Comparison of educational and learning capitals in students with and without high intellectual ability from the Actiotope Model of Giftedness

Abstract

The ACTIOTOPE model of giftedness is based on the idea that giftedness is not an inherent trait, but rather the result of successful adaptations to environmental determinants. It introduces the concepts of educational and learning capital, which are fundamental resources that facilitate excellence. The Questionnaire on Educational and Learning Capital (QELC) provides an understanding of the resources that contribute to academic and professional success. It has been validated in several countries, demonstrating its cross-cultural applicability. For example, in Mexico, the results showed that the original factor structure presents an absolute fit and low levels of error. Research has shown that educational and learning capital are important predictors of academic performance, highlighting the importance of environmental and personal resources in fostering academic excellence.

The QELC consists of subscales that measure the five forms of educational capital (economic, cultural, social, infrastructural, and didactic) and the five forms of learning capital (organismic, actional, telic, episodic, and attentional). It is not only a research tool, but also a practical instrument for educators, helping to identify students who could benefit from additional resources or support, enabling educators to create personalized learning environments that foster excellence. The objective of this study was to compare the Educational and Learning Capitals of students with high intellectual ability and those without high intellectual ability in the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades of primary school and the first through third grades of secondary school. The study was descriptive and cross-sectional.  A total of 354 students participated, including those with high intellectual ability (N = 178) and those without high ability (N = 176), all from public schools.  A Student's t-test for independent samples was performed, and the effect size was calculated. The results indicate significant differences in educational and learning capital. In relation to the educational capital subscales, differences were found in the economic, cultural, social, infrastructure, and didactic subscales, where students with high ability obtained higher scores than students without high ability. The effect size is large in educational, economic, and infrastructure capital and medium for the rest of the educational capitals. On the other hand, with regard to Learning Capital, significant differences were found in this and in Organic, Actional, Episodic, and Attentional Capital, where students with high abilities obtained higher scores. A high effect size was observed in Organic Capital, and a medium effect size in Learning, Actional, Episodic, and Attention Capital. Only in Telic Capital were no differences observed. The findings confirm the relevance of the ACTIOTOPE Model as a guiding framework for the comprehensive care of gifted students, offering clear guidelines for coordinated intervention in the academic, social, and family spheres, avoiding fragmented approaches and favoring a systemic view of development.  In particular, the data highlight the need for dynamic interaction between both types of capital, which drives excellence and positive adaptation among students.