Is planning related to dynamic testing outcomes? Investigating the potential for learning of gifted and average-ability children

This study investigated the potential of dynamic testing of geometric analogical reasoning in differentiating between the potential for learning of gifted and average-ability children (aged 9–10 years old). In doing so, it was analysed whether planning, a higher-order executive function, was related to outcomes of the dynamic test, and to instructional needs during training. Employing a pretest-training-post-test control group design, participants were split into four subgroups: gifted dynamic testing (n = 24), gifted control (n = 26), average-ability dynamic testing (n = 48) and average-ability control (n = 50). The results revealed that children who were dynamically tested progressed more in accuracy from pre-test to post-test than their peers who received practice opportunities only. Gifted children outperformed their average-ability peers in accuracy, but showed similar levels of improvement after training or practice only. Moreover, gifted children showed they needed fewer prompts during training than their average-ability peers. Planning was found to be related only to pre-test accuracy, and the number of prompts needed at the first training session, but not to post-test accuracy or the number of prompts needed at the second training session. In the discussion, educational implications of the findings were discussed. •Dynamic testing provides information on children's potential for learning.•Gifted children outperform their average-ability peers in analogical reasoning scores.•They show similar levels of improvement after training as average-ability children.•Planning is only related to analogical reasoning before practice or training.•Planning is related to instructions only in the initial phases of training.