Teaching gifted students in the context of intellectual competitions: an integrative approach

Abstract

Traditional conceptualizations of linguistic giftedness have focused primarily on the psychometric measurement of cognitive abilities, often overlooking the real pedagogical formats in which this potential is actualized and developed. However, such an approach fails to fully capture the specific ways in which exceptional linguistic abilities manifest within the competitive contexts of intellectual competitions, where students are required to demonstrate not only a high level of language proficiency but also the capacity for creative, strategic, and reflective action. The aim of this paper is to develop an integrative model of linguistic giftedness in the context of academic olympiads, introducing the concept of “competitive agency” [or: competitive subjectivity] as a key factor in realizing linguistic potential and as a foundation for designing methodological solutions in olympiad preparation systems. The proposed multilevel model integrates cognitive-linguistic, communicative-pragmatic, and personality-motivational components and is interpreted as a framework for selecting content, types of olympiad tasks, and forms of organizing training activities. The central concept of “competitive agency” is examined as a specific form of agency emerging at the intersection of individual potential, competence development under competitive conditions, and institutional opportunities that define the format and assessment criteria. The study synthesizes Western approaches to language aptitude and academic giftedness with the Russian cultural-historical tradition and contemporary theories of giftedness, translating them into the domain of foreign language teaching methodology and student preparation for olympiads.

 

References

1. Boytsova O.Yu., Nosov D.M., Torop V.V. 2019. Spravedlivost’ neravenstva, ili Kto i kak pobezhdaet na olimpiade po obshchestvoznaniyu [The fairness of inequality, or who wins the social studies olympiad and how]. Educational Studies Moscow, no. 2, pp. 199–225. (In Russ.)

2. Vygotskii L.S. 2005. Psikhologiya razvitiya cheloveka [The psychology of human development]. Moscow: Smysl; Eksmo. (In Russ.)

3. Gorodetskaya L.A. 2019. Integrirovannye zadaniya po audirovaniyu i chteniyu na regional’nom i zaklyuchitel’nom etapakh Vserossiiskoi olimpiady shkol’nikov po angliiskomu yazyku [Integrated listening and reading tasks at regional and final stages of the All-Russian English olympiad for school students]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 1, pp. 51–61. (In Russ.)

4. Kasatkin P.I., Gulov A.P. 2025. Sostyazatel’naya kompetentsiya kak faktor lichnostnogo razvitiya obuchayushchikhsya [Competitive competence as a factor of students’ personal development]. The World of Science, Culture and Education, no. 1(110), pp. 217–221. (In Russ.)

5. Igna O.N. 2012. “Slagaemye” lingvisticheskoi odarennosti i sposobnostei k inostrannym yazykam [“Components” of linguistic giftedness and foreign language aptitude]. TSPU Bulletin, no. 10(125), pp. 109–113. (In Russ.)

6. Nurullina G.M. 2025. Formirovanie intellektual’no-tvorcheskogo potentsiala uchashchikhsya-bilingvov vo vneurochnoi deyatel’nosti (na primere olimpiady po russkomu yazyku) [Formation of the intellectual and creative potential of bilingual students in extracurricular activities (on the example of the Russian language olympiad)]. Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, no. 4(240), pp. 148–156. doi: 10.23951/1609-624X-2025-4-148-156 (In Russ.)

7. Passov E.I. 2017. Obrazovanie i metodika: ot sushchego k dolzhnomu [Education and methodology: from what is to what ought to be]. RUDN Journal of Russian and Foreign Languages Research and Teaching, no. 15(4), pp. 389–413. https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2264-2017-15-4-389-413 (In Russ.)

8. Perevertkina M.S., Zolotareva M.D. 2021. Strategii profil’noi differentsiatsii soderzhaniya obucheniya angliiskomu yazyku v starshei shkole [Strategies of profile differentiation of English language instruction content in upper secondary school]. Rhema, no. 4, pp. 141–159. https://doi.org/10.31862/2500-2953-2021-4-141-159 (In Russ.)

9. Spitsyna O.A., Edikhanova Yu.M. 2022. Vzaimosvyaz’ intellekta i pokazatelei rechevoi odarennosti v strukture rannei pedagogicheskoi odarennosti [The relationship between intelligence and indicators of speech giftedness in the structure of early pedagogical giftedness]. Kazan Pedagogical Journal, no. 5(154), pp. 172–177. https://doi.org/10.51379/KPJ.2022.156.6.021 (In Russ.)

10. Titova S.V. 2023. Ierarkhiya sovremennykh teorii, metodov i podkhodov k obucheniyu inostrannym yazykam [The hierarchy of modern theories, methods and approaches to foreign language teaching]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 85–102. https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU-2074-1588-19-26-4-6 (In Russ.)

11. Khot’kina M.A. 2022. Osobennosti kompleksnoi podgotovki uchashchikhsya 9–11 klassov k intellektual’nym sostyazaniyam v tsifrovoi srede [Features of comprehensive preparation of students in grades 9–11 for intellectual competitions in a digital environment]. Modern Pedagogical Education, no. 11, pp. 32–36. (In Russ.)

12. Biedroń A., Pawlak M. 2016. New conceptualizations of linguistic gifted ness. Language Teaching, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444815000439

13. Bronfenbrenner U. 1979. The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

14. Carroll J.B., Sapon S.M. 1959. Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT). New York: Psychological Corporation.

15. Gagne F. 2004. Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. High Ability Studies, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000314682

16. Lin Z.-L., Hsieh S.-K. 2023. Solving linguistic olympiad problems with tree-of-thought prompting. In Proceedings of the 35th Conference on Computational Linguistics and Speech Processing (ROCLING 2023), pp. 448–457.

17. Lo C.O., Porath M. 2017. Paradigm shifts in gifted education: An examination vis-a-vis its historical situatedness and pedagogical sensibilities. The Gifted Child Quarterly, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217722840

18. Neacșu V.A. 2024. Linguistics Olympiad: Training guide (Textbooks in Language Sciences 13). Berlin: Language Science Press. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10947862

19. Renzulli J.S. 1986. The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In Sternberg R.J., Davidson J.E. (eds.). Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 53–92.

20. Robinson P. 2005. Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, vol. 25, pp. 46–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036

21. Skehan P. 2002. Theorising and updating aptitude. In Robinson P. (ed.). Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 69–93. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.06ske

22. Sternberg R.J. 1999. The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 292–316. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.3.4.292

23. Vygotsky L.S. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

24. Wen Z., Biedroń A., Skehan P. 2017. Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Language Teaching, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000276