Underachievement in Gifted and Talented Children - Essay Example

UNDERACHIEVEMENT IN GIFTED AND TALENTED CHILDREN Introduction Talented and gifted children exhibit some levels of underachievement for varying reasons and in varying circumstances. As such, there is no panacea on how to successfully reverse underachievement in children whose talents and natural gifts may become manifest in diverse ways. Many potential children with special needs may experience underachievement as efforts to tackle these needs may concentrate more on remediation of hardships and less on development of areas of talent and strength. It is paramount for education scholars to differentiate between issues that relate to academic motivation and the special needs that may correlate to students’ challenges that may be inconspicuous to many classroom educators. In this regard, this paper aims at forming a critical analysis of the factors that underlie underachievement in talented students with a view of presenting some precise interventions to address the issue. Definition Underachievement can be defined as the demonstration of a severe discrepancy between the anticipated achievements or results and the actual achievements in talented or gifted children or students. In this regard, the expected results are measured by intellectual or cognitive ability evaluations or some standardized achievement test scores. On the other hand, the actual results are measured by teacher evaluations or class scores in the classroom set-up. In order for a child to be regarded as an underachiever, the difference between the projected and the observed accomplishment need not be the unswerving outcome of an identified learning infirmity. Therefore, talented underachievers often exhibit superior scores on assessments of expected achievement (Mc Coach, 2000: p. 157). Causes of Underachievement in Gifted Students Majority of the recent research studies that have investigated the characteristics of underachieving children have placed much focus on the clinical, qualitative, and single-subject research methodology. The studies, such as Sousa (2009), Cassady (2010), and Callahan and Davis (2012), have documented several causes of underachievement in gifted children. According to these studies, the most common factors associated with underachievement in talented children include the following; Low motivation and self-regulation Low academic self-perception Negative attitudes towards school Negative perceptions towards the educators Low goal valuation The determination on why some high potential students exhibit low levels of achievement is often challenging since underachievement is precipitated by varying reasons (Callahan, & Davis, 2012). Nevertheless, practitioners and scholars have to explore the causes of underachievement in order o come with succinct solutions. Firstly, it is important to understand that a particular underachievement scenario could obscure more critical cognitive, physical, or emotional problems. Secondly, it should be noted that the trend of underachievement could symbolize a discord between the student and the educational environment. More importantly, both parents and teachers need to understand that underachievement has a direct correlation to personal traits such as low self-efficacy, low motivation, and low self-regulation. For each of these grounds of under-success, it requires a specific intervention approach. Thus, educators must attempt to discern the reason for children behavior before resulting to mechanisms of reversing the trends of underachievement. It is noteworthy that the implications of a mismatch between the causes and the preferred solution approaches to underachievement can result in serious repercussions (Moon, 2004). Identifying and Serving Gifted Underachievers Some practitioners often attempt to assess an age-performance discrepancy when trying to identify underachieving children. As a result, they often fail to recognize a particular learner as a failure. This is especially when the outcome in as a minimum of a major area of content falls below the expected score level (Grobman, 2006). Even though this could be a precise way of identifying underachieving talented children from the general student pool, such discrepancy in age performance may only identify the severely underachieving talented students. Individual could presume the outcome of a talented learner to be beyond the score level in certain content. This is so in particularly subjects where the learner has been acknowledged as talented or gifted (Hishinuma, & Tadaki, 1996). Interventions It is plausible that the causes of underachievement in talented children have received substantial attention in many research studies. Even though conducting qualitative research and case studies has become the common method of approaching the issue. There is very few studies have tried to utilize quasi-experimental approaches in studying the efficacy of several interventions. It appears that the common interventions that aim at reversing underachievement are categorized into two major groups; instructional interventions and counseling interventions. The counseling methods often focus on changing the personal dynamics that precipitate underachievement in a talented child. In many counseling scenarios, the sole objective of the counselor is not to force the underachieving child into becoming successful. But rather to help the child in deciding whether success is a desirable goal (Lupart, & Pyryt, 1996). If so, the counselor aims at helping the child in reversing the counterproductive cognitions and habits that suppress potential achievement. When it comes to instructional interventions, the sessions often involve full-time or part-time special classrooms for talented underachievers. In these interventions, the educators are more concerned with the creation of a favorable environment for student achievement by introducing an environment that differs from the contemporary classroom organization. Away from the classroom set-up that utilizes institutional interventions, it is worth noting that children develop confidence in several ways. There are those who are confident of their skills are more likely to