After reading Chapter 1, you should have begun to develop an understanding of the social and emotional needs of gifted and talented children. Information about overexcitabilities and resilience should have piqued your interests. For this blog posting, you will use the content from the textbook and the presentation in this video to develop new ideas.
Before watching this video, write down three questions you have for the author of the textbook about what you have read. During the video, think about how the author might respond to your questions. After watching, post your questions and then describe how you think the author might respond to your questions.
Before watching the video:
ReplyDelete1. Given the information we know and are learning about the psychological development of gifted children, how can we insure that we are accounting for these developmental abnormalities in identifying gifted students?
2. As standards, goals, and objectives are being developed for use in gifted classrooms, how can educators design, implement, and assess unit plans that account for asynchronous social and emotional development that is likely to be present in these students?
3. How can we develop programming for educators and parents that teaches about the social and emotional development of gifted children as a means to curtail the identification of some kids as behavior problems, learning disabled, or even autistic?
After watching the video:
1. By creating awareness of the multiple theories of psychological development of gifted children, we are helping to spread the message that gifted kids aren’t good at everything. In fact, they usually fall into the category of asynchronous in their areas of development. In the identification process, multiple ways of assessment are being used to insure maximum opportunity to create the environment where the gifted child will succeed and prove his or her ability. Through a combination of multiple methods of assessment as well as increased awareness in the educational community of the social and emotional needs of gifted students, more students are being identified as gifted based on a holistic approach to process. It is not perfect, but knowledge is power. It is up to the educators for the gifted to continue to be advocates for these students and the ability they are on the cusp of displaying.
2. I believe the author would start with simply by saying we must understand that this asynchronous development of the social and emotional components of gifted students is likely to exist. To challenge these students academically is to place them in situations where they are performing on par with students above their grade level. However, the expectations of the “well rounded” student should not be levied, yet. The material may be advanced for their age, but the manner in which they perceive it is still wrapped in the package of kid. Topics meant for teens and adults, undertaken by kids, lead to confusion and misunderstanding, many times because their life experiences have not allowed them to experience situations except through the world of academia. Similarly, the expectations of presentation (assessments) as well as social and emotional understanding of tangents likely to develop will not match the academic understanding these students have for a topic. To confuse matters more, each student is likely to be completely different. To render goals, objectives, and assessments effective, a plan should be devised with expectations that challenge the whole student to aid in not only his or her cognitive development, but also in his or her social and emotional development as well. This should include prescriptive plans that meet each student right where they are on the developmental continuum.
3. Educators in the field of gifted education must be advocates. As a population of students, they are often viewed as the students who understand everything and can do it all. Many times, they are even viewed as the students who need no help being successful. However, with an intellectual ability of an adult and the social and emotional skills of a K-12 student, gifted children can have quite the time understanding their place in the classroom, in their family, or even in life. Advocates reach out to the entire community (family, general education teachers, administration, and even the student’s peers) to create an understanding of the extraordinary ability and potential for these students as well as the dire consequences if their needs are not met. Developing programs for educators through advocacy for gifted students will spread this message of potential that is wrapped in not so neat and tidy packages.
Questions:
ReplyDelete1. How can educators and parents, who may or may not have a basic understanding of the differences between what Dabrowski describes as gifted excitability traits and what the DSM describes as pathology, be expected to make decisions about making proper accommodations for students with special needs? Is this not the job of a psychiatrist or psychologist? Is drawing hard and fast conclusions about students’ psychological needs not irresponsible when done outside the scope of one’s profession? For example, at what point does “excitability” equate to manic episodes and inability to function? If excitability is everything described by Dabrowski, a psychiatrist needs to be involved.
2. Should a certain number of hours be designated to accommodate curriculum designed around psychological theories about gifted students’ social and emotional development? How could this help them and how may it hurt them?
3. In a system based around core curriculum devised by people whose campaign involved the assertions of education administrators such as David Liben who said, “…in college and careers, no one cares how you feel” (Gewertz, 2012), it looks like an uphill battle in proposing the adoption of co-cognitive based course material. How might educators sell the idea that things like interpersonal ability, wisdom and emotional intelligence are at the core of success in most fields.
A combination of what the author may say and what I say :
ReplyDelete1. I don’t know what the author would say. That’s why I have the question. However, I can guess that he may echo the language of the DSM, which essentially says that traits, behaviors, or thoughts are only considered pathological and therefore requiring treatment if they cause distress or impose discernible challenges on a person’s ability to function for a designated period of time. This being the case, it’s hard to imagine a kid describing these feelings/behaviors and their implications as never having interfered with their happiness or productivity.
