 |
 |
||
![[search]](search.gif){kind=small}
![[home]](home.gif){kind=small}
![[back]](back.gif){kind=small}
![[forward]](forward.gif){kind=small}
Children Who Are Gifted,
Talented, and Creative
INDEX OF GENERAL TOPICS
What Is Giftedness?
Intelligence, Giftedness, and Talent
Intelligence as Multidimensional Potential
Historically Marginalized Populations
Affective and Cognitive Issues Relative to High Ability
Social-Emotional Concerns
Dabrowski's Theory of Emotional Development
Creativity
INDEX OF ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Resources for the Early Identification and Education of Young Gifted Children
Components of Gifted Education, Grouping/Placement Options, & Teacher Resources
Girls, Underrepresented Groups, and Dual Exceptionalities
Assessment, Intelligence, and Gifted Resources
Gifted Education, Underachievement, and Placement Issues
Resources on Gifted Social-Emotional Development
Creativity Resources
Literary Resources and References
WHAT IS GIFTEDNESS?
Today, there are a variety of definitions for giftedness. The definition adopted by a culture will determine what portion of the population it considers to be gifted. In the United States, the definition most widely accepted by states and school districts is based on the federal definition, (also known as the Marland definition), developed in 1972 by Sidney Marland, former U. S. Commissioner of Education:
Gifted and talented children are those identified by professionally
qualified persons who by virtue of outstanding abilities are capable
of high performance. These are children who require differentiated
educational programs and/or services beyond those normally
provided by the regular school program in order to realize their
contribution to self and society (Marland, 1972).
Marland described children who are creative, gifted, and talented as those with demonstrated achievement and/or potential ability in any of the following areas, singly or in combination:
(The latter being deleted in subsequent legislation). A revised definition stated that "outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor" (U.S. Department of Education, 1993, p. 26).
Most states and school districts have adopted modified versions of Marland for determining who qualifies for gifted education programs. In Illinois, according to Article 14-A of the Illinois School Code:
mental development is accelerated beyond the average or who have:
1.) Demonstrated a specific aptitude or talent
2.) Those with exceptional ability in academic subjects
3.) High level thought processes
4.) Divergent thinking
5.) Creativity in the arts
The Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program is a federally funded initiative that is a provision of legislation pertaining to the education of gifted children, the Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act. According to the Javits Act, giftedness is defined as the following:
Children and youth with outstanding talent who perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment. These children and youth exhibit high performance capability in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, possess an unusual leadership capacity, or excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor.
Children who are gifted and creative tend to have many of the following characteristics, though not necessarily all of them:
Early Signs of Giftedness
The primary indicators of giftedness in infants and toddlers are unusual alertness and lengthy attention span, extraordinary memory, and advanced language development. Children who are gifted are not necessarily precocious in all domains. Asynchronous, or uneven, development is quite common in children who are gifted. It's not unusual for them to excel in only one domain, such as their cognitive development --or in just certain areas of cognitive development-- while their physical and affective development may not appear to be advanced. Most standardized intelligence tests are not considered to be valid and reliable for children under about age seven, due to the plasticity of the central nervous system, variability in children's rates of development, and the relative instability of young children's test performance. Therefore, behavioral observations provide the best indications of early signs of giftedness. Sometimes, educational placement of preprimary aged students, in the general education classroom, may be based on student weaknesses, such as social immaturity, rather than student strengths and, as such, may not always be the best environment for nurturing the student's extraordinary abilities. In public education, more curriculum and placement options are usually available to students who are primary aged and older, such as enrichment, acceleration, and grade skipping.
