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