Dr. Cindy Burnett:
How has gifted education evolved over the years? And what does the future look like in today’s rapidly changing world? In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Catherine Little from the University of Connecticut to explore the shifting landscape of gifted education and discuss how teachers can better nurture creativity, curiosity, and challenge their gifted students. Foreign.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
Doctor Catherine Little is a professor in giftedness, creativity and talent Development at the University of Connecticut. Her research interests include professional learning, differentiation of curriculum and instruction for advanced learners, and questioning practices. Recently, she has been project Director for Project Spark, Project LIFT, and Project Focus, which are Javitis funded initiatives focused on working with schools and teachers to recognize and respond to advanced academic potential in the elementary grades, particularly in students from underserved populations. Catherine is currently serving as the president of the Board of Directors of the national association for Gifted Education, which at the time of this interview, has its annual conference coming up in Pittsburgh on November 13th to 16th, 2025. Katherine, welcome to the show.

Dr. Catherine Little:
Thanks so much. It’s really nice to be here.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
So Catherine, Cindy and I had a great time at the NAGT conference last year. We had an opportunity to interview some incredible researchers and practitioners from the field. We really kind of set out to kind of better understand the field, how it’s evolved and also looking at this, this, this piece around underserved populations and how we can better identify students that represent those groups. But we just thought, given your position, if you could tell us a little about, you know, maybe the last 30 years of gifted education and we’re particularly interested to see how you think it is evolving and may continue to evolve in this changing landscape.

Dr. Catherine Little:
Okay, no small question. I will. Let me see what I can do with that. So gifted education does have a, a relatively long history, probably about 100 years that, you know, the field has been functioning and specifically see as the, as a national organization, we have just recently passed our 70th anniversary. The organization was formed in 1954. And so, you know, as a field, I think gifted education got a big spur of energy shortly after the formation of NAGC in the Sputnik era. Because we often look back to the Sputnik’s situation as one that really helped to prompt attention to talented learners, advanced learners providing support for advanced level learning following Sputnik. And you know, over the years, I think that gifted education has been an effort to recognize and respond to that some learners are at a place where the regular classroom curriculum is just not necessarily going to provide them with opportunities for learning and growth in the classroom.