Resources for the Early Identification and Education of Young Gifted Children
INTELLIGENCE, GIFTEDNESS, AND TALENT --See also Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns
Frequently, the identification of giftedness by school districts has been based on traditional notions of intelligence, as characterized by general intellectual ability and specific aptitudes. Usually, intelligence tests will identify the students who are likely to be successful in school, because they measure the abilities that are most valued by schools --primarily verbal and logical-mathematical intelligences. Since IQ scores are relatively stable over much of a person's life, the use of traditional methods for identifying giftedness, with a major emphasis on IQ, may reflect an assumption about intelligence as an inborn trait that is fixed and not amenable to mediation through experience. Sometimes, school districts also use informal measures, such as teacher referrals, parent reports, and peer nominations, for the identification of giftedness. However, the IQ score tends to be heavily weighted. Intelligence tests do not identify artistic and creative potential, or other abilities traditionally less valued by educational institutions, such as emotional intelligence, social competence or leadership ability --which may be very valuable in other arenas, including the workplace. Thus, some experts have asserted that traditional definitions of giftedness are too narrow, that they minimize the complex, multidimensional quality of the human intellect and discount significant areas of human potential.
Traditional notions of intelligence, and numerous studies on the development and decline of cognitive functions with aging, have focused on fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence refers to bioligically inherited abilities, while crystallized intelligence refers to the influences of learning and experience on cognitive functioning, especially socio-cultural impacts. Contemporary perspectives highlight the multifaceted nature of intelligence and emphasize the precept that potential abilities can and must be cultivated. The nature vs. nurture debate, concerning whether it is genetics or the environment that contributes most to intelligence, has raged for quite some time. However, another paradigm has emerged: interaction*. Many experts believe that it is not simply an "either or" proposition and contend that not only do both variables contribute to intelligence, they interact with each other as well. Some assert that people are born with a constellation of strengths, and the contexts in which potentials are valued and nurtured contribute to whether or not those abilities come to fruition. According to this viewpoint, rather than ask if children are smart, educators need to identify precisely how each child is smart, so they can provide the kinds of environments in which those abilities are most likely to flourish, including learning experiences that are appropriately challenging.
Gagné (1997; 1998) differentiated between giftedness and talent, asserting that talent is a skill in a single domain which has been developed systematically, while giftedness represents innate abilities in multiple domains. Sternberg (1999) argued against the distinction. He asserted that every ability is a form of developing expertise (2000), that intelligences are processes, with self-actualization resulting from interactions between hereditary endowment, experience, and self-governance. Sternberg stated that intelligence can be increased, and Feuerstein also argued that intelligence is a state, not a trait, which can be mediated. Feuerstein asserted that, rather than being a structure that is static, intelligence is a system that is dynamic and developing throughout a person's lifetime.
Across the globe, since the turn of the century, IQ scores have been increasing over the years, from one generation to the next. This is known as the Flynn Effect. Theorists have not attributed the increases to a rise in intelligence in the general population, but to a variety of other factors, such as increased education, improved test-taking skills, and better parenting and nutrition, as well as issues around the tests and norms. When commenting on the results of his findings, in 1987, Flynn speculated, "IQ tests do not measure intelligence but rather correlate with a weak causal link to intelligence."
Other ways of looking at intelligence include examining contributions to self and society, and place and time of expression. For example, some individuals make extraordinary contributions in schools but not in other arenas, and for others, it is quite the opposite. Researchers also seek to understand why some people shine early in life, yet others are brilliant later in adulthood.
Thus, we see intimations of other paradigms that might influence the nature/nurture debate, including chance, and the possibility of interactions between genes, environment, and the individual. Theories impacting contemporary notions of intelligence include those that focus on personal stakeholders, self-determinism, and constructivism, taking into consideration motivation, self-efficacy, and the learner's role in the construction of knowledge. This raises questions about the idiosyncratic nature of human beings, including how individuals might mediate interactions between genetic inheritance and experience, possibly altering potential outcomes. The notion of intelligence as processes to be cultivated, rather than as fixed products, may contribute to understanding "the problem of the match" between individual preferences, hereditary endowments, and experiences in schools. For related information, examine individual differences, thinking styles, aptitude-treatment interaction and cognitive style, as well as a new perspective on self-management from evolutionary psychology, "Future Psychological Evolution".
INTELLIGENCE AS MULTIDIMENSIONAL POTENTIAL
Sternberg identified three major components in his Triarchic Theory of Intelligence, including analytic, creative, and practical intelligences. He asserted that individuals express patterns of intelligence reflective of strengths in various combinations of these abilities, and from preferences at three levels of self-governance: functions of governments of the mind, stylistic preferences, and forms of mental self-government (Sternberg, 2000).
