISCOVER tasks.
Results
Quantitative and qualitative analyses were carried out on collected data. At first, the participants’ school grades were correlated with their corresponding DISCOVER ratings. Thus, the students’ school grades in art, geometry, math, reading comprehension, and composition writing were correlated with their DISCOVER ratings in activities that measure spatial artistic, spatial analytical, logical-mathematical, and oral and written linguistic intelligences, respectively.
As shown in Table 1, the results revealed mostly an alignment between the participants’ school grades and their DISCOVER ratings. The highest correlation was found between the participants’ rating in linguistic intelligence and their composition writing grades (r = .861, p < .01), followed by the correlation between ratings in logical-mathematical intelligence and math achievement scores (r = .767, p < .01). The correlation between the students’ geometry grades and their ratings in the spatial analytical activity was also high and significant (r = .551, p < .05). The highest discrepancy was found between the participants’ grades in reading comprehension and their DISCOVER ratings on the oral linguistic activity (r = .235, p < .48, ns), followed by the correlation between students’ grades in art and their ratings in the artistic activity, which also was low and nonsignificant (r = .221, p > .51, ns). Data analysis of the transcribed interviews showed that the findings were also corroborated by the teachers who agreed with some but not all of the students’ DISCOVER ratings. As the English teacher said,
The DISCOVER ratings given to students reflected pretty much the students’ ability in writing. Students who were given low ratings are those who have shown consistently a weakness in composition writing. Those who were given high ratings have mostly good grades in this subject-matter . . . So, yes, the DISCOVER observers seem to be more or less correct in their assessment. However, I did not agree with the ratings given to students in the oral linguistic intelligence. . . . Maybe the problem is comparing students’ performance in reading to their oral linguistic ability. The two don’t fit together.
Correlation Between Students’ DISCOVER Ratings and Their Corresponding School Grades.
Note. DISCOVER = Discovering Intellectual Strength and Capabilities While Observing Varied Ethnic Responses.
p < .05. **p < .01.
Another finding is that all of the participants who were given two Definitely ratings, and thus identified as gifted according to the criteria used in DISCOVER, had high grade point averages ranging between 3.7 and 4.0. No gender differences in identification were found. In all, 19% of the participants in the total sample were identified (see Table 2).
Gifted Participants by Gender.
Study 2
Participants
The sample consisted of 248 students (121 boys and 127 girls) taken from Grades 3 to 5 at two private schools in Beirut, Lebanon. The participants were predominantly from middle SES backgrounds, as evidenced by their place of residence and their parents’ occupation. The participants’ mean age was 8.1 years in third grade (n = 86, 36 boys and 50 girls), 9.2 years in fourth grade (n = 77, 43 boys and 34 girls), and 10.2 years in fifth grade (n = 85, 42 boys and 43 girls). All students spoke English as well as Arabic fluently.
Procedure
All participants were given the Grades 3 to 5 version of the DISCOVER assessment followed by the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM). The administration of both tests took place in the students’ classrooms for two consecutive days. Interviews with the homeroom teachers and with the parents who nominated their children were conducted following the administration of the two instruments. Interviews took place after school hours and were tape-recorded with the permission of the interviewees. The criteria for identification were set according to the standards specified by the developers of DISCOVER; that is, participants needed to receive Definitely ratings in at least two of the assessment’s activities.
Results
Concurrent validity
The students’ ratings in each of the DISCOVER activities were correlated with their RSPM scores. As shown in Table 3, the highest correlation was found between the students’ ratings in the spatial analytical activity and their RSPM scores (r = .776, p < .01), followed by the correlation between their ratings in the spatial artistic activity and their RSPM scores (r = .547, p < .01). The lowest correlations were between the students’ RSPM scores and their ratings in the linguistic activities, oral linguistic (r = .2, p = .11, ns) and written linguistic (r = .114, p = .23, ns).
Correlations Between Raven Scores and DISCOVER Ratings.
Note. DISCOVER = Discovering Intellectual Strength and Capabilities While Observing Varied Ethnic Responses.
p < .05. **p < .01.
Parents’ and teachers’ nominations
The results showed that students identified through the use of DISCOVER were all nominated by their parents, their teachers, or both. As one teacher said, “I knew all along that [these students] were gifted. I am glad to know that my hunch was validated by a formal assessment.” However, seven students nominated by parents and three by their teachers were not identified through the use of DISCOVER. Interviews with the parents who disagreed with their children’s scores showed that they believed strongly in their children’s high ability, especially spatial artistic ability, a belief that was not substantiated by their DISCOVER ratings.