Dr. Catherine Little:
We have studies that show that some learners Might begin a certain grade level already having mastered most of the content of that grade level. If we look at grade level standards and so recognizing that there are these students, and we know that, you know, students exist on a really wide continuum in lots and lots of respects, and it’s difficult for a classroom teacher to respond to the full range of everyone who’s in that classroom. At any grade level, in any subject area, there’s just going to be a big range. And so gifted education is really, at its core, an effort to try to provide supports for learners who need something that is, that is more advanced than their same age peers. That has had lots of different kinds of manifestations for a long time. The focus has, and this continues to a certain extent, an approach of using a pullout program in which we identify certain students and we take them out of the classroom for a day, a week, or an hour a week, or a couple of hours a week, something like that. And often in those programs, there’s been a tradition of focusing on when they go to a different space, focusing on critical and creative thinking, a lot of creative productivity opportunities, which is very relevant here, special projects, doing enrichment that is beyond the content that is covered in regular classrooms. And that has been approach that has long been used within the field.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And still in many cases, some of the challenges of that are that, first of all, that it doesn’t necessarily address the issue that the students are still sitting in regular classrooms through a lot of time, a lot of instructional time that is on stuff that they already know. Yes, they might get this change where they’re off doing something else, but it doesn’t really address that problem of how do we support their growth in the core content areas. The other challenge that sometimes comes up related to this is that the content that they might be covering in one of those spaces is not necessarily something that specifically responds to their assessed needs, Nor is it something that other kids shouldn’t also have access to. So when we talk about enrichment programming and the idea of giving all kids opportunities for learning about cool stuff, you know, and getting creative opportunities, the field has wrestled with different ways of how do we intersect with general education to make sure that all kids have opportunities to get enrichment kinds of programming, to get a chance to learn something unusual, something new, something that’s beyond the regular standards, and to engage with critical thinking, creative thinking, all of that. And so that, I think is one of the core issues at the center of the field is what do our services actually look like? Are our services something that’s different from the regular classroom in content entirely? Or is it that maybe our services instead focus on taking kids during math class to do advanced math, taking kids during reading class to do advanced reading? Or does programming look like a resource teacher comes into the classroom and works with kids? Along with the general education classroom teacher, there’s also programs that are self contained programs where students are identified for full time gifted programming. And a lot of school districts will have combinations of all of these things that I’ve been talking about. So I think that the evolution in terms of services over the last 30 years has been questioning sort of what is it that we are responding to? How do we demonstrate that our services are doing good things for kids most of the time, whichever of those things, you’ll hear that they enjoy them. But how are we really supporting long term learning and growth and takeaways.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And then the other big piece which you alluded to, Matt, is the, the identification and the underrepresentation issue. We have a long history of underrepresentation of certain groups in gifted education that minoritized populations, students from low income backgrounds, students who are multilingual learners, are less likely to be identified very often for gifted programs than their peers, might be more economically advantaged or might be from more non minoritized populations. White and Asian kids tend, you know, generally tend to be more represented than kids from other backgrounds. And again, there are some income differentials and language differentials in there. In addition to that, there are also kids who are twice exceptional students who are identified for special education services but also need gifted education services. And those students have tended to be underrepresented as well. So one of the big challenges of the field is always how do we find kids? How do we best find the ones who are in need of services? And this back and forth between who and the what, who are the kids? What are the services? Is really what the central set of questions in the field. That was kind of a long tirade, but I guess that’s kind of at the core.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And then again, how do we, what we know from all of that is that there is no one way to do either of these things. So. Okay, I’ll stop there.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
No, no, I loved it. And if I was to summarize, you know what the mission, especially because you’re referencing the Sputnik moment, is incredible. How many things can trace itself to Sputnik, but, but there is a little bit of that competitive edge. We as a country need to identify the best talent in, in order to keep moving forward. And I think everyone can get on board on that, even if you don’t necessarily want to go from an economic perspective. If we look at things like the cure for cancer, I think we can all recognize that we can benefit that. So we want to make sure that the students who perhaps have the best potential to obtain something, something as significant as that in their future, that they are identified and supported. So.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
But the flip side of it is at such a young age, from a parent perspective, it must be really difficult to say so. So what are you saying? That my kid’s not as good as this kid and therefore they, they shouldn’t get those services? And then we’ve also got the overachievement culture, which is that I’ve got to get my kid in this program. And, and then of course, we can think about the way we’re identifying them might means that we’re, we’re. We’re leaning or skewing a little bit towards particular domains. You would reference mathematics, for example. And so, you know, an incredibly talented pianist could be missed out. And I was wondering if you could try and connect the dots for me because when we’re talking about creativity from, From a, you know, so much of what we see with enrichment programs center around creativity. And this is where I think we bring in that wash and all students get access to this enrichment piece.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
Because if creativity, if we see it as particularly a young age, something that’s kind of domain general, it can be applicable for all students. It. I also understand the argument that can be unfair if only a select group of getting those. So just wondering if you can kind of like just unpack that a little bit and if you don’t mind, think about where you think progress is being made and where it may continue to be made in the future.

Dr. Catherine Little:
Sure, I’ll give it a try. Yeah, a lot of I, you know, I would echo a lot of what you said there and often just back to the, you know, the competitiveness and the saving the world kind of aspect. I think there often is that argument to be made of we have to identify and serve the best and brightest, so we make sure that they go on to do great things and that we don’t miss out on those great things. I actually think that that argument is a little tenuous. Sometimes it’s a little tricky because we don’t necessarily have evidence that it’s gifted programs that contribute to those great things later on. You know, maybe it is the school experience, maybe it isn’t. When you look at the history of really talented, eminent individuals who have done Amazing, groundbreaking things. A lot of times they don’t have the best things to say about school, you know, So I think that there’s always that question of how can we always be doing better.

Dr. Catherine Little:
I will say that in most cases, when you do talk about those folks who do the great, eminent, creative world, earth shaking accomplishments, they do usually refer back to someone who was a mentor, a teacher, a supporter, at least one someone, usually multiple someones. And that’s what I like to think of on that particular aspect is that there are things that as educators that we are doing and we can’t know which are the right things for which kids, but that educators do matter and the supports that educators provide really do matter. And that’s not just for earth shaking things, but for anyone. I think everyone can talk about a teacher that had an influence on them, but I think that the other, the other piece of it though is to bring it back to what’s our purpose in providing gifted education services. And a big piece of that in my mind is much more because every kid deserves the opportunity to be learning something and growing some way at school. That, that just should be part of the school experience. That’s what it’s supposed to be all about. And if you go to school and everything at school is stuff that you already know how to do and stuff that is not new, not new growth, not new learning for you, then that’s, that’s not fair in the same way says, you know, lots of other things.