Gardner identified nine areas of intelligence in his theory of Multiple Intelligences: linguistic, logical-mathematical, visual-spacial, kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist, and existential.
Guilford's Structure of the Intellect model is comprised of three primary dimensions, operations, contents, and products, resulting in up to 150 components of intelligence.
The model developed by Renzulli was intended to cast a wider net, in defining giftedness, than traditional methods of identification had, targeting those with above average ability, creativity, and high task commitment. Wheras traditional definitions of giftedness identify only about 3 to 5 percent of the population as gifted, programs based on Renzulli's definition identify up to 25% of the population and, therefore, permit more students access to specialized services. Usually referred to as "The Revolving-Door Model" of gifted education, students are rotated in and out, so that only a certain portion of students identified as gifted are actively involved in such programs at any given time.
Continuing Issues around the Assessment of Intellectual Abilities
Research has red flagged a number of problems associated with the use of intelligence tests for identifying gifted children, including the narrow definition of giftedness on which such tests are based, and the decreased likelihood of identifying gifted students from underrepresented groups. Although the practice of using IQ scores for identifying giftedness does not match the recommendations made by many contemporary psychologists and educators, schools continue to rely heavily on intelligence tests. In 1992, Sternberg argued that it's the consumers of tests, such as school districts, who have contributed to the delay in the development, marketing, and widespread use of more appropriate instruments for assessing intelligence.
COMPONENTS OF GIFTED EDUCATION, GROUPING/PLACEMENT OPTIONS, & TEACHER RESOURCES
Those least likely to be identified as gifted are students from socio-cultural groups that have been historically marginalized, including females, people of color, children from low income families, students with limited English proficiency, and individuals with disabilities.
Traditionally, girls have been socialized more towards caring and responsibility orientations than in the development of intellectual pursuits. Girls may attempt to conceal their talents, particularly during adolescence. Additionally, gender biased expectations and discouragement may contribute to the diminished likelihood that females develop advanced skills in math and science.
Students may also be less inclined to demonstrate their intellectual prowess when they come from an environment where peers make fun of their academic abilities. As an example, for some students from low income groups, "street smarts" are considered by peers to be more critical to survival than "book smarts" or scholastic success.
Students with limited English proficiency may be overlooked if testing is in English, therefore, they should be assessed in their primary language.
It is important to keep in mind that children with special needs may also be gifted, including children with Learning Disabilities. However, their potential might not be recognized if their disability contributes to poor test performance. Accommodations in testing should be provided as necessary. (The use of multimodal assessment is considered best practice before making any major life decisions, such as labeling and educational placement --whether for the identification of special needs or for identifying extraordinary abilities.) This population is sometimes referred to as being "Twice Exceptional". For further information on this topic, see "Teaching Potentially High Achieving Students Who Have Disabilities".
First born children are the most likely to be identified as gifted. However, if one child in a family is gifted, there is a good chance that other children, in the same nuclear family, are gifted as well.
Bias in Testing
There has been much controversy over issues around bias in testing, including the importance of relevant, representative, and recent norms. Tests that are culturally biased may not adequately identify gifted children of color or children who do not come from the majority culture. The trend has been changing, however, with the advent of legal issues around testing bias, school initiatives to identify gifted students from historically marginalized groups, as well as test revisions and the development of "culture fair" assessments.
