Extraído do site : http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10065.aspx
Roedell,
W.
Roeper Review Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 127-130 1984 This article by Wendy Roedell points out that although good social adjustment, emotional maturity, and healthy self-concepts are realized by many intellectually gifted children, this same group of children is uniquely vulnerable to a variety of adjustment difficulties. Problems of uneven development, perfectionism, adult expectations, intense sensitivity, self-definition, alienation, inappropriate environments and role conflict are explored. Roedell concludes that the degree of success at these adjustments depends to a great extent on environmental support.
This article
examines the unique vulnerabilities of children with extraordinarily advanced
intellectual skills, and highlights the differences between highly gifted and
moderately gifted children. Problems of uneven development, perfectionism,
adult expectations, intense sensitivity, self-definition, alienation,
inappropriate environments and role conflict are explored.
Wendy C. Roedell is a gifted education consultant for the
Northwest Gifted Education Center at Educational Service District No. 121 in
Seattle, Washington. Dr. Roedell is co-author of Gifted Young
Children (Teachers
College Press, 1980), and a Contributing Editor of this journal.
Good social adjustment, emotional maturity, and healthy self-concepts
characterize the experience of many intellectually gifted children. Numerous
studies have confirmed Terman's early finding that moderately gifted
individuals tend to do well in school and to achieve success in later life
(Gallagher, 1958; 1975; Hollingworth, 1942; Terman, 1925). Such life success
is not automatic for the gifted, however, and depends to a great extent on
environmental support. Even moderately gifted children are vulnerable to a
variety of adjustment difficulties. As the degree of intellectual advancement
increases, so does the child's risk of social maladjustment and unhappiness
(Hollingworth, 1942; Terman, 1925; Terman & Oden, 1947; Tannenbaum,
1983).
Children with unusually advanced intellectual development are
uniquely vulnerable. Moreover, studies throughout the country have begun to
document the fact that extraordinarily gifted children exist, at least in
some cities, in larger numbers than would be expected on the basis of the
normal curve. Studies at the University of Washington (Roedell, Jackson,
& Robinson, 1980; Robinson, 1980), at Johns Hopkins University in
Baltimore (Stanley, Keating, & Fox, 1974; Keating, 1976), and at the
University of Denver (Silverman, in preparation) have all identified
significant subpopulations of highly gifted children.
The definition of extraordinary precocity differs from study
to study. Some researchers cite IQs above 145 as indicating highly gifted
abilities, while others reserve the label for children whose IQs exceed 165
or even 180. Some define extraordinary giftedness in terms of scores on other
types of tests, such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, or in terms of high
level creative productivity. Whatever the definition, there is general
agreement that highly gifted children are more susceptible to some types of
developmental difficulties than are moderately gifted or average children.
Areas of vulnerability include uneven development, perfectionism, adult
expectations, intense sensitivity, self-definition, alienation, inappropriate
environments, and role conflicts.
Uneven
Development
As Leta Hollingworth (1942) commented, it is difficult to have the intelligence
of an adult and the emotions of a child in a childish body (p. 282). The gap between a child's
advanced intellectual capability and more age-appropriate social and physical
skills can lead to unrealistic expectations for performance. Young children
become frustrated when their limited physical capabilities prevent the
construction of the complex projects created in their extremely capable
imaginations. Adults, expecting social maturity to match high level
intellectual development, may label a highly articulate, logical child as a
behavior problem when he or she exhibits an age-appropriate tantrum.
Even more damage can
result when adults ignore a child's high level ability and focus instead of
weaknesses in areas of slower development. A child's giftedness may even go
unnoticed, eclipsed by behavior problems, physical weakness, or social
immaturity. Whitmore (1980) gives the example of Bobby, with an IQ of 153,
who spent a second year in the first grade as a result of his disruptive
behavior and his failure to complete daily classroom work. A teacher's
underestimate of a child's ability can trigger a rapid decline in
self-esteem. Pringle (1970) found, for example, that most of the 103 bright
children brought to a clinic because of general maladjustment had teachers
who underestimated their ability. The most frequent symptom presented by
these able
misfits was a lack of
confidence.