Dr. Catherine Little:
I mean, the world is not fair, of course, but, but school should be about every kid having the chance to learn and grow. And that I think is an important aspect of gift education as well as that there are lots of kids that if school doesn’t provide them with the services that they need to learn and grow and with access to opportunities to develop their talents in a particular area that their families, their communities may have the resources to provide that for them outside of the school setting. For other kids, that’s not the case. Not because their families don’t want to, but they may just not have the resources available to support them. And so I think a big part of what we try to do and what we as a field I think are trying to think about and focus on is how do we give those opportunities for truly enriching learning experiences for kids who won’t necessarily be able to get that outside of the school setting. I think to speak to your point about the really talented pianists, for instance, you know, there are, there’s so many domains of talent in in the world, in the universe, and every culture identifies consciously or unconsciously, these are the things that we are going to prioritize as talent. This is where we’re going to invest our energies to develop talent. We do it really well in sports in this country, in certain sports, not in all sports, but in certain sports, we invest a lot of our energies into developing the most talented individuals in sports.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And that’s not a bad thing. I think that. But again, it’s just a demonstration of this idea. And I think that one of the things that’s really hard about education is that the public school system can’t do all of the domains. It’s too many. There’s not enough time, there’s not enough resources to do all of the domains. And so we as a society have kind of identified. These are the things that we want schools to do.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And then gifted education as a field is sort of this idea of in those areas that we’ve decided that we want schools to do, where we have kids who are performing above level, who need something more advanced, that’s where we’re going to invest our energies. So I don’t know if that directly addresses or ties all the dots together, but that’s kind of one of the things. And I think the reason that you see that gifted education programs are largely going to use math and reading scores as places to say, oh, here’s a kid who’s doing really well in math or reading, so we’re going to provide that advanced service in that area. And that’s because schools as a whole invest most of their time and energy in math and reading, at least, you know, in like, The K through 8 kind of period. So. So that, I think is. Is part of this whole thing. I want to speak to also you mentioned the thing about parents and having to, you know, think really early about, oh, what, what does this say about my kid? And I think that’s one of the challenges about the fact that gifted education is so often all about identification.

Dr. Catherine Little:
It’s. It’s where a lot of our research attention goes. It’s a lot of the time for gifted education personnel within a school district, the leadership, they have to invest a lot of their time in the identification process. And from a certain standpoint, you know, it has to be. We have to figure out who are we serving. But at the same time, I think that that takes some time away from services. And the more that we can find ways to be in partnership with general education to make sure that all kids are having access to enriching learning experiences where we can be a little bit more of reflecting some of what is happening with multi tiered systems of support and special education as well, of identifying a need and responding to a need rather than identifying a student. And that’s, I think, where a lot of effort is moving is identify the need, respond to the need.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And, you know, I just, I do want to emphasize again that those opportunities for critical and creative thinking are really, in my mind, critical for everyone. All kids should have those, those kinds of opportunities for exposure to lots of, lots of content, lots of different kinds of experiences to find their interests, to explore what they care about and, and to learn tools for interacting with that content and interacting with the world in ways that allow them to raise new questions, to explore new ideas, to understand different perspectives. And we can vary the content in ways that help to respond to the levels of what students are ready for without saying, you get this and you don’t.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
And I think that’s echoed a lot of the conversations, actually all of the conversations we’ve had with our gifted specialists. And I think we’ve had 12 conversations around gifted education and creativity. And every single person, including yourself, just said, you know, creativity belongs with everyone, not just with the gifted. And I think, I think that’s a really important point because sometimes when we talk with educators, they say, well, you know, creativity that’s with the gifted students, like, okay, but this creativity can be with all students. But I really want to go back, I want to go back to this point, identify the need, and then what was the second part of that?

Dr. Catherine Little:
And respond to the need.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
And respond to the need. So what happens when you don’t identify the need? So how can, how can teachers out there listening identify a need within a student? Because so often I remember when we talked with Aaron, Aaron F. Floyd last year, we actually talked with her at nagc and she was talking about how so often students are masking their giftedness, their high capabilities. And so how do we go about identifying the needs of students like this? And I know you’ve done a lot of research on this, so I’d love your opinion. How do we identify those needs of students that aren’t showing that there is a need?