GIRLS, UNDERREPRESENTED GROUPS, AND DUAL EXCEPTIONALITIES
Heterogeneity of Highly Able Students
There is a range of giftedness, as much variability exists within this group. There are both varying degrees of ability, as well as a wide variety of talent areas. Typically, the mean IQ score on intelligence tests is 100, with the average range between 90 - 110. While there is no single rubric that has been accepted by experts for the demarkation of different levels of giftedness, the Hollingworth Center for Highly Gifted Children proposed the following guideline, based on IQ scores:
Mildly Gifted IQ Range: 115 to 129
Moderately Gifted IQ Range: 130 to 144
Highly Gifted IQ Range: 145 to 159
Exceptionally (or Profoundly) Gifted IQ Range: 160+
Traditionally, many school districts have used a cut-off score of 130, on standardized intelligence tests, for identifying students who are gifted. Research has shown just a moderate correlation between IQ score and an individual's creativity --and only up to a threshold of about 120. Intelligence tests do not measure creativity, therefore, districts which rely solely on IQ measures for identifying giftedness, and which use 130 as their cut-off scores, are likely to overlook a significant portion of their creative students. Today, school district identification procedures are often more flexible, particularly in regard to the use of multiple measures and the identification of children from historically marginalized groups, as well as students with extraordinary talents. (See also Creativity)
ASSESSMENT, INTELLIGENCE, AND GIFTED RESOURCES
AFFECTIVE AND COGNITIVE ISSUES RELATIVE TO HIGH ABILITY
Common Myths
It is a commonly held belief that, because of their high abilities, students who are gifted are advantaged and require no specialized education or supports, in order to realize their potential. However, whenever children have abilities that are not appreciated and cultivated, they may be at-risk for underachievement. Research has revealed the importance of mentors in the lives of high achieving individuals who are gifted, talented, and creative. Mentors played very significant roles in providing both intellectual and emotional guidance: they supported these individuals through difficult times, valued and nurtured their strengths, and urged them on toward self-actualization (Gardner, 1994).
Regardless of outcome, children and youth who are creatively and intellectually gifted differ from the norm and have different cognitive and affective needs. Silverman (2000, p. 1) stated, "When giftedness is seen as the mirror image of retardation, it becomes clear that we have a responsibility to meet their needs, whether or not they are high achievers."
Due to an increasing focus on academic achievement in the identification and education of gifted students, in 1991, The Columbus Group, comprised of practitioners, theorists, and parents, developed yet another definition of giftedness:
Giftedness is asynchronous development in which advanced cognitive
abilities and heightened intensity combine to create inner experiences
and awareness that are qualitatively different from the norm. This
asynchrony increases with higher intellectual capacity. The uniqueness
of the gifted renders them particularly vulnerable and requires
modifications in parenting, teaching and counseling in order for them to
develop optimally. (The Columbus Group, 1991)
There are a variety of grouping and placement options for situating gifted education. However, this is a very controversial matter, particularly due to the current Zeitgeist around including children with exceptionalities in the general education classroom. Some experts are very concerned that the continuum of placement options, and gifted education altogether, may no longer be available.
GIFTED EDUCATION, UNDERACHIEVEMENT, AND PLACEMENT ISSUES
SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL CONCERNS
Struggles with Self and Other
In children who are creative and gifted, complex cognitive processes and a vast range of emotions may be held in a delicate balance. Many struggle with perfectionism, are self-critical, feel dissatisfied with a world filled with cruelty, become disillusioned with current ways of thinking, and have feelings of inferiority about attaining the ideal. The inner conflicts of individuals who are creative and gifted might sometimes appear as contradictions, such as wanting to both stand out and go unnoticed. Some children are subjected to repeated experiences of social humiliation related to being gifted, which may contribute to the development of ambivalent feelings about their abilities and confusion over how to assume their place in the world.
High Expectations and Limited Resources
Young people who are gifted/talented and creative often find themselves struggling to fit into a society that tends to undervalue their abilities, fails to recognize their conflicts, and provides little assistance in meeting both their cognitive and affective needs --while, at the same time, expecting them to consistently achieve at high levels. A repeated complaint voiced by some individuals who are gifted is in regard to feeling as though they are treated as "human doings" rather than human beings. They may feel that no one else understands what they go through when they are treated as performers, when people hold extremely high expectations of them, when they are socially ostracized, and when they experience existential turmoil. Support and guidance are critical to their well-being. However, few professionals have been trained to address the unique social and emotional needs of this population (Silverman, 1993).
DABROWSKI'S THEORY OF EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Children who are gifted demonstrate greater awareness of the world and of social injustice. Many attempt to address and reconcile injustices much earlier than typically developing youths, but they have not yet developed coping strategies that match their cognitive awareness, in order to adequately process such emotionally charged experiences. A strong ability to conceptualize the ideal, coupled with a quest for meaning --the struggle to understand the purpose of being-- combined with feelings of powerlessness, may lead some of these young people into throes of despair over the human condition. It has been speculated that those who are gifted are at higher risk for existential depression, and adolescents who are gifted are at higher risk for suicide due to their increased sensitivity and inclination toward perfectionism (Delisle, 1986; 1990).
