Talent Identification and Development
1 – Vaeyens et al. (2008) – Talent identification and development programmes
in sport. Current models and future directions.
Overview of the current knowledge in the area of talent identification and development
programmes with special focus on problems associated with the identification of gifted
adolescents. There is a growing agreement that traditional cross-sectional talent
identification models are likely to exclude many, especially late maturing, promising
children from development programmes due to the dynamic and multidimensional
nature of sport talent. It is advocated that talent identification and development
programmes should be dynamic and interconnected taking into consideration maturity
status and the potential to develop rather than to exclude children at an early age.
Talent identification (TID): the process of recognizing current participants with the
potential to excel in a particular sport.
Talent development (TDE): providing the most appropriate learning environment to
realize this potential.
Problems with current designs
Cross-sectional TID models to predict success in adult competition by measuring the
current performance of adolescents on (a combination of) physiological, physical,
anthropometric or technical variables within age-specific groups.
- Researchers employing cross-sectional designs have based their work on the
assumption that the important characteristics of success in adult performance
can be extrapolated to identify talented youngsters. However, adolescents who
possess the required characteristics will not necessarily retain these attributes
throughout maturation.
-> maturation and training effects
Many of the qualities that distinguish top athletic performance in adults may not
be apparent until late adolescence, confounding the early selection of performers.
- The rate of maturation impacts upon performance characteristics. Since
chronological age and biological maturity rarely progress at the same rate,
children may be (dis)advantaged on performance tests due to their maturity
status, especially when comparing results to chronological age-specific norms.
Also in TDE programmes -> allocation to chronological age categories; can lead to
the misclassification of children in relation to their biological maturity. Relative
age effect.
- Dynamic nature of talent and its development. The use of immature or
inappropriate markers in a static conception of key variables for long-term talent
prediction is problematic because of the dynamic nature of sport performance and
its underlying determinants. Present in two ways:
o Inter-individual differences in growth, development and training cause an
unstable non-linear development of performance determinants., making
one-shot long-term predictions unreliable, particularly at (pre)pubertal
stages of development.
o Differences in practice history profiles, or even resistance to test stress,
question the applicability of performance criteria to identify youngsters
with potential.
Different performance indicators may characterize success at
different age groups.
, Shifts in task demands are evident in sports characterized by
frequent introductions of new trends or rule amendments like
judgment sports or with evolving game characteristics in team
sports.
- TID processes have usually focused on a limited range of variables. Issue:
excellence in a sport is not idiosyncratic to a standard set of skills or physical
attributes -> compensation phenomenon: deficiencies in one area of
performance may be compensated for by strengths in others. Individuals who
score low on one specific variable may be deselected from the talent pool and vice
versa. The specific positional requirements evident in some sports also dictate that
component skills are not equally distributed across all playing positions. Potential
crucial psychological variables are often overlooked within TID models.
Towards a clear and undisputed theoretical framework
Relative contribution of nature and nurture in the development of talent.
Clear distinction between constituent elements (giftedness) and an end product of
development (talent) via the differentiated model of giftedness and talent
(DMGT).
- Giftedness: possession and use of high levels of natural abilities (aptitudes) in at
least one of four ability domains, to a level that places a person among the top
10% of same-age peers.
- Talent: the superior mastery of systematically developed abilities (competencies)
in any field of human activity to a level that the individual belongs to the top 10%
of peers active in that field.
DMGT proposes four broad domains of natural abilities: intellectual, creative, socio-
affective and sensorimotor. These aptitudes, which are partly genetic, can be observed
more directly in young children because environmental inputs and systematic learning
may have only had a limited moderating influence. However, these gifts may still
1 – Vaeyens et al. (2008) – Talent identification and development programmes
in sport. Current models and future directions.
Overview of the current knowledge in the area of talent identification and development
programmes with special focus on problems associated with the identification of gifted
adolescents. There is a growing agreement that traditional cross-sectional talent
identification models are likely to exclude many, especially late maturing, promising
children from development programmes due to the dynamic and multidimensional
nature of sport talent. It is advocated that talent identification and development
programmes should be dynamic and interconnected taking into consideration maturity
status and the potential to develop rather than to exclude children at an early age.
Talent identification (TID): the process of recognizing current participants with the
potential to excel in a particular sport.
Talent development (TDE): providing the most appropriate learning environment to
realize this potential.
Problems with current designs
Cross-sectional TID models to predict success in adult competition by measuring the
current performance of adolescents on (a combination of) physiological, physical,
anthropometric or technical variables within age-specific groups.
- Researchers employing cross-sectional designs have based their work on the
assumption that the important characteristics of success in adult performance
can be extrapolated to identify talented youngsters. However, adolescents who
possess the required characteristics will not necessarily retain these attributes
throughout maturation.
-> maturation and training effects
Many of the qualities that distinguish top athletic performance in adults may not
be apparent until late adolescence, confounding the early selection of performers.
- The rate of maturation impacts upon performance characteristics. Since
chronological age and biological maturity rarely progress at the same rate,
children may be (dis)advantaged on performance tests due to their maturity
status, especially when comparing results to chronological age-specific norms.
Also in TDE programmes -> allocation to chronological age categories; can lead to
the misclassification of children in relation to their biological maturity. Relative
age effect.
- Dynamic nature of talent and its development. The use of immature or
inappropriate markers in a static conception of key variables for long-term talent
prediction is problematic because of the dynamic nature of sport performance and
its underlying determinants. Present in two ways:
o Inter-individual differences in growth, development and training cause an
unstable non-linear development of performance determinants., making
one-shot long-term predictions unreliable, particularly at (pre)pubertal
stages of development.
o Differences in practice history profiles, or even resistance to test stress,
question the applicability of performance criteria to identify youngsters
with potential.
Different performance indicators may characterize success at
different age groups.
, Shifts in task demands are evident in sports characterized by
frequent introductions of new trends or rule amendments like
judgment sports or with evolving game characteristics in team
sports.
- TID processes have usually focused on a limited range of variables. Issue:
excellence in a sport is not idiosyncratic to a standard set of skills or physical
attributes -> compensation phenomenon: deficiencies in one area of
performance may be compensated for by strengths in others. Individuals who
score low on one specific variable may be deselected from the talent pool and vice
versa. The specific positional requirements evident in some sports also dictate that
component skills are not equally distributed across all playing positions. Potential
crucial psychological variables are often overlooked within TID models.
Towards a clear and undisputed theoretical framework
Relative contribution of nature and nurture in the development of talent.
Clear distinction between constituent elements (giftedness) and an end product of
development (talent) via the differentiated model of giftedness and talent
(DMGT).
- Giftedness: possession and use of high levels of natural abilities (aptitudes) in at
least one of four ability domains, to a level that places a person among the top
10% of same-age peers.
- Talent: the superior mastery of systematically developed abilities (competencies)
in any field of human activity to a level that the individual belongs to the top 10%
of peers active in that field.
DMGT proposes four broad domains of natural abilities: intellectual, creative, socio-
affective and sensorimotor. These aptitudes, which are partly genetic, can be observed
more directly in young children because environmental inputs and systematic learning
may have only had a limited moderating influence. However, these gifts may still