Perfectionism
Many gifted children exhibit an inner push toward perfection which drives them to set impossible goals for themselves. They use their extremely capable conceptual abilities to imagine ambitious and detailed products, and then direct their similarly well-developed critical thinking skills to the task of tearing down their own imperfect efforts to realize their ideal. As they learn to appreciate professional work in the arts and sciences, they set professional level standards for themselves, and become impatient with the skill development which must occur before they can achieve that proficiency. Years of hearing parents and teachers say that's wonderful! to projects that do not meet the child's own high standards leads to a distrust of feedback from those sources. A child who consistently receives an A without putting forth maximum effort ceases to value that A grade as a serious measure of performance.
This perfectionism has both positive and negative aspects. In
a positive form, perfectionism can provide the driving energy which leads to
great achievement. The meticulous attention to detail necessary for
scientific investigation, the commitment which pushes composers to keep
working until the music realizes the glorious sounds playing in the
imagination, and the persistence which keeps great artists at their easels
until their creation matches their conception all result from perfectionism.
Setting high standards is not in itself a bad thing. However, perfectionism coupled
with a punishing attitude towards one's own efforts can cripple the
imagination, kill the spirit, and so handicap performance that an individual
may never fulfill the promise of early talent.
The inner drive to be perfect leads many gifted children to
perceive themselves as failures even when external evidence indicates high
level success. It is in the child's reaction to this perceived failure that
the danger lies. A series of studies by Carol Dweck and her colleagues on the
differences between children who exhibit a sense of helplessness in the face
of failure and those who demonstrate a sense of mastery help elucidate the
question of why highly capable children might perceive themselves as
inadequate.
In several studies (Diener & Dweck, 1978; 1980; Dweck,
1975; Dweck & Repucci, 1973), Dweck found that helpless children
attribute their failures to stable factors, such as lack of ability, and
their successes to unstable factors, such as effort or luck. Mastery-oriented
children, on the other hand, attribute their successes to stable factors,
such as ability, and their failures to unstable factors, such as effort or
luck. When mastery-oriented children succeed, they interpret the success as
diagnostic of their underlying ability. When they fail, they tend to
concentrate on modifying their problem-solving strategies, rather than on
analyzing reasons for failure (Diener & Sweck, 1978).
Helpless children, on the other hand, interpret failure as
diagnostic of their perceived underlying lack of ability, and tend to give
up, rather than to try a different strategy. Such children do not perceive
success as evidence of high ability, but rather as the result of an easy
task, teacher kindness, or blind luck. When their perfectionism interacts
with a helpless orientation toward perceived failure, highly gifted children
may exhibit lowered self-concepts and ineffective approaches to
problem-solving. On the other hand, perfectionism coupled with a mastery
orientation can lead to a high level of creative productivity.
Offering specific
feedback on a gifted child's work, rather than global evaluations, can help
direct the child's attention toward strategies for improvement without regard
for failure or success. Feedback from professionals, obtained through
mentor programs or special workshops, can be particularly valuable in helping
a child understand the years of dedication required to become a creative
professional.
Adult
Expectations
The perfectionism of gifted children is frequently exaggerated by adults who constantly urge them to live up to their potential. Parents may overschedule their child with lessons and worthwhile activities, leaving no time to daydream or to play with ordinary toys. Teachers who observe the spark of high-level talent pile on extra work, and never seem satisfied. Children in a departmentalized secondary school can feel torn apart by teachers urging increased performance in each subject area, without regard to the student's own interests or the pressures being applied by other teachers. Work harder on your math, says one teacher. You have the ability to really push ahead. Work harder on your writing, says another teacher.You really have talent. Work harder on your social studies project, says a third teacher. You aren't even beginning to tap your real ability. A multitalented child may well have the ability to excel at high levels in every subject area, but realities of time and the dictates of the child's own interest make living up to your potential in every area an impossibility.
Intense
Sensitivity
The intense sensitivity and internal responsiveness characterizing many highly gifted individuals can intensify reactions to the ordinary problems of growing up (Silverman, 1983; Whitmore, 1980). By tuning in to a wide range of social cues during social interaction, a highly sensitive gifted child may perceive social rejection where it is not intended (Whitmore, 1980). Furthermore, sensitivity to society's injustice and hypocrisy leads many highly gifted children to feel despair and cynicism at very young ages.
Although heightened sensitivity to environmental and social
cues may be a normal response for gifted children, Silverman (1983) points
out that they may perceive their own intense inner experiences as evidence
that something is wrong with them. Other children may ridicule a gifted child
for reacting strongly to an apparently trivial incident, thereby increasing
the child's feeling of being odd. Like perfectionism, intense sensitivity can
have positive or negative effects, depending on the individual response.
