Gifted and Talented - Essay Example

Running Head: Gifted and Talented Gifted and Talented [Institute’s Gifted and Talented Since the earliest times, much of the progress and achievements of the human civilizations have become possible primarily because of the contributions from the gifted individuals. In fact, as early as the 2200 BC, the Chinese civilizations had felt the need to identify and develop gifted children and groom to take up the government administration positions. Even the Roman and Greek civilizations spent considerable focus and energy towards exploring and using these gifted people. Nevertheless, it was Francis Galton, who is credited with using the term “gifted” for these individuals (Ford, et al, 1996, p. 75). The perception amongst educators reveals that they remain critical of the ability of nonverbal tests to assess intelligence because it appears as a test for nonverbal students (students that cannot converse well). It is crucial that they understand that nonverbal tests can also measure of highlight intelligence (Distin, 2006, p. 85). More importantly, these tests provide an opportunity to students to demonstrate their intelligence and ability without linking their ability to perform on the test to the influence of language, vocabulary, and academic exposure. Consider the example of musically, creatively, and spatially gifted students and other students who manifest a great deal of practical and creative intelligence (Ford, et al, 1996, p. 75). These students are less likely to demonstrate the same degree of command over English language, grammar, vocabulary, and presentation, but the same does not translate into their non-giftedness. In fact, it remains the responsibility of educational institutions to identify and accommodate these students as well (Phillipson & McCann, 2007, p. 52). Nevertheless, it is important here to note that the inability of the tools employed at measuring giftedness to incorporate racial, income and ethnic differences. Even the first and the longest running longitudinal study concerning giftedness individuals, conducted by Lewis Terman, failed to take into account cultural differences amongst diverse population. In fact, this also represents that despite all the claims of equality and equal opportunity, United States is still far from achieving the status of a colorblind society (Ford & Trotman, 2001, p. 237). Furthermore, Terman study on giftedness, which began in 1921, also highlights other critical factors about giftedness that it is not correlated with high achievements. Several studies and researches in the recent future have also confirmed this fact. Terman cherry picked individuals for his study of gifted individuals and then continued to take deep interest within their lives (Pfeiffer, 2008, p. 97). He played the roles of a counselor, mentor, teacher, and friend for these people and did not hesitate to pull strings and write letters of recommendations for this student. The prime reason being that he wanted to ensure that these gifted students could live up to their potential. Interestingly enough, one of the most crucial conclusions derived from this study is the fact that achievement and giftedness are not correlated despite repeated attempts by Terman to influence the results of this sample (Ford, et al, 1996, p. 75). This finding is crucial to study multiculturalism within gifted students because there are many institutions, which factor the achievements and accomplishments of students to measure and identify their giftedness. Quite understandably, giftedness can allow individuals to achieve more than the average student population; this causation is not a necessity (Phillipson & McCann, 2007, p. 52). In fact, the insistence of institutions on factoring achievements to measure giftedness has also played a critical role in excluding minority populations from gifted students. In most cases, these minority students belong from lower income class families, where they fail to gather the same level of resources to assist them in standing out of the crowd. In addition, they are likely to face personal problems at home, which may limit their productivity and progress at school (Pfeiffer, 2008, p. 97). Furthermore, they might also face several stereotypes, negative peer pressure and discrimination, which might make it troublesome for them to excel. Therefore, the point here is that educational institutions can no longer rely on achievement data to identify gifted students or the same would lead in continuous exclusion of minority students (Kitano, 1991, p. 15). Along with Terman, Leta Stetter Hollingworth is amongst the first most influential writers and researchers in the field of gifted children. Furthermore, she is first researcher to study children possessing the IQ of above 180. She did the same with a sample of eleven students and found a few traits and elements common within these individuals (Distin, 2006, p. 85). Contrary to the popular belief that their intelligence and ability would allow them to live their live at its fullest and enjoy the same, these people were not very content with their life, primarily because of two reasons. First, they felt that their adults were not able to understand them (Ford & Trotman, 2001, p. 237). Second, they felt that the educational institutions and teachers were not providing them with adequate educational or intellectual challenges. Important here to note is these are the results from a sample which did not take into any racial or ethnic differences and represented a classic white upper middle income class sample. Consider the difficulties faced by students coming from different ethnic and racial backgrounds. The point here is that it is responsibility of educational institutions to train the teachers and equip them with tools that would assist them at understanding the needs of students from a multicultural background (Pfeiffer, 2008, p. 97). In addition, this also translates into training these educators and teachers to incorporate a multicultural view into their educational style with a sensitive approach towards the needs and role models of minority populations. They should build partnerships with families from diverse backgrounds so that they could work towards the betterment of the educational system (Parke, 2003). Furthermore, in order to accommodate multicultural students into the umbrella of gifted students, the teachers and policymakers would have to be trained in taking a more broader and multidimensional view of intelligence. Rather than relying on the older models of giftedness, which rely heavily on IQ and other test scores, educators should understand and rely on Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Theory and Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory of Intelligence (Phillipson & McCann, 2007, p. 52). Gardner argues that he has come up with eight different dimension of intelligence, which is logical-mathematical, spatial, linguistic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalistic and bodily kinaesthetic. Important here to note is that this significantly broadens the dimension of intelligence and giftedness. No longer would a student who has performed well on a class test be the only gifted student but any other student who has an extra ordinary ability or talent for music, presentation, athleticism or other would also fall under the umbrella of giftedness (Ford & Trotman, 2001, p. 237). Therefore, it has become imperative for the federal, state, and local governments to ensure that their efforts aimed to identifying, grooming, and rewarding gifted children represent a sample, which is not titled towards any particular demographic, but is the true representative of the national population. The same does not warrant affirmative action, but it means that the measures, tools and techniques used by the authorities should understand the diverse backgrounds, needs, expectations and abilities of gifted students (Parke, 2003). There is ample evidence to suggest that when any institution comes up with a list of gifted students or individuals, which is highly titled towards a sample of white, middle, and upper middle-income class students, then it cannot be the true representation of gifted students within that region (Phillipson & McCann, 2007, p. 52). Many educational institutions use intelligence or achievement tests to classify gifted students. However, these tests are inherently favoring urban white middle class students, which ultimately leads to the conclusion that these tests needs to be more adaptive to the needs of a racially and culturally diverse student population (Ford & Trotman, 2001, p. 237). Furthermore, when gifted children do not get the same opportunities, educational and otherwise, to utilize and employ their talents for personal and societal betterment, towards the end of the day, it is the loss of the society and the nation that it is wasting its potential. Considering the competitiveness of the 21st century, it is imperative that the government employs ample resources at identifying these children, regardless of their background, and provide them with the best possible opportunity to excel and contribute to the development of the society (Ford, et al, 1996, p. 75). References Distin, K. 2006. Gifted children: A Guide for Parents and Professionals. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Ford, D. Y., & Trotman, M. F. 2001. Teachers of gifted students: Suggested multicultural characteristics and competencies. Roeper Review, Volume 23(4), pp. 235-239. Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C., & Harris III, J. J. 1996. Multicultural gifted education: A wakeup call to the profession. Roeper Review, 19(2), pp. 72-78. Kitano, M. K. 1991. A multicultural educational perspective on serving the culturally diverse gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, Volume 15(1), pp. 4-19. Parke, B. N. 2003. Discovering programs for talent development. Corwin Press. Pfeiffer, S. I. 2008. Handbook of giftedness in children: psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices. Springer. Phillipson, S. N., & McCann, M. 2007. Conceptions of giftedness: Sociocultural perspectives. Routledge. Read More