Those in greatest peril are those who are alienated from their families.
Most attempt or commit suicide because of the severity of their
problems, not because of their giftedness. However, alienation,
humiliation, isolation, or depression, when experienced with the
characteristic intensity of the gifted, can be fatal.
The pain borne of experiencing life at a deep level can be
constructive as well as destructive. According to some theorists,
inner conflict is potentially transformative and can be used to
further development (Assagioli, 1965; Dabrowski, 1972; Jung, 1954).
Such constructive use of psychic pain requires guidance.
(Silverman, 1993, p. 82-83)(emphasis added)
Dabrowski's theory of emotional development is based on observations of children and youth who were creative and intellectually gifted, and helps to understand their complex inner life.
Noting the expanded awareness and intensity of experience that are characteristic of creative and intellectual giftedness, Dabrowski believed these traits reflect a propensity to become both super-stimulated and emotionally conflicted by life experiences. He described them as Overexcitabilities --sensitivities and tensions that are formed and expressed in five domains of psychological development.
FORMS AND EXPRESSIONS OF PSYCHIC OVEREXCITABILITY (Piechowski, 1979; Silverman, 1993, p.18 - 20)
PSYCHOMOTOR
Surplus of energy
Rapid speech, marked enthusiasm, fast games and sports,
pressure for action, acting out
Psychomotor expression of emotional tension
Compulsive talking and chattering, impulsive actions,
nervous habits (tics, nailbiting), workaholism, acting out, compulsive
organizing, competitiveness
SENSUAL
Sensory pleasure
Seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, hearing
Sensual expression of emotional tension
Overeating, sexual overindulgence, buying sprees, wanting to
be in the limelight
Aesthetic Pleasures
Appreciation of beautiful objects (gems, jewelry, etc.),
writing styles, words
INTELLECTUAL
Probing questions; problem solving; learning
Curiosity, concentration, capacity of sustained intellectual
effort, avid reading, detailed planning
Theoretical thinking
Thinking about thinking, analytical thinking, introspection,
love of theory and analysis, moral thinking and development of a hierarchy of
values, conceptual and intuitive integration
IMAGINATIONAL
Free play of the imagination
Frequent use of image and metaphor, facility for invention
and fantasy, facility for detailed visualization, poetic and dramatic perception, animistic and
magical thinking
Spontaneous imagery as an expression of emotional tension
Animistic imagery, mixing truth and fiction, elaborate
dreams, illusions, detailed visual recall, fears of the unknown, tendency to dramatize
EMOTIONAL
Intensity of feeling
Positive feelings, negative feelings, extremes of emotion,
complex emotions and feelings, identification with others' feelings, laughing
and crying together
Somatic expressions
Tense stomach, sinking heart, blushing, flushing
Inhibition (timidity, shyness)
Strong affective memory
Fears and anxieties, feelings of guilt
Concern with death, depressive and suicidal moods
Relationship feelings
Emotional ties and attachments, concern for others
(empathy), sensitivity in relationships, attachment to animals, difficulty
adjusting to new environments, loneliness, conflicts with others over depth of
relationship
Feelings toward self
Self-evaluation and self-judgment, feelings of inadequacy
and inferiority
DABROWSKI'S THEORY OF POSITIVE DISINTEGRATION
Dabrowski asserted that inner conflict is not necessarily degenerative. He said that it is indicative of a quest to attain higher personal ideals. Dabrowski believed that, ultimately, disintegration is positive, as it is necessary before successful integration can occur at a higher level of social-emotional development (Dabrowski, 1972; Dabrowski, Kawczak, & Piechowski, 1970).
According to Dabrowski, advanced development involves questioning feelings, thoughts, and behaviors based on biological instincts and socially inherited values and beliefs. This period is marked by reflections on one's purpose and place in the world, life as it is versus what it ought to be, intense feelings of disillusionment, insecurity, emotional distress, neurosis, and personality disintegration.