Self-definition
The classic adolescent identity crisis may come earlier for highly gifted children whose intense analytical approach to life leads to early analysis of self. Their own perfectionism, coupled with inappropriate adult expectations, can make the process of identity formation particularly difficult for highly gifted children.
In addition, highly talented children often have the potential
to succeed in a number of different fields. Deciding which area should engage
their minds and talents can be an excruciating experience (Sanborn, 1979).
Unsure about their ability to live up to their own expectations and the
expectations of others, confused about the direction of their true talent,
and worried about the ways in which they are different from average students
while simultaneously fearing mediocrity - these are the dilemmas which face
gifted students attempting to define themselves in a confusing and often
hostile world.
Alienation
While moderately gifted children tend to be popular with their classmates, children with unusually high levels of ability sometimes have a more difficult time finding compatible peers (Gallagher, 1958). Hollingworth (1942) and O'Shea (1960) have suggested that problems of communication, starting in the preschool years, may be one root cause of the highly gifted child's involuntary isolation. A 3-year-old who expresses abstract ideas using the vocabulary of the average 6-year-old may not be understood by same-age peers. Four-year-olds who enjoy playing monopoly and checkers have difficulty finding same-age playmates with similar skills (Roedell, Jackson, & Robinson, 1980).
With their advanced conceptions of group organization, highly
gifted children may develop an adult-like manner with others, and be accused
of bossiness. When efforts to be accepted fail, a highly able child may
withdraw from social interaction. One 4-year-old was diagnosed as emotionally
disturbed by his preschool teachers because of his tendency to withdraw from
social interaction. Worried, his parents enrolled him in a program for highly
gifted children, where his friendly, outgoing manner demonstrated that his
emotional disturbance had merely been a reaction to having no intellectual
peers on his own level with whom to interact.
Children who withdraw early from social interaction may
deprive themselves of the opportunity to learn needed social interaction
skills. While intellectually advanced children frequently have advanced
conceptions of the dynamics of social interaction, their good ideas may not
translate into social behavior without the benefit of guided social
experience in the company of true peers (Roedell, Jackson, & Robinson,
1980).
The social alienation of extraordinarily gifted children is
exacerbated by the insistence of educators and parents that they spend most
of their time in the company of chronological peers. The assumption that
children of the same age constitute a true peer group only holds true for
children of average development. The term peer does not, in essence, mean
people of the same age, but rather refers to individuals who can interact at
an equal level around issues of common interest (Lewis, Young, Brooks, &
Michelson, 1975). Highly gifted children are not likely to find developmentally
defined peers among their age-mates, and in fact many of them prefer older
companions (Hollingworth, 1942, Silverman, in preparation). Given a choice,
highly gifted children tend to form friendships with others of similar mental
age (O'Shea, 1960).
For children whose
development is highly uneven, true peers may vary depending on the activity.
A child with extraordinary intellectual but average physical skills might
have one set of peers for discussing literature or playing chess, and another
set of peers on the soccer field. The potential social alienation of
extremely able children can be avoided by special efforts to help such
children find companions with similar interests and abilities. Unless such
efforts are made, highly gifted children run the risk of being labeled
different and strange by their age mates, and may internalize this
designation and become eccentric social isolates. Ronald, a 5-year-old in a
program for extraordinarily advanced children, explained these feelings well
when he commented, Do you know why Bill is my best friend? Because he's the only
one who understands the kind of guy I really am.
Inappropriate
Environments
Highly gifted children experience increased vulnerability when they spend large portions of their time in inappropriate educational settings. The more a gifted child's abilities differ from the norm, the more inappropriate becomes the educational program offered in the regular classroom. A 7-year-old with the reasoning capacity of an 11-year-old, whose reading and math skills equal those of the average fifth grader, will find little useful activity in a regular second grade classroom. Even if the teacher presents new information, the instructional pace will be unbearably slow, forcing the child to practice endlessly skills mastered in less than half the time taken by the average student (Stanley, Keating, & Fox, 1974, Keating, 1976).
Many programs for gifted children also constitute
inappropriate environments for the extraordinarily gifted child (Stanley,
1979). Part-time pullout programs only relieve the boredom of the regular
classroom for a few hours per week. In some school districts, the content of
the gifted enrichment class is not linked logically to the identification
system. A mathematically brilliant youngster might be identified for such a
program, for example, and be asked to spend his enrichment hours working on
creative writing and art, with no attention paid to his interests and
abilities in mathematics. Even when the child's abilities and the content of
the program are linked, the learning pace of the program may be geared to the
level of the moderately gifted child.