Dr. Catherine Little:
It’s a great question and, you know, there’s certainly no easy answer. I’m going to, you know, share some ideas here, but it’s. I don’t want to suggest that this is a simple kind of a thing, because it’s not. But one of the things that I think a lot of recent research has Pointed toward is that one of the key aspects is making sure that all kids are having access to learning experiences that invite them to really show their potential. And what that means is there has to be some open endedness to the learning experience. There has to be some space that we’re not looking at a ceiling of answers, that it’s not just answered this question and move on, answer this question and move on, but rather taking the top off and just seeing how kids can respond to something that’s a little bit more open, but also that it needs to be something that invites all kids to participate. So that the common phrasing these days, the popular phrasing these days is low floor, high ceiling tasks. And the idea of something that everybody can access, everybody can do, it’s inviting them to talk about, to bring in personal experiences that they don’t have to have had specific background to be able to engage with a task.

Dr. Catherine Little:
But then there’s a lot of room to show within that task, a lot of levels of response, you know, what kinds of response can kids show? And that by doing that, we give them space to show things that we weren’t necessarily expecting them to see. Now combined with that, to make that work. Teachers have to know what to look for. They need to know what are the behaviors that characterize this kind of more advanced potential. For example, that the varied ways that kids might strategize to solve a problem, they might bring a different kind of a strategy. They might make connections that are unexpected or that are sort of above the level of what you would expect from a child of their age to make a connection or see a pattern that, you know, maybe not all kids are going to see. So one of the key aspects of this is the need for professional learning to help teachers understand what are the kinds of behaviors that I should be looking for if I am looking for this advanced potential? And then what do I do about it when I see it? What are some of the types of responses? What kinds of more advanced questions can I ask? What types of more advanced problems can I give? And we have a real problem with professional learning and gifted education. There is very little requirement across the country for, in teacher preparation programs for teachers to have any specific preparation in gifted education.

Dr. Catherine Little:
In many programs, it might be one, might be one class session, not one course, but one class session, an hour of an exceptionalities class or something like that that talks about that. And it may or may not be from someone who has expertise in gifted education. And you know, there’s a couple of places around the country that are trying out having a whole course in undergraduate programs, in teacher preparation programs on gifted education. And of course there are school districts that provide some professional learning opportunities for their teachers. But it’s not what I would call widespread. And that’s important. And so it means that it is, it’s compounded by the curriculum, may or may not provide kinds of low floor, high ceiling tasks and then teachers may or may not know what to look for. And so that’s one of the real efforts, I think of a lot of work going on right now.

Dr. Catherine Little:
That’s one of the things that NEGC is doing is we are working on an initiative to increase, heading towards some kind of state of universal educator preparation and gifted education. My colleague Sheila Gallagher, who’s now our past president, has been really working on this effort and so we’re really hoping that we can make some moves that way. But just to kind of circle back to the, to the original question, it’s really about giving space for students to respond, but it’s not about doing it just one time. And I want to emphasize that like we can’t go into a classroom one time, do a low floor, high ceiling task and say you’re in, you’re out. You know, that, that, that can’t be how it works. It has to be had to be a pattern and you know, should really be combined with other kinds of assessment. And you know, we know that, that the assessment practices that we use, there’s no perfect assessment, there’s no one way. But it’s a combination of information that can help us to see things.

Dr. Catherine Little:
A need for something different, for something more advanced.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
So Katherine, I have a big question for you and standing, you know you’re going to be going to the NEGC conference soon. As the President of NEGC, being in the field for 30 years with your wide area of expertise, as we look toward the future and we see everything that’s happening in the world. If you had a magic wand and could say to, we have a lot of young academics that are, that listen to our podcast, you could say, I hope in the next 20 years, 10 years that this could be achieved in gifted education. What. What would you like to see happen?

Dr. Catherine Little:
Wow, you guys don’t ask small questions, do you?

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
I.

Dr. Catherine Little:
My background, my favorite part of the work that I’ve had the chance to do in 30 years in gifted education is curriculum development work. Building resources for teachers to use in the classroom that invite opportunities for students to grow and develop their potential. Some of those resources are things that, that really, you know, probably are for students who are really ready for something much more advanced. And some of those resources, I think, can be used in general classroom settings with a wider range of students. And that, again, that low floor, high ceiling kind of idea. And we. The resources available for research work and gifted education are fairly limited, and we’re all competing for a very small pot of financial resources to support it. And a lot of those resources are not specifically targeted toward curriculum development work.