While this might sound a lot like the identity and affiliation dilemmas of adolescence, not all people confront these conflicts, experience their magnitude, or see the global picture. Those who do so often resolve the issues rather superficially, eventually accepting a good deal of inherited values and beliefs. Some get stuck pathologically in instictive drives or in the disintegration process. Highly able people are the most likely to confront such conflicts at the deepest levels --and often at a younger age than typically developing peers.
It may feel like an earth shattering experience, but, ultimately, this can be a positive process which aids in the development of empathy and altruism. It has the potential for leading to a breakthrough in conscious self-transformation, including higher and multiple levels of consciousness, the clarification of personal values and goals, and the integration of a more authentic, harmonious self.
DABROWSKI'S LEVELS OF EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Silverman, 1993, p.18 - 20)
The Primary Focus of the Five Levels of Mature
Development:
1. Self-interest
2. Group values
3. Transformative growth
4. Self-actualization
5. Attainment of the ideal personality
The first and last levels are states that are relatively stable. The other three are transitional states that must be flexible in order to permit further development.
Summary of The Five Levels of Positive Disintegration
Level 1: Primary Integration
Egocentrism prevails. A person at this level lacks the capacity for empathy and self-examination. When things go wrong, someone else is always to blame; self-responsibility is not a Level I characteristic. With nothing within to inhibit personal ambition, individuals at Level I often attain power in society by ruthless means.
Level 2: Unilevel Disintegration
Individuals are influenced primarily by their social group and by mainstream values, or they are moral relativists for whom "anything goes," morally speaking. They often exhibit ambivalent feelings and indecisive behavior because they have no clear cut set of self-determined internal values. Inner conflict is horizontal, a competition between equal, competing values.
Level 3: Spontaneous Multilevel Disintegration --The Level of Emotional Tumult
Multilevelness arises. The person develops a hierarchical sense of values. Inner conflict is vertical, a struggle to bring one's behavior up to higher standards. There is a dissatisfaction with what one is, because of a competing sense of what one could and ought to be (personality ideal). This internal struggle between higher and lower can be accompanied by existential despair, anxiety, depression, and feelings of dissatisfaction with the self (inferiority, disquietude, astonishment).
Level 4: Organized Multilevel Disintegration
In comparison to those at Level III, individuals at Level IV are well on the road to self-actualization. They have found a way to reach their own ideals, and they are effective leaders in society. They show high levels of responsibility, authenticity, reflective judgment, empathy for others, autonomy of thought and action, self-awareness, and other attributes associated with self-actualization.
Level 5: Secondary Integration
The struggle for self-mastery has been won. Inner conflicts regarding the self have been resolved through actualization of the personality ideal. Disintegration has been transcended by the integration of one's values and ideals into one's living and being. The life is lived in service to humanity. It is lived according to the highest, most universal principles of loving, compassionate regard for the worth of the human individual.
RESOURCES ON GIFTED SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Fluency: Ability to generate numerous ideas
2. Flexibility: Ideas are generated in a wide variety of categories
3. Originality: Ideas are unique
4. Elaboration: Ideas are embellished and include attention to detail
Providing teacher-made models for replication focuses on products instead of processes. Coloring books, dittos, and teacher-made models, with specific directions and materials, promote uniformity and discourage divergent thinking. These are closed-ended activities which send the message that there is only one right way of doing things, thereby inhibiting creativity, thus, they should be kept to a minimum. In classrooms that emphasize process oriented student-centered art projects, the breadth and depth of students' artistic displays are noticeably different from the uniform art work displayed in classrooms that focus on product oriented teacher-directed craft projects. The former promote prolonged investigation and experimentation, while the latter are rarely based on in-depth study of the subject matter and tend to be driven by teacher expectations. Materials and techniques in teacher-directed art activities are usually limited to a teacher prescribed set and children are usually permitted only minor variations in execution. What children learn from such experiences is that schools value conformity in art --the antithesis of creativity! The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) does not consider the regular use of dittos, coloring books, and teacher-made models to be developmentally appropriate in Early Childhood Education. Because aesthetics, or art appreciation, and creative risk-taking are most likely to flourish in environments where artistic processes are highly valued and nurtured, some have argued that teacher-directed craft projects should be used no more than 20% of the time.