It is important to remember that a child with an IQ of 164 is
as different intellectually from a child with an IQ of 132 as that child is
different from the 100 IQ child. Forcing a child with an IQ of 164 to learn
at the pace of the average child, or even the pace of the moderately gifted,
is akin to placing an average child in a special education classroom and
asking that his/her learning rate be slowed down to keep pace with the rest
of the class. The frustration of highly gifted children forced to stifle
their love of learning in inhospitable environments can result in withdrawal,
behavior problems, or psychosomatic symptoms.
Role
Conflict
The conflict between society's stereotyped expectations for certain age, sex, and racial groups and the highly gifted child's need to fulfill extraordinary individual potential can be severe. For example, in most junior high and high school settings, the macho image prevails. It is the football star who is the hero of the school, not the mathematics whiz. The desire to fulfill the role expectations for the adolescent male can dim a gifted young man's aesthetic appreciation for music or extraordinary ability in literature or mathematics.
The under-representation of minorities in mathematics and
science courses at the secondary level has been attributed to a range of
problems, including the lack of role models and the perception of mathematics
as the domain of white males (Johnson, 1982). Highly gifted students from
culturally different backgrounds face special conflicts in fulfilling
individual potential without becoming alienated from their cultural heritage
(Frasier, 1979). Peer pressure and the idea that academic excellence is
reserved for the majority culture prevents many highly able minority students
from enrolling in gifted programs or in advanced academic courses.
Highly gifted girls experience equally severe role conflicts.
These girls, for example, are less likely than boys to take advantage of
opportunities to accelerate their mathematics education, and in general are
less likely to enroll in high level math and science courses (Fox, Brody,
& Tobin, 1980). Role conflict for gifted girls stretches beyond math and
science, however, to a basic conflict between traditional conceptions of
femininity and the inner drive to excel. In a 1978 study of gifted boys, it
was found that only 18 percent of the boys expected their wives to have
full-time careers, and 57 percent did not expect them to work after they had
children. A companion study of highly gifted eighth grade girls revealed that
48 percent saw major problems in combining scientific careers with family
responsibilities. In a study of highly gifted seventh graders, only 46
percent of the girls, but 98 percent of the boys expected to have continuous
full-time careers (Fox, Tobin, & Brody, 1981).
In her work on the moral development of women, Carol Gilligan
(1982) describes the developmental path which leads women to define morality
in terms of care and responsibility towards others, so that even when a girl
does aspire to a career, it may be for different reasons than are voiced by
boys. One 11-year-old girl is quoted as saying,...
I want to be
some kind of a scientist or something, and I want to do things, and I want to
help people... I think that everybody should try to help somebody else in
some way, and the way I'm choosing is through science. (p. 34)
Gilligan asked women of varying ages, to describe their views
of self and morality. From these interviews, she defines a feminine view of
the world as comprised of a web of interconnections and contrasts this
perspective with the male view of a world comprised of hierarchical
relationships. As Gilligan explains:
The images of
hierarchy and web, drawn from the texts of men's and women's fantasies and
thought, convey different ways of structuring relationships and are
associated with different views of morality and self. But these images create
a problem in understanding because each distorts the other's representation.
As the top of the hierarchy becomes the edge of the web and as the center of
a network of connection becomes the middle of a hierarchical progression,
each image marks as dangerous the place which the other defines as safe. (p.
62)
Thus, Gilligan characterizes women's fear of success as
essentially a fear of being alone at the top without a supporting network of
equal relationships.
Conclusions
Obviously, not all highly gifted children suffer as a result of the vulnerabilities described above. No inherent quality of giftedness automatically dooms these individuals to social maladjustment or unhappiness. In most cases, problems for extremely able people arise from the discrepancy between their level of development and the expectations of society. As information about the needs of highly gifted children becomes more widespread, and society's expectations become more closely attuned to the realities of gifted development, the degree of vulnerability of these children will diminish.
Awareness, however, is not enough. Nurturing the development
of highly gifted children requires a commitment to building support systems
to help them come to terms with their prodigious abilities. Such support
systems include appropriate educational programs; systematic affective
education including social skills training and self-concept development;
planned efforts in career counseling, academic counseling, and personal counseling;
and supportive adults to act as role models, provide guidance, and offer
understanding. Without these avenues of support, extraordinarily advanced
intellectual abilities become a tremendous burden rather than the foundation
for a creative and productive life.
