Gifted Education in Indonesia: Reframing Gifted Education through the Lens of Actiotope Model of Giftedness

Description

This study hypothesized that the fragmented structure of Indonesia’s gifted education system can be systematically understood through the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (AMG), which conceptualizes giftedness as a dynamic interaction between individuals and their learning environments. The research assumed that imbalances between educational capitals (economic, social, cultural, infrastructural, didactic) and learning capitals (actional, organismic, telic, attentional, episodic) constrain the development of gifted education in Indonesia. The dataset combines documentary and qualitative sources collected through a multi-method design. Primary data comprised semi-structured interviews with 20 participants, including policymakers, school principals, and university experts in special and gifted education. Secondary data consisted of 31 national policy documents and academic publications (2003–2024), such as the National Education System Act, Merdeka Belajar guidelines, UNESCO reports, and studies on Indonesian gifted education. Data were coded using NVivo 12 and analyzed according to the Education and Learning Capital Model (ELCM) (Ziegler & Baker, 2013). Reliability and criterion-related validity were satisfactory (Cronbach’s α = 0.87–0.91; CRV = 0.76–0.83). Ethical approval was granted by the Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia Ethics Committee (Protocol No. 342/UN40/F1.2/PP/2025). Findings indicate that Indonesia’s gifted education ecosystem is legally well-supported but structurally fragmented. Economic and infrastructural capitals remain underdeveloped—only about 3 % of the education budget supports talent programs—while social and cultural capitals are strong, driven by parental involvement and academic achievement norms. Learning capital analysis shows that gifted students possess high motivation and initiative (actional and telic capitals) but limited reflection, emotional resilience, and sustained attention due to exam-oriented practices. These patterns reveal a reliance on individual and community effort rather than systemic reinforcement. The results suggest that improving gifted education in Indonesia requires balancing external and internal learning resources: strengthening funding, teacher preparation, and infrastructure while cultivating reflective and self-regulated learners. The data can be used for comparative regional studies, to design evidence-based teacher training modules, and to integrate differentiated instruction into Merdeka Belajar reforms. In interpreting the dataset, researchers should view happiness, achievement, and talent development as products of ecological interaction rather than innate ability. Data Availability: The anonymized qualitative dataset and coded documents are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, in accordance with the journal’s share-upon-reasonable-request data policy.

Steps to reproduce

1. Define the Research Scope: Identify the focus of analysis — gifted education policies, practices, and systemic structures in Indonesia — and adopt the Actiotope Model of Giftedness (AMG) as the theoretical framework. 2. Data Collection: Conduct semi-structured interviews with key informants, including policymakers, principals, and university experts (N = 20). Collect official documents and publications (2003–2024) relevant to gifted education, national curricula (Merdeka Belajar), and national achievement programs. Ensure all documents are in Indonesian or English and published by verified institutional sources (MoECRT, UNESCO, Puspresnas, etc.). 3. Data Screening and Coding: Screen documents for relevance to talent development, inclusion, and educational excellence. Use a deductive coding scheme based on the Education and Learning Capital Model (ELCM) to classify data into 10 capitals (economic, social, cultural, infrastructural, didactic, and five learning capitals). Employ NVivo 12 software for coding and thematic clustering. 4. Data Analysis: Apply qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2014). Conduct intercoder reliability checks (target Cohen’s κ ≥ 0.80). Compare Indonesia’s capital structures with reference countries (UAE, Oman, Palestine, Sudan) for contextual benchmarking. 5. Interpretation: Synthesize findings to identify strengths and weaknesses of each capital. Interpret results through the AMG lens to map systemic enablers and constraints of gifted education in Indonesia. Validate thematic patterns with experts to ensure analytic rigor. 6. Ethical and Procedural Integrity: Obtain institutional ethical approval (Protocol No. 342/UN40/F1.2/PP/2025). Maintain participant anonymity and secure informed consent. Ensure transparency in reporting, consistent with COPE and AERA ethical standards.

Institutions

• Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

  Jawa Barat, Bandung

Categories

Licence