Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site hlexa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!ihnp4!hlexa!pcl
From: pcl@hlexa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.kids
Subject: Re: "Talented and Gifted" program
Message-ID: <1097@hlexa.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Jan-84 01:49:15 EST
Article-I.D.: hlexa.1097
Posted: Mon Jan 30 01:49:15 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 1-Feb-84 01:34:20 EST
References: <869@ihuxr.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Short Hills, NJ
Lines: 89

To: ihuxr!lew

As you have already noted, educational efforts directed at the gifted are
full of some pretty questionable stuff, if not downright quackery.  I
think it is important to challenge what doesn't seem right to you (just
as with the rest of life), but don't generalize from the problems with
these specific efforts (implementation details) to the idea that special
consideration for the gifted is mis-guided.  It is crucial for both the
children's intellectual AND EMOTIONAL well-being that their giftedness
be addressed in some way.  The trick is finding the better ways.

I've done a bit of study re: psychology & education of the gifted,
although it mostly pre-dated the recent surge of interest (fad?) in the
topic.  I think most of this stuff reflects the state of education in
general, which is pretty poor.  Probably the most important/constructive
thing that you (as a parent) can do is think about the issue, talk to
other parents who are in the same situation, and check out some of the
literature (just to know what the teachers are working from, as much as
to get any guidance for yourself).  [As with many on the net, I also
lived through the experience of being a 'gifted child', which in my case
included skipping two grades in elementary school.  The reaction of
others to this fact sensitized me to a lot of issues related to
giftedness.]

The reason that I included 'emotional well-being' in my statement above
probably deserves some elaboration.  By hypothesis, gifted kids are
different from their age-peers.  By the very nature of this difference,
they are quite likely to be aware of it.  By the very nature of their
youth, however, they are not likely to be able to *understand* their
differentness without some proper guidance - some conceptual structure
within which to organize the day-to-day manifestations of their
differences, and to guide their adaptation to this situation of 'being
different'.  The question is not whether they will develop some
explanation - they will.  The questions instead are what explanation(s)
they develop, how consistent/rational the explanations are, and whether
it is something open to introspection and discussion (vs. silently
shaping their self-image).

Others (in the literature) have suggested, and my own observations (of
others) have confirmed, that the natural explanations gifted kids will
develop (without guidance) for their differences will be fundamentally
negative - after all, isn't that the paradigm of 'being different' in
our society?  (Pick up a book on 'exceptional children' some time, and
you'll find out that it's about mentally/emotionally/physically
*handicapped* kids!)  I believe this is particularly true when the
child's environment 'pretends' that the child is just like the others. 
The 'negative' explanation may be as explicit as thinking that there is
something 'wrong' with them that no-one will talk about.  It can also
appear as a (very) low self-image, due to the more-severe-than-typical
mis-match between what they understand and what they can (physically or
socially) *do*.

I could go on for a long time on this subject (there's a lot of
repressed rage in there), but I'll just give one example and then stop.
One of my very close friends (of a few years ago) wanted nothing more
than to be 'normal', and she suffered a deep frustration at her inability
to be so (although when she dulled her mind with drugs, she could come
close).  She knew she was different, but her environment had never
provided any constructive perspective from which to understand that
difference.  She had a very low self-esteem (exacerbated by cultural
attitudes about women, which I won't go into), that had wrecked her life
far more than just the failure to develop her intellectual abilities to
their capacity. 

Scene: 3rd or 4th grade classroom, learning about fractions.  She had
an image of 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ... What would it add up to?  Teacher -
you can't do things like that.  Shut up and quit causing trouble. 
What's a kid going to feel?  I'm sure lots of you have been through
experiences like this.  My point is not to bewail the insensitivity &
ignorance a kid is confronted with in episodes like this (although that
could make for another discussion), but to draw attention to the effect
*persistent* experiences like that will have on a kid who has no way of
understanding why these situations occur, and why they don't happen to
the other kids.

So.  What's my conclusion?  I guess just to reiterate the point with
which I opened - namely, that programs for the gifted may (and should)
be challenged on a number of grounds, but that it is imperative that
some systematic adjustment be made in a child's environment to reflect
their abilities.  (These adjustments come in continuous gradations, of
course, just as their abilities do).  Even more, the fact of a child's
giftedness must be made explicit to the child, so that THEY have a
constructive way of thinking about their own experiences.  (It needn't
be given any particular label, perhaps, but they have to be able to
think explicitly about the fact that they are different.)

	Paul Lustgarten
	AT&T Bell Laboratories, Short Hills, NJ
	ihnp4!hlexa!pcl