References
Diener, C.I., &
Dweck, C.S. An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in
performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of
personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 431-462.
Diener, C.I., &
Dweck, C.S. An analysis of learned helplessness II: The processing of
success. Journal
of personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 39, 940-952.
Dweck, C.S. The role of
expectations and attributions on the alteration of learned helplessness. Journal of
personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 674-685.
Dweck, C.S., &
Repucci, N.D. Learned helplessness and reinforcement responsibility in
children. Journal
of Personality and Social Pychology, 1973, 251 109-116.
Fox, L.H. The problem of
women and mathematics. New York, New York: The Ford Foundation, 1981.
Fox, L.H., Brody, L.,
& Tobin, D. (Eds.). Women and the mathematical mystique. Baltimore, Maryland:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.
Fox, L.H., Tobin, D.,
& Brody, L. Career development of gifted and talented women. Journal of Career
Education, 1981, 7, 289-298.
Frasier, M.M. Counseling
the culturally diverse gifted. In N. Colangelo & R.T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in
counseling the gifted. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt, 1979.
Freeman, J. Gifted children.
Baltimore, Maryland: University Pack Press, 1979.
Gallagher, J.J. Peer
acceptance of highly gifted children in elementary school. Elementary School
Journal, 1958, 58, 465-470.
Gallagher, J.J. Teaching the
gifted child. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon, 1975.
Gallagher, J.J., &
Crowder, T. The adjustment of gifted children in the regular classroom. Exceptional
Children, 1957, 23, 306-312, 317-319.
Gilligan, E. In a different
voice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1982.
Hollingworth, L.S. Children above
180 IQ Stanford-Binet. Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York: World Book, 1942.
Johnson, J.L. Blacks in
mathematics: The state of the art. Paper presented at the Equity in
Mathematics Core Conference, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics,
Reston, Virginia, February 19-21, 1982.
Keating, D.P. (Ed.). Intellectual
talent: Research and development. Baltimore Maryland: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1976.
Lewis, M., Young, C.,
Brooks, I., & Michelson, L. The beginning of friendship. In M. Lewis
& L.A. Rosenblum (Eds.), Friendship and peer relations. New York, New York: Wiley,
1975.
O'Shea, H. Friendships
and the intellectually gifted child. Exceptional Children, 1960, 26, 327-335.
Pringle, M.L.K. Able misfits.
London: Longman, 1970.
Robinson, H.B. The
uncommonly bright child. In M. Lewis & L.A. Rosenblum (Eds.), The uncommon
child. New York, New York: Plenum, 1980.
Robinson, N.M., &
Robinson. H.B. The optimal match: Devising the best compromise for the highly
gifted student. In D. Feldman (Ed.), New directions for child development: Developmental approaches
to giftedness and creativity. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass,
1982.
Roedell, W.C., Jackson,
N.E., & Robinson, H.B. Gifted Young Children. New York, New York: Teachers
College Press, 1980.
Sanborn, M.P.
Differential counseling needs of the gifted and talented. In N. Colangelo
& R.T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in counseling the gifted. Dubuque, Iowa:
Kendall/Hunt, 1979.
Silverman, L.K. Gifted education.
St. Louis, Michigan: C.V. Moseby, in preparation.
Silverman, L.K. Issues in
affective development of the gifted. In J. VanTassel- Baska (Ed.), A practical guide
to counseling the gifted in a school setting. Reston, Virginia:
Council for Exceptional Children, 1983.
Stanley, J.C. Identifying
and nurturing the intellectually gifted. In W.C. George, S.J. Cohn, &
J.C. Stanley (Eds.). Educating the gifted. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1979.
Stanley, J.C., Keating,
D.P., & Fox. L.H. Mathematical talent: Discovery, description, and development.
Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974.
Tannenbaum, A.H. Gifted children.
New York, New York: Macmillan, 1983.
Terman, L.M. Genetic studies
of genius: Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children (Vol. 1). Stanford, California:
Stanford University Press, 1925.
Terman, L.M., & Oden,
M. Genetic
studies of genius: The gifted child grows up: Twenty-five years follow-up of
a superior group (Vol.
4). Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1947.
Whitmore, J.R. Giftedness,
conflict, and underachievement. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn &
Bacon, 1980.
|
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário