quote by Dr. Lawyer The current consensus among psychologists/psychiatrists on this issue is that the temporal disparity between intellectual and emotional growth ends up causing a lot of psychodynamic maladjustments later in life.
I have never heard of such consensus. Where is your data? In fact, research supports the choices that Sho's parents have made. Below I post an article from the British Medical Journal (Volume 307(6912) 30 October 1993 pp 1088-1089)
Some highlights:
What happens to gifted children when they grow up? Terman and Oden, who followed up 1,528 children from the age of 12 to mid-life, concluded that "the superior child, with few exceptions, becomes the able adult, superior in nearly every aspect to the generality. The superiority is greatest in intellectual ability, in scholastic accomplishments, and in vocational achievements" [14]. Furthermore, their findings favoured rapidly promoted children.
Several reviews of research and specific empirical studies have shown the value of accelerated teaching for gifted and talented children for both short term and long term accomplishments [15,16,17]. Other research attests to the short and long term benefits of grouping gifted students together so that they can work with able and challenging peers [18].
The whole article:
The main sign of giftedness is precocity. Young people are regarded as gifted when they show intellectual, artistic, or motor behaviour characteristic of people several years older. Their precocious development might be in linguistic, logical mathematical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, or intrapersonal intelligence or ability, as delineated by Gardner [1], or in analytical, synthetic, or practical intelligence, as defined by Sternberg [2]. Precocity and intellectual prowess may be the basic signs of giftedness, but many lists have been published of other characteristics of gifted children [3,4].
Tannenbaum suggested that giftedness in childhood should be viewed purely as potential for development. He argued that the complex called "giftedness" consisted of five features: superior general intellect, specific talents or aptitudes, a set of non-intellective traits, a challenging and facilitative environment, and good luck at crucial times in life [5]. Dweck and Leggett also suggested that it was preferable for a child and parents to see giftedness as incremental or emergent rather than as an entity already possessed [6]. Such an attitude leads to the child being better motivated to learn and develop his or her talents.
Gifted children have special needs [7]. Those most commonly identified are, firstly, that the curriculum and instruction should be set at an appropriately challenging pace, level, and richness to facilitate academic growth and sustain motivation to learn. Secondly, gifted children need supportive and nurturing parents, teachers, peers, and mentors who help them develop long term goals and self esteem. And, thirdly, they need to understand their special talents, aptitudes, and personal characteristics and develop a capacity for self direction. Unfortunately, the schooling given to gifted children is often unsatisfactory and unproductive. Kroll and I found that gifted children are often bored at school - partly because of the low level and slow pace of the instruction and partly from having to spend much time being taught what they already know [8]. Gross and I documented the inappropriate handling of gifted children in school as well as the occasional hostility directed at them [9]. Galbraith's survey of gifted children found the following complaints: school was too easy and boring; the children were expected to be perfect; peers teased them about being smart; they felt different, alienated; they worried a lot about world problems; and people didn't understand them [10].
School services for gifted children at the elementary level in the United States and many other countries have often taken the form of supplementary instruction - in spare rooms after school and on Saturdays and in summer programmes [11]. Full time classes with all instruction in a single classroom are also often used. At the secondary level gifted children may be placed ahead of their age and given special classes [12]. Sometimes they are put into contact with leaders in a subject or given counsellors to help them with personal and social problems, psychological testing to help them understand their special talents and aptitudes, and tutors to work with them on advanced, special, or enriched learning material. The best instruction for gifted children is tailored to their needs and is diagnostic-prescriptive in orientation [13]. That means that their current skill or knowledge is assessed, and new learning tasks are then selected to be appropriately challenging.
What happens to gifted children when they grow up? Terman and Oden, who followed up 1,528 children from the age of 12 to mid-life, concluded that "the superior child, with few exceptions, becomes the able adult, superior in nearly every aspect to the generality. The superiority is greatest in intellectual ability, in scholastic accomplishments, and in vocational achievements" [14]. Furthermore, their findings favoured rapidly promoted children.