Dr. Catherine Little:
But that is what I would love to see, is for us to have more curriculum development work, more resources available for teachers that really just speak to learning opportunities for kids and that are tailored and differentiated in ways that they can, you know, that we have more things that can be used in settings with kids who clearly are way ahead, but also, again, that can be responsive to a wide range in a general education setting. And again, that there is teacher education support to make sure that teachers are ready to use those resources. So I just. I think that the curriculum is at the core of everything, and to be able to have more resources available is where I would love to see us go.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
So, building on that curriculum piece, how might teachers better use questioning as a method of instruction to support creativity?

Dr. Catherine Little:
Thanks for that, too. I have long been really interested in questioning practices and discourse practices in the classroom. And just looking at questioning is the most powerful tool that a teacher has. I think just being able to craft and share challenging questions with students, to model questions with students, to invite questions from students. And I think that teachers ask thousands of questions, you know, probably thousands a day, definitely hundreds a day. And really engaging in discussion in the classroom is the chance for everybody to be engaged and learn and grow. There’s a long history study of questioning in the classroom, and most of that study demonstrates that most classroom questioning takes a particular format that is referred to as the IRE format. There’s initiation, response, evaluation.

Dr. Catherine Little:
Teacher asks a question, student respond. Teacher says yes or no, and moves on. And what most of the discourse literature is emphasizing is more of a discourse environment where everybody’s kind of talking, where it’s not always coming back and forth to the teacher, where we’re supporting students in being responsive to one another directly and asking each other questions and being encouraging. You know, we call them talk moves in the classroom. And this is not all gifted education stuff. This is general education, everybody in education stuff. But engaging in real discussion in the classroom setting and wrestling with questions that are. That don’t have right answers, that are authentic, that have multiple answers.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And that’s where I think you know, we really invite a lot of creativity from students, both in terms of how they respond, but also what they ask. And modeling a space where we value asking questions and asking and wondering about stuff, you know, where we really value wonder. And we live in a time that there is no need for a teacher to tell you a fact because there’s too much access to facts without someone specifically telling you and making you memorize that fact. It’s more about what fact do I need to know right, right now to respond to this situation I’m in or this problem I have, or to this idea that I have? We found in one of our recent studies, we were asking teachers what were the moments in some lessons we had worked on with them that gave students seemed to make students struggle a bit. We were trying to get at this concept of productive struggle, of how do students engage in struggle in productive and growth ways. But just unpacking, what did teachers see as the struggle? We found pretty regularly that when they asked a question or gave a task that required students to generate ideas, that that was often a real struggle for students, that this idea of generating ideas, generating questions was something that students were like, wait, what are you asking me to do? And that suggests that they’re not getting enough of an opportunity to do that in the classroom if it’s something that they’re finding to be unusual and difficult and causing them a struggle. So I think that we have to think about how do our questions invite, rather than just task someone with coming up with an answer, rather they’re inviting, thinking, inviting wonder, inviting more questions is what I. And that, again, to go back to the curriculum point is we’ve got to write that in.

Dr. Catherine Little:
We’ve got to write that, write the curriculum in ways that that suggests to teachers that this is what, this is what we need to ask. This is how we need to ask things, to invite that conversation.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
And I just want to add, because this is music to my ears, you know, quite often we ask ourselves, what is the value of being in that classroom environment, as you said, given the access that we have to facts and information. And for the last three, four, five, six years, I primarily refer to myself as a social cultural theorist in the classroom, where it is all about engaging in dialogue. But what I do want to throw out there is that I’ve recognized as, particularly when I’m working with first year students, the need to teach them how to actively listen, the need to literally make eye contact, right, like so you can put them in those groups, which is fantastic, but there’s also a lot of effort on the teacher’s part, particularly at the very beginning of the year when you’re establishing routines, you’re establishing a culture to support them as they’re developing those skills, because not all students have the skills, I think in today’s world to have those conversations. And I, and I think that’s also critical and important before we bring up that, that start asking those really difficult questions as well. So I love that. I want to throw that out there. And I really appreciate you bringing it up.