The teachers’ interviews mostly corroborated the results; that is, teachers mostly agreed with DISCOVER’s findings in relation to the identified participants, except in the case of three students, all males in fourth grade, and all in one class. The teacher expressed her disappointment with the results and stated that all three non-identified students deserved to be given the label “gifted.” When asked to justify her comment, she said,
I have watched these students struggle with school work since the first day of class, but somehow I thought that the three of them were highly gifted in many different ways even though their grades were never outstanding. It’s just a feeling that I had, based on their good behavior and great effort. I still believe that their abilities will be “discovered” one day, even if DISCOVER did not discover that!
Alignment of students’ grades with their DISCOVER ratings
All identified students had high grade point averages, ranging between 3.8 and 4.0, indicating that their DISCOVER ratings were aligned with their classroom performance. Interviews with the teachers revealed that the identified students had been getting high grades throughout the school year and accordingly, “they deserved to be given the label gifted.”
Gender differences in identification
A total of 36 children, or 14.5% of the sample (19 boys and 17 girls), were identified through DISCOVER. Although the boys’ DISCOVER ratings were generally slightly higher than those of the girls (see Table 4), the results showed no significant gender differences in students’ ratings across grade levels and activities, with one exception found in the math ratings of fifth graders. The 2 × 3 MANOVA yielded nonsignificant results for gender by grade interaction, F(4, 232) = 1.62, p = .57, ns, with a negligible effect size (0.02). No significant main effect for grade was found either, F(3, 208) = 0.83, p = .67, ns, with a negligible effect size as well (0.13). However, a significant main effect for gender, F(4, 232) = 4.89, p = .03, was found, effect size = 0.36, which led to further univariate analysis. The ANOVA revealed that boys significantly outperformed girls in math in fifth grade, F(1, 122) = 6.54, p = .01, with a moderate effect size of 0.41.
Mean Ratings of Students in the DISCOVER Activities Across Grades.
Note. Unknown = 1. Maybe = 2. Probably = 3. Definitely = 4. DISCOVER = Discovering Intellectual Strength and Capabilities While Observing Varied Ethnic Responses.
p < .05.
Moreover, as shown in Table 5, chi-square tests did not reveal any significant gender differences in identification (i.e., no significant differences in the numbers of boys and girls who were given the Definitely rating in at least two of the DISCOVER activities) in all grade levels and across the entire sample (χ2 = 1.59, p = .11, ns), effect size = 0.07.
Chi-Square Tests of Significance for Gender by Gifted Participants.
Discussion
Research on the use of DISCOVER for identifying gifted learners in Lebanon was promising. The two studies yielded positive results, indicating that adopting the assessment for identifying gifted Lebanese students might be effective as an initial step for establishing programs for gifted learners nationwide. Thus, DISCOVER might become a leading instrument for the identification of gifted students in Lebanon, as suggested in the model below.
A Model for Establishing Gifted Education in Lebanon
Based on the promising results yielded by research on DISCOVER in Lebanon, the next step was to prepare the groundwork for establishing programs for gifted learners in the country through designing a model (Sarouphim, 2010). Figure 1 shows a proposed model that consists of three phases: preparation, implementation, and evaluation. Each phase includes steps that aim to gradually establish a solid foundation for gifted education in Lebanon.
Model for establishing a system of education for gifted learners in Lebanon.
Phase I: Preparation
This phase consists of preliminary work to ensure that the system is ready to be put into action.
Step 1: Raise community awareness
A common misconception of giftedness in Lebanon is the notion that highly intelligent individuals are those who excel in mathematics to the exclusion of other domains, such as high performance in languages or the arts. This misconception is well-ingrained in the minds of the Lebanese; therefore, one of the first tasks needed to start a program for the gifted in Lebanon is to help people develop an understanding of what constitutes giftedness, as well as an understanding of the needs and characteristics of gifted children.
Another popular misperception prevalent in the minds of the Lebanese is that highly able students will thrive in any environment, mostly without much assistance from teachers or parents (Sarouphim, 2007). This predominant belief is one of the obstacles that have hindered the introduction of programs for the gifted in the country. Basically, radical changes in people’s attitudes and understanding of the construct of giftedness are a must. In addition, administrators and teachers must believe in the value of nurturing the ability of gifted learners before they are able to convince others of the importance of providing services to gifted learners.
Awareness programs could start in a few schools—mostly private schools in the capital Beirut—followed by large-scale campaigns to spread this awareness nationwide. Booklets, public lectures, and letters to parents constitute possible venues for the awareness campaign. Also, for the campaign to succeed in Lebanon, the assistance of the Ministry of Education is vital, which leads to the next step in this first phase of establishing programs for gifted learners in Lebanon.