Several reviews of research and specific empirical studies have shown the value of accelerated teaching for gifted and talented children for both short term and long term accomplishments [15,16,17]. Other research attests to the short and long term benefits of grouping gifted students together so that they can work with able and challenging peers [18]. While less effective than accelerated teaching and grouping, enrichment programmes also seem to benefit gifted and talented learners, although the benefits may be mainly short term [17].
Parents are probably the most important influences in the development of talent or giftedness. Family sacrifices may be needed [19], and parents have to make a long term commitment to help their gifted children develop their talents to the highest level [9]. Parents provide all of the early teaching - in acquisition of language, mathematical operations, and thinking skills. Later, by monitoring children's progress in school and helping them get special teaching programmes in and out of school, they provide the resources for higher development [20]. Finally, it is the parents who help gifted children formulate long term, high level goals and develop the motivation, learning styles, attitudes, and strategies to achieve them.
REFERENCES
1. Gardner H. Frames of mind. The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983. [Context Link]
2. Sternberg RJ. Giftedness according to the triarchic theory of human intelligence. In: Colangelo N, Davis GA, eds. Handbook of gifted education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1991:45-54. [Context Link]
3. Renzulli JS, Smith LH, White AJ, Callahan CM, Hartman RK. Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, Connecticut: Creative Learning Press, 1976. [Context Link]
4. Feldhusen JF, Hoover SM, Sayler MF. Identification and education of the gifted and talented at the secondary level. Monroe, New York: Trillium, 1990. [Context Link]
5. Tannenbaum AJ. The social psychology of giftedness. In: Colangelo N, Davis GA, eds. Handbook of gifted education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1991:27-44. [Context Link]
6. Dweck CS, Leggett EL. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychol Rev 1988; 95:256-73. [Context Link]
7. Feldhusen JF. Meeting the needs of gifted students through differentiated programming. Gifted Child Quarterly 1982; 26:37-41. [Context Link]
8. Feldhusen JF, Kroll MD. Boredom or challenge for the academically talented. Gifted Education International 1991; 7:80-1. [Context Link]
9. Gross MUM, Feldhusen JF. The exceptionally gifted child. Understanding Our Gifted 1990; 2:1,7-10. [Context Link]
10. Galbraith J. The gifted kids survival guide. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishers, 1983. [Context Link]
11. Cox J, Daniel N, Boston BO. Educating able learners: programs and promising practices. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1985. [Context Link]
12. College Board. A guide to the advanced placement program. Princeton, New Jersey: College Entrance Examination Board, 1989. [Context Link]
13. Stanley JC. SMPY's DT-PI model; diagnostic testing followed by prescriptive instruction. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin 1978; 4:7-8. [Context Link]
14. Terman LM, Oden MH. The gifted group at mid-life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1959. [Context Link]
15. Daurio SP. Educational enrichment versus acceleration: a review of the literature. In: George WC, Cohn SJ, Stanley JC, eds. Educating the gifted, acceleration and enrichment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979:13-63. [Context Link]
16. Brody LE, Benbow CP. Accelerative strategies: how effective are they for the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly 1987; 31:105-10. [Context Link]
17. Feldhusen JF. Effects of programs for the gifted: a search for evidence. In: Southern WT, Jones ED, eds. The academic acceleration of gifted children. New York: Teachers College Press, 1991:133-47. [Context Link]
18. Kulik JA, Kulik CC. Research in acceleration. In: Colangelo N, Davis GA, eds. Handbook of gifted education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1991:190-1. [Context Link]
19. Feldman DH. Nature's gambit: child prodigies and the development of human potential. New York: Basic Books, 1986. [Context Link]
20. Feldhusen JF. Talent identification and development in education (TIDE). Sarasota, Florida: Center for Creative Learning, 1992. [Context Link]