participate in a variety of activities. Several research studies have pointed out that the variation in learning style can hinder the progress of a talented child. For instance, creative children are likely to develop some level of underachievement in cases where their cognitive thinking style diverges from the convergent style provided by the school environment. In this regard, creative children require opportunities that offer them both the liberty to be creative and the support in organization and skill areas where they appear to be weaker. The perceptions that children have concerning their skills have considerable influence on the types of activities that they select, as well as the extent to which they challenge themselves in undertaking those activities. Furthermore, these perceptions influence the level of persistence that such children exhibit during their engagement in those activities. It is plausible then that academic self-concept entails a description and an assessment of a student’s perceived academic abilities (McCoach, & Siegle, 2003). To a great extent, it encompasses global perceptions or beliefs of self-worth that are associated with an individual’s perceived academic competence. The academic self-concept is a multidimensional subject that dwells on the formation of internal, as well as external comparisons. Students get to compare their performance with that of their peers both in and out of the classroom. The proponents of this intervention mechanism are of the view that when individuals compare favorably with their peers in a given domain, they have a higher likelihood of maintaining high self-concepts in that domain. Thus, educationally talented learners ought to uphold high educational self-concepts because their academic capabilities and potential relate favorably with that of their fellow apprentices. In this same regard, it is important to note that students who engage in extra-curricular activities and less likely to exhibit tendencies of under-achievement (Preckel, Holling, & Vock, 2006). In order to form the most precise solution to underachievement in gifted children. It is important to move beyond the correlation approaches of common characteristics of underachieving children and explore the linkages and flow of causality between the various characteristics. Another fundamental point to note is that even though the use of a perfect operational definition of talented underachievement clarifies the nature of the population under study.The same could also hinder the identification of certain types of potentially talented underachievers. Conclusion From a comparison of the two approaches outlined above, it is evident the best approach of addressing underachievement in talented children should incorporate both counseling interventions and institutional-based interventions. Since the factors that affect the development and manifestation of underachievement differ, no single intervention method can be effective for addressing the full range of underachieving talented children. Students are most likely to suppress their underachievement trends when they get stimulated in the classroom and then given the chance to pursue topics and activities that are of greatest interest to them. Therefore, drawing back the patterns of underachievement might take time, detailed time for underachiever’s prospectus, as well as the classroom circumstances. Essentially, even though many talented children are extremely bright and articulate, this does not always mean that the children are portraying their highest potential. There is a need for the development of an achievement-oriented approach that provide children with strategies of obtaining the critical skills that are pivotal for the realization of greater academic and personal success. By developing a consistent environment of achievement and offering the required level of support for all children, it will be possible to reverse underachievement in talented children. This is because such an environment will inculcate in students a sense of high motivation, high self-regulation, and high academic self-perception. This in turn will lead to a permanent reversal of underachievement tendencies and instead herald the desired performance both in and out of the learning environment. It is up to the educators and scholars to ensure that all talented children have unlimited access to a range of suitable opportunities that could take place within and outside the classroom set-up. It is these activities that provide children with opportunities to learn in settings that are different from the learning environment. Children with access to these opportunities often demonstrate increased levels of self-esteem and self- confidence. Furthermore, the opportunities inculcate increased desire for learning and personal satisfaction and, ultimately, better personal and academic achievement. References Callahan, C., & Davis, H 2012. Fundamentals of Gifted Education: Considering Multiple Perspectives. New York: Routledge. Cassady, J., (2010). Anxiety in Schools: The Causes, Consequences, and Solutions for Academic Anxieties. New York: Peter Lang Grobman, J 2006. Underachievement in exceptionally gifted adolescents and young adults: A psychiatrist’s view. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 198–210. Hishinuma, E., & Tadaki, S 1996. Addressing diversity of the gifted/at risk: Characteristics for identification. Gifted Child Today, 19(5), 20-50. Lupart, L., & Pyryt, L 1996. "Hidden gifted" students: Underachiever prevalence and profile. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20 (1), 36-52. McCoach, D, & Siegle, D 2003. Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 144–153. Moon, S 2004. Social/Emotional Issues, Underachievement, and Counseling of Gifted and Talented Students. New York: Corwin Press. Preckel, F., Holling, H., & Vock, M 2006. Academic underachievement: Relationship with cognitive motivation, achievement motivation, and conscientiousness. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 401–410. Sousa, D., (2009). How the Gifted Brain Learns. New York: Corwin Press Reis, S & McCoach, D 2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 153-170. Read More