Step 2: Involve the Ministry of Education
In Lebanon, the Ministry of Education is the key authority on all major decisions concerning the school curriculum. Thus, if programs for the gifted are to gain momentum and expand nationwide, they must have the seal of approval of the Lebanese government. Therefore, all efforts in this regard have to be coordinated with the Ministry of Education.
Step 3: Develop teacher training programs
At present, teacher training programs in Lebanon focus mostly on mainstream education, with the exception of a few graduate programs available at some prestigious universities in Beirut. If teachers are to be involved in the process of identifying and educating gifted students, they need to be trained in understanding what constitutes giftedness and what strategies to adopt in the classroom for optimal learning. Programs that focus on training prospective teachers in providing services for students with special needs must be embedded within the teacher training curricula at universities in Lebanon.
Step 4: Adopt nontraditional definitions of giftedness and theories of intelligence
The modern conceptions of giftedness and theories of intelligence have shifted focus from conceptualizing high ability as a global construct to that of a more diversified and multidimensional paradigm. A program for gifted students in Lebanon must be embedded in these conceptualizations of intelligence and giftedness (e.g., Gardner, 1983; Maker, 1993; Renzulli, 1978). Of particular interest is the widening of the curriculum scope beyond the traditional mastery of the 3Rs (reading, writing, and arithmetic). Also, identification procedures have to be diversified and must examine a multitude of abilities. One has to be particularly diligent in establishing the program on a solid theoretical basis from the very beginning to increase its chances for continuity and success.
Phase II: Implementation
This phase consists of implementing the model in schools. Its aim is to put into operation a system for educating gifted learners in Lebanese schools.
Step 1: Choose identification procedures
The issue of identifying gifted students has been much debated in the literature (e.g., Borland, 2014; Maker, 1993; Sarouphim & Maker, 2010; Whiting & Ford, 2006). Traditionally, students identified as gifted were those who scored at or above the 97th percentile on either standardized achievement or intelligence tests (Ford, Harris, Tyson, & Trotman, 2002). However, as previously mentioned, these tests do not exist in Lebanon. With the recent paradigm shift in identification that calls for instruments other than standardized tests, different measures could be used in Lebanon, namely, alternative assessments. In addition, these relatively new measures match the nontraditional conceptions of giftedness and intelligence proposed in this model. Another benefit of these instruments is the effectiveness of their use with diverse groups and the ease of adapting them to the particular cultural setting in which they are administered (Whiting & Ford, 2006). In addition, students from lower income groups in Lebanon will have a higher chance of being identified through the use of performance-based assessments, as these instruments were found to be more effective with economically disadvantaged students (Ford et al., 2002).
The instrument advocated for use in this model is DISCOVER. However, identifying gifted Lebanese students should not be based solely on the use of DISCOVER; rather, this instrument could constitute the basis for further screening and assessment of the students’ strengths. Other data sources must be considered, too, such as parents’ and teachers’ nominations, as well as evidence of or signs of potential for high academic achievement in one or several areas, as demonstrated through portfolio assessment.
Step 2: Develop Curricula
Much research has been conducted on designing an appropriate curriculum for gifted students (Maker et al., 2006; Renzulli & Reis, 1985). Most models focus on three aspects: pace, breadth, and depth. The Lebanese model will aim to nurture the MIs of students by providing them with the appropriate classroom environment that will capitalize on their diversified strengths, talents, and creativity.
Typically, in developing programs for the gifted, an important consideration is that the curriculum has to match the identification measures (Whiting & Ford, 2006). Given that the main instrument proposed for identification is the DISCOVER assessment, it follows that the curriculum of choice to be adopted in Lebanese schools is the DISCOVER curriculum model (Maker et al., 2006). This model, embedded in Gardner’s (1983) MI theory, is based on a constructivist approach to teaching and learning. The model proposes teaching students through actively involving them in their own learning. Developing problem-solving skills, building new knowledge on prior experience, and acquiring higher order thinking skills are the main learning objectives of the DISCOVER curriculum. The model has been applied in several countries outside the United States, including China, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. Research in all these countries on the effectiveness of the DISCOVER curriculum has shown a significant increase in students’ academic success (Maker et al., 2006). Similar positive results are expected in Lebanon.
Step 3: Develop policies
A program for gifted students in Lebanon cannot survive without the formulation of policies relevant to the Lebanese setting. Policies on identification, placement, access, and evaluation have to be developed to meet the needs of able learners. One of the important policies to consider is that concerning nondiscriminatory assessment and placement to ensure that all the children of Lebanon of different gender, religion, and SES have an equal opportunity to access programs for the gifted. Typically, minorities and economically disadvantaged students have been underrepresented in programs for the gifted (Ford et al., 2002). In Lebanon, students at risk for being underrepresented are those from lower socioeconomic groups who attend public schools. Therefore, care must be taken to ensure that identification procedures and placement policies protect these students’ rights for egalitarian access to programs for the gifted.