Dr. Catherine Little:
I absolutely agree. You know, and I. There’s, there’s some really good work that’s been done on these ideas of talk moves or accountable talk. These are some of the phrases for what the. How the literature refers to them. And I have a, I have a colleague, a retired now colleague here at UConn who had done some, some math curriculum development work and really incorporated a strong emphasis on math discourse. And this is for little bitty kids and I, we were doing a project and I had first graders in a classroom. This was a summer math class for kids in, you know, had just finished first grade.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And I just remember we had an almost brand new teacher. This teacher had been working for one year and she had really taken to heart the workshop that we did for them about how to use these talk moves in the context of this curriculum. And I watched this teacher be extremely deliberate with these first graders about modeling and emphasizing these talk moves. And every single question would lead to where she would say, can someone add on to that so and so? Could you repeat what so and so said? So and so, do you agree or disagree and why? And really just, just over and over, almost ad nauseam to the point that you’re like, is it overdone? But it wasn’t. Because for these first graders, that’s what they needed for them to learn those habits and to be comfortable with doing those things. And so that always stands out to me as just a demonstration of exactly what you’re saying, that we have to not only have the space for discussion and have the questions for discussion, but help kids to understand how to do it. And what are some of the, some of the, you know, and there are ways to do it. Giving them sentence starters, giving them sample questions, having things on the board that say these are the practices that we use in a discussion.

Dr. Catherine Little:
Absolutely critical.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
Well, Katherine, it is about time to go, but we have really enjoyed this conversation. And I think, Matt, it brings together for me so many of the other conversations we’ve had, but all sort of brought together in a beautiful one episode. So if you like this episode, we hope that you will listen to our gifted and talented collection, which Katherine will be added to. But before we go, we wanted to ask you a question. We ask all of our guests, which is what is the most creative educational experience you’ve had, either formal or informal, and why? And can you tell us a few of the details about this experience?

Dr. Catherine Little:
Oh, my goodness. What is the most creative educational experience that I’ve had? I think I can remember a my 6th grade teacher who really put a really strong emphasis on supporting writing and supporting the development of writing. And, you know, she. I remember our first writing assignment that she gave us to do was something that she gave us, a model, which is a great thing for teachers to do. But I did that thing that a lot of kids do, that I wrote my first story just exactly like the model and didn’t feel the freedom to be able to expand that. And it’s coming up on Halloween here when we’re having this conversation. Now, I know it might be after by the time this comes out, but I remember that by the time we got into October, she had somehow done things that I was able to break out of that just being like the model mode. And I wrote a story for in October that was a Halloween scary story that I just was very, very proud of and that she really, really liked.

Dr. Catherine Little:
And it was not exactly like the model. And I think when I think about creative experiences, that that idea that I could break out of, that I didn’t have to be exactly like a model, but I could do something different and do something that was me. That was something that was really powerful for me. And I think as I continued to develop as a writer throughout middle and high school and learning how to shape my writing, I trace a lot of it back to that, to that support to find my own voice and not just be like the model. And so that I think has been really important in my life and hope that. That other kids have opportunities like that too.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
That was perfect, Katherine. Thank you so much. And we hope to see you at the upcoming conference. If you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want to dive deeper into topics around giftedness and creativity, visit our Gifted and Talented Education collections page@foldingcreativityineducation.com for more inspiring episodes, resources and insights. And don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast and sign up for our Extra Fuel newsletter to keep fluent. To keep fueling your creativity. Ah. If you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want a deep, deep if you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want to dive deeper into the topics around giftedness and creativity, visit our Gifted and Talented Education Collections page at Fueling Creativity in Education podcast for more inspiring episodes, resources and insights out.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
And don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast and sign up for our Extra Fuel newsletter to keep fueling your own creative teaching journey. My name’s Dr. Matthew Weller.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
And my name is Dr. Cindy Burnett. You know that’s not our website.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
Yeah. I was sitting there and I’m thinking, I shouldn’t have used chat for this, but I was in a rush, so you see, chat’s messed up there. All right, here we go. Sorry about that. If you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want to dive deeper into topics around giftedness and creativity, visit our Gifted and Talented Education Collections page at Fueling Creativity podcast for more inspiring episodes, resources and insights. And don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast and sign up for our Extra Fuel unit. Catherine, hold on. I’m.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
Catherine. I’m sorry. If you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want to dive deeper into topics around giftedness, if you’ve enjoyed this conversation and want to dive deeper into topics around giftedness and creativity, visit our Gifted and Talented Education Collections page at Fueling Creativity podcast. And don’t forget to subscribe to our Extra Fuel newsletter to keep fueling your own creative teaching journey. My name is Dr. Matthew Werwood.

Dr. Cindy Burnett:
And my name is Dr. Cindy Burnett. This episode was produced by Cindy Burnett and Matthew Warwood. Our podcast assistant is Ann Fernando, and our editor is Sheikh.

Dr. Matthew Warwood:
It.