By Katherine Varga
Many people assume gifted education is simply providing
accelerated or additional school work. Unfortunately, this philosophy often
produces developmentally inappropriate gifted education, overworking children
with unnecessary and destructive workloads. This type of gifted education
focuses intensely on “academics” while neglecting the all around needs of the
child such as providing for adequate music, sports and social opportunities. This
philosophy also assumes gifted children learn best independently without the
advantage of mentors to actively guide their learning progress.
Many gifted learners process information differently from
their typical peers. Statistically speaking, with I.Q.s around 130 and above,
gifted students are as far away from average students (I.Q.s around 100) as
children who qualify as mentally challenged in typical special education
programs (I.Q.s around 70 and below). Likewise, research suggests it is just as
important to have alternative teaching methods for gifted students as it is to
have alternative methods for special education students (“Tips for Teachers,”
2012). Some teaching methods used for typical students may stunt the academic
development of gifted students. Without appropriate gifted education, we are
educating our gifted children to be average and are losing out on some of their
great potential.
How do gifted students learn differently?
While no two gifted children are exactly alike, research has
identified some commonalities in learning style shared by many gifted students.
Some points will be expounded on at another time, but here are a few examples:
Gifted children tend to be global learners instead of serial
learners (Munro, 2008). Serial learners tend to read through details without
seeing the overlapping main concepts. Global learners look for patterns and
scan information rather than over focusing on details. This ability to see the big picture helps
them to comprehend ideas more thoroughly and understand a broader depth of
implications. Education focusing on the development of higher order thinking
skills and practical applications are more appropriate for gifted learners long
before many of their peers are ready for this type of thinking.
Serial learners attack problem solving by methodically going
step by step through a process modeled by a teacher (Munro, 2008). In contrast,
gifted students prefer finding solutions on their own and often rebel or feel
uncomfortable with very rigid methods of instruction. Gifted students tend to
answer quickly, often unaware of how they come to answers. Unchecked, this fast thinking can become a
weakness. When encountered with a very taxing problem, gifted students, used to
instinctively knowing the answer, have difficulty taking themselves through a
methodical process needed to find an answer. They make small errors resulting
in incorrect responses. This tendency can be especially evident when gifted
students reach high school and concepts increase in difficulty. Without having a lifetime of practice
learning how to systematically problem solve, not having learned study skills,
students find themselves frustrated with their performance on difficult tasks.
Going from the top of their classes to average can be emotionally confusing and
destructive to their self-concept and result in apathetic behavior towards
academics. In addition, perfectionistic
expectations brought to upper grades, reinforced by an academic history of
relatively easy success, keeps some from fully engaging in school when risks
are required (Roewell, 1984). Failure, a new personal concept for many gifted
children, becomes a stumbling block many typical students have long since
learned to overcome. Gifted children see their failures as faults intrinsic to
who they are rather than due to the difficulty of the task or other external
factors. Gifted education should be challenging enough that gifted students
encounter difficulties much earlier in their academic journey than high school
or later. Appropriate gifted education would allow students to problem solve
where possible, teach them how to break whole solutions into smaller parts, and
foster an environment where failures are seen as part of a learning process rather
than the end of the world.
Typical students come to new lessons with some limited
information on a topic, whereas gifted students often connect new information
to a wide web of information they already know (Munro, 2008). Sometimes the connections made by gifted
students seem irrelevant to the topic because they tend to think in many
directions at once. Gifted children can be criticized for their creative
thought when its true origin is not understood or appreciated by the teacher. A
well-intentioned, but naïve, teacher can teach students the multi-dimensional
way in which their brains connect ideas is inappropriate and unacceptable. Typical
children often answer questions in the classroom, whereas gifted children tend
to ask questions (Munro, 2008). Teachers who are not expecting many questions
or who do not have the academic knowledge required to answer these questions
adequately can inadvertently discourage gifted children from asking questions
and seeking more information. Gifted education requires teachers who are truly
masters in their subject area (VanTassel-Baska, 2005). Pieces of paper that
indicate endorsement in one area or another are likely not sufficient to
effectively measure the level of mastery achieved by a potential teacher of the
gifted. Likewise, a curriculum with flexibility
is also necessary to accommodate questions and various directions for study
(VanTassel-Baska, 2005).
These are just a few ways in which gifted education needs to
be significantly different from the education models currently offered. The
purpose of gifted education is not to create an elite group who look down on
their peers, but rather to recognize gifted students do indeed learn
differently and would greatly benefit from instruction targeting their unique
learning styles. “Busy work,” easily resented by gifted students who can see
the lack of practical purpose, will never replace an appropriate and thoughtful
education geared towards the development of an intelligent,
independent-thinking, problem-solving, balanced and happy child.
References
Munro, J.. (2008).
Understanding How Gifted and Talented Students Learn. In Melbourne Graduate
School of Education: Studies in Exceptional
Learning and Gifted Education. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/eldi/selage/documents/GLT-
Roedell, W..
(1984). Vulnerabilities of Highly Gifted Children. In Reoper Review, Vol 6, No. 3. 127-130.
Tips for
Teachers: Successful Strategies for Teaching Gifted Learners. (July 25, 2012).
In Davidson Institute for Talent Development. Retrieved July 25, 2012, from http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10075.aspx.
VanTassel-Baska,
J. & Stambaugh, Tamra. (2005). Challenges and Possibilities for Serving
Gifted Learners in the Regular Classroom. In Theory Into Practice, 44. 211-217.