Another policy of similar importance is that of making the availability of services for gifted learners compulsory in the Lebanese educational system. Just as services for students with disabilities have been mandated by the Ministry of Education in Lebanon (Wehbi, 2006), provisions for gifted students must be mandated as well (e.g., hiring of experienced staff and establishing resource rooms in all schools across the country).
One important consideration is that policies on the education of the gifted should be implemented on the national level with the cooperation of the Ministry of Education. Moreover, inspections of whether schools are abiding by these policies must be carried out on a regular basis.
Step 4: Involve the parents
Several studies have documented the advantage of parents’ involvement in the identification and placement of gifted children (Baldwin, 2005; Callahan, 2005). Parents’ involvement must exceed the mere granting of their permission to test or place their children to that of an active participation in the program. At first, Lebanese parents should be trained in how to recognize the signs of high ability in their children. Second, parents should be educated in how to nurture and develop their children’s abilities (e.g., games, activities, materials). Involved parents who believe in the value of the program could become important advocates in spreading awareness among the Lebanese population on the significance of gifted education in the country. Also, when these parents perceive the success of the program in meeting their children’s academic needs, they will be more willing to encourage their children and others to participate in such programs.
Phase III: Evaluation. This last phase aims to determine the success of the model
Step 1: Test the application
The main task in this action step is to assess the quality of the program. How well is it functioning? What are its strengths and weaknesses? The purpose is to investigate all aspects of the operation by examining students’ performance, interviewing teachers and parents on their satisfaction with the program, and assessing the added value of the program to the education of gifted students.
Step 2: Make necessary modifications
The feedback provided by students, teachers, administrators, and parents will serve as basis for revising the program. Identified strengths will be enhanced, and flaws will be fixed. To ensure the continuity of the program, assessing the outcomes must be an ongoing process. Models other than DISCOVER could be introduced at this point, but care must be taken to adapt their scope and content to the needs of students in the Lebanese educational setting.
Step 3: Conduct research
No discipline could survive without research. Given that the field of giftedness is new in Lebanon, studies on the effectiveness of the model are of great importance. At first, research must focus on the Lebanese public’s perceptions of the program to assess how well it was received by the stakeholders, namely, administrators, teachers, parents, and students. Next, research must focus on the effectiveness of the program in meeting its objectives. Then studies investigating program revision and quality enhancement must be conducted at a later stage.
In sum, the steps outlined in this model are neither exclusive nor definitive. When launched, modifications to the model will be tailored to emerging needs. At this time, the initial efforts must focus on finding a starting point and an amenable climate where education of the gifted can thrive in Lebanon. The strategy to adopt is along the following lines: Start small, evaluate constantly, and revise and expand according to needs. When the success of the model is established, other countries in the Middle East could adopt it and adapt it to their own unique and particular needs.
Current Status of Gifted Education in Lebanon
In an effort to investigate the current state of affairs on the education of gifted students in Lebanon, a study conducted at the Lebanese American University involving 75 schools nationwide has revealed that fewer than 1% of these schools have established a well-delineated mechanism for identifying and educating high-ability learners (Nabhani, Osta, & Sarouphim, 2013). However, an astonishing 98% of these schools expressed their desire to start such programs should they receive the needed assistance and personnel training. Moreover, some school officials stated that they would be willing to revise the school’s mission to reflect its dedication to educating gifted learners should they receive assistance in training teachers. This shift in attitudes suggests an increased awareness on the part of educators in the country concerning the importance of providing special services to high-ability students.
Conclusion
Educators in Lebanon have made a giant leap toward understanding the importance of developing programs for gifted learners. Based on the promising research results, DISCOVER could be a viable instrument to adopt for launching gifted education in Lebanon. Also, the model proposed in this article might prove to be feasible and beneficial for the country. In a country such as Lebanon, with a history troubled with repetitive wars, it is the civic responsibility of scholars and educators to recognize and nurture the talents of its gifted citizens who represent the untapped promise for a peaceful and prosperous future for Lebanon. As Renzulli (2012), in his discussion of gifted education for the 21st century, put it, “The anticipated social roles that people of high potential will play should be the main rationale for both supporting special programs and designing learning experiences that will prepare today’s students for responsible leadership roles in the future” (p. 158).
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The author received travel grants from the Lebanese American University to present the research in this article at international conferences.