Art can be an expedient instructional vehicle, but the best models to use are real --real people, real objects, and real events. Also include a wide variety of picture books, photographs, art materials, and multimedia techniques, as such resources tend to elicit discovery, examination, comparison, and fine-grain analysis, as well as encouraging documentation and multiple representations of observed phenomena. Note: Art is NOT the place to assess children's abilities to follow directions, since creativity is stifled by very specific instructions and expected outcomes. Instead, use real-life situations or simulated scenarios, beginning with simple two or three step directions, then increasing the number or complexity. (Remember that reversible thinking is required for such tasks --which is stage dependent and, therefore, advanced for young children.)
Some have equated creativity with a problem-solving mindset. The Odyssey of the Mind competitions were established to provide hands-on opportunities for students to utilize their creative problem-solving abilities. While students who have been identified as gifted are most likely to participate in the competitions, many educators have argued that these kinds of activities should be provided for every child, since virtually all students can benefit from such engaging opportunities to develop their problem-solving skills.
CREATIVITY RESOURCES
Assagioli, R. (1965). Psychosynthesis: A manual of principles
and techniques. New York: Hobbs, Dorman.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience.
New York: Harper and Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery
and invention. NY: HarperCollins.
Dabrowski, K., Kawczak, A., & Piechowski, M.M. (1970). Mental growth through
positive disintegration. London: Gryf.
Dabrowski, K. (1972). Psychoneurosis is not an illness. London: Gryf.
Delisle, J. R. (1986). Death with honors: Suicide and the gifted adolescent.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 558-560.
Delisle, J. R. (1990). The gifted adolescent at risk: Strategies and resources
for suicide prevention among gifted youth. Journal for the Education
of the Gifted, 13, 212-228.
Gagné, F. (1997). A differentiated model of giftedness and talent. Gifted, 15-16.
Retrieved April 14, 2001, on the World Wide Web:
http://www.nswagtc.org.au/info/definitions/gagnemodel.html
Gagné, F. (1998). A proposal for subcategories within gifted or talented
populations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 87-95.
Gardner, H. (1994). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through
the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi.
NY: Basic Books.
Illinois School Code 105 ILCS 5/ (1995). Article 14A. Gifted Children. State of
Illinois: Authors. Retrieved April 13, 2001, on the World Wide Web:
http://www.legis.state.il.us/ilcs/ch105/ch105act5articles/ch105act5Sub32.htm
Jung, C. (1954). The development of personality. (R.F.C. Hull, Trans.)
Bollingen Series 20, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Marland, S. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to
Congress. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Maxwell, E. (1992). Self as phoenix: A comparison of Assagioli's and Dabrowski's
developmental theories. Advanced Development, 4, 35.
Nelson, K.C., (1989). Dabrowski's theory of positive disintegration.
Advanced Development, 1, 5-9.
Piechowski, M. M. (1979). Developmental potential. In Colangelo, N.
& T. Zaffrann, (Eds.). New voices in counseling the gifted.
Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.
Silverman, L. (Ed.) (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver: Love Pub. Co.
Silverman, L. (2000). Do gifted children have special needs?
Online Article from the Gifted Development Center. Denver: Author.
Retrieved 4-14-2001, on the World Wide Web:
http://gifteddevelopment.com/Articles/Do%20Gifted%20Students%20Have%20Special%20Needs.html
Sternberg, R.J. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of
intelligence. NY: Viking Press.
Sternberg, R.J. (1992). Ability tests, measurements, and markets.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 134-140.
Sternberg, R.J. (1999). Intelligence as developing expertise.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 359–375.
Sternberg, R.J. (2000). Patterns of giftedness: A triarchic analysis.
Roeper Review, 22, 231-236.
U.S. Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing
America's talent. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved 4-12-2001, on
the World Wide Web:
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/DevTalent/toc.html
Ed Psyc Central
Index of Syllabi & Course Related Materials
Copyright 2000 - 2004 by Heidi Weiman All Rights Reserved.
For Disclaimer, Legal Notice, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Use, See The Fine Print
![[top]](top.gif){kind=small}