Hebert may also say that educating educators, parents and students about the relative “normalcy” of what may be occurring in the lives of gifted students may be comforting and provide a firm starting point upon which to move forward. This is certainly likely. However, it is also presumptuous and possibly irresponsible to suggest that people who read a few books or watched a seminar about gifted emotions are then professionally capable and culpable in what may be, for some, the ultimate and only chance at proper diagnosis. Hopefully he would suggest direct interaction with and periodic referral to school counselors and licensed psychologists/psychiatrists for proper assessments to screen for disorders that may require deeper intervention than the best intentions of educators and parents.
2. Gifted students often experience a sense of isolation due to conflicts that arise from their asynchronous development. Exposure to these ideas may likely help students feel that what they are experiencing is permissible and expected, given their special abilities and capacities. They may also be able to use this information to their advantage to gain self-awareness and hope. For example, Dabrowski’s theories can provide a sort of “map” along which these kids may track their own development. Young people, in particular, have a hard time imagining that circumstances will change-especially when they are acutely aware of complex international quagmires such as war and poverty. This can create a sense of hopelessness for the individual. However, Dabrowski’s theory shows them that although the world may seem unchanging or slow to progress, they will, almost certainly change their point of views the way they live within the world. When they can identify where they are developmentally and then create intrapersonal goals around that, hope arises that they will eventually be able to handle the pressures and sensitivities that seem overwhelming at the present time. Other theories, such as those of Sternberg or Gardner could provide several opportunities for students’ to cultivate a well-rounded grasp of their strengths and deficits.
ReplyDeleteSome possible negative outcomes that may arise from a young mind being bombarded with psychological theories supposedly “about them” may stem from the natural human tendency to classify and self-diagnose. These reactions may be stronger in youth with growing brains and heightened emotional impressionability. Of course, we want gifted kids to feel that their differences may be assets and to have positive self-images, however we must be aware of the risks. Focusing too much on what makes people different than the majority may create a sense of stigmatization or self-fulfilling prophecies that encourage behaviors that may have otherwise not occurred.
Perhaps the key is balance or in giving kids options in whether they want to participate in this type of curriculum. Certainly instruction, in any case, should emphasize the difference between individuals within a designated group and make clear that these theories are often based upon data gathered from sample populations. There are no crystal clear answers in the relatively “new” science of modern psychology (beginning with Wundt in 1879). Understanding of the brain is still in its nascent stages as it is a highly complex organ/muscle/biological computer that varies vastly from person to person. The way that the brain interacts with the rest of the body’s mechanisms to produce individual behaviors and emotions is yet to be fully understood. So, if students are totally aware that these ideas should be viewed as suggestions rather than hard facts that define them or absolutely reflect their inner states, they may be better equipped to handle such a possibly personally invasive discussion.
3. Teachers today are consumed with teaching the “bottom line” content that serves the ultimate purpose of preparation for standardized testing on core curriculum. This being the case, we can already assume that students’ cognitive needs are being met in the regular classroom. However, the role of gifted teachers in gifted programs is, by definition, divergent from the regular program. Gifted kids are moving through the standard curriculum faster and more efficiently than their peers. This equates to more time for varying forms of enrichment. The high levels of resilience, excitability and sense of justice in gifted students has been documented and scientifically demonstrated. So, these students are primed and in a position to receive guidance beyond the scope of core and fact recitation. If these kids are to be truly expanded in their creative and productive capacities to a level that will insure their paths to eminence, we must expose them to a curriculum that includes modeling and developing wisdom, social capital, and emotional intelligence. Without these factors, these students may have heads loaded with facts, but no way to share them or to incite the changes they desire to see.
ReplyDelete*Catherine Gewertz, “Teachers Reflect Standards in Basals.” Education Week (May 9, 2012). http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/.
3. Teachers today are consumed with teaching the “bottom line” content that serves the ultimate purpose of preparation for standardized testing on core curriculum. This being the case, we can already assume that students’ cognitive needs are being met in the regular classroom. However, the role of gifted teachers in gifted programs is, by definition, divergent from the regular program. Gifted kids are moving through the standard curriculum faster and more efficiently than their peers. This equates to more time for varying forms of enrichment. The high levels of resilience, excitability and sense of justice in gifted students has been documented and scientifically demonstrated. So, these students are primed and in a position to receive guidance beyond the scope of core and fact recitation. If these kids are to be truly expanded in their creative and productive capacities to a level that will insure their paths to eminence, we must expose them to a curriculum that includes modeling and developing wisdom, social capital, and emotional intelligence. Without these factors, these students may have heads loaded with facts, but no way to share them or to incite the changes they desire to see.
ReplyDelete*Catherine Gewertz, “Teachers Reflect Standards in Basals.” Education Week (May 9, 2012). http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/.