Should eminence based on outstanding innovation be the goal of gifted education and talent development? Implications for policy and research

Subotnik, Rena F.; Rickoff, Rochelle

doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.12.005

Cited by 48 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2003, Subotnik commented on the surprise she had felt a decade before at realizing that graduates of an elite program for high-IQ children had not made unique contributions to society beyond what might be expected from their family SES and the high-quality education they received (see Subotnik, Kassan, et al, 1993), and posed the following question to readers: “Can gifted children grown up claim to be gifted adults without displaying markers of distinction associated with their abilities?” (Subotnik, 2003, p. 14). Several years later, Subotnik and Rickoff (2010) contended that the answer is no: (a) Gifted children need to become eminent producers to be labeled gifted as adults, and (b) society has a right to expect outcomes from its investment in developing children’s gifts. To accomplish the goal of producing eminent adults, society will actually have to invest in developing children’s gifts by studying talent in various domains, assessing the benefits and costs of early specialization, ensuring apprenticeships and mentorships, and supporting psychosocial-skill development.…”

Section: Consensus and Controversy: What Do We Know From Psycholmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the path to outstanding performance may begin with demonstrated potential (Simonton, 1994, 1999, 2010), giftedness must be developed and sustained by way of training and interventions in domain-specific skills (B. S. Bloom & Sosniak, 1981; Kalinowski, 1985; Lubinski, 2010a, 2010b; Park, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2007, 2008; Sloane & Sosniak, 1985; Sosniak, 1985a, 1985b; Winner, 1996), the acquisition of the psychological and social skills needed to pursue difficult new paths (Dweck, 2006, in press; Jarvin & Subotnik, 2010; Jonker, Elferink-Gemser, & Visscher, 2010; Sosniak, 1985c), and the individual’s conscious decision to engage fully in a domain (Arnold, 1993; Ceci & Williams, 2010, Goldsmith, 2000; Sosniak, 1985b, 1985c). The goal of this developmental process is to transform potential talent during youth into outstanding performance and innovation in adulthood (Feldhusen, 2005; Subotnik & Rickoff, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bloom, 1985b; Freeman, 2010; Lohman & Korb, 2006). Although substantial numbers of children with outstanding academic or intellectual ability are identified and some resources are expended on services for them, few of these children become eminent in adulthood (Cross & Coleman, 2005; Dai, 2010; Davidson, 2009; Hollinger & Fleming, 1992; Simonton, 1998; Subotnik & Rickoff, 2010; VanTassel-Baska, 1989). Does this reflect on our methods of identification or the quality of instructional opportunities available in gifted programs?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education

Subotnik

Olszewski‐Kubilius²,

Worrell

2011

Psychol Sci Public Interest

Self Cite

772

476

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For nearly a century, scholars have sought to understand, measure, and explain giftedness. Succeeding theories and empirical investigations have often built on earlier work, complementing or sometimes clashing over conceptions of talent or contesting the mechanisms of talent development. Some have even suggested that giftedness itself is a misnomer, mistaken for the results of endless practice or social advantage. In surveying the landscape of current knowledge about giftedness and gifted education, this monograph will advance a set of interrelated arguments: The abilities of individuals do matter, particularly their abilities in specific talent domains; different talent domains have different developmental trajectories that vary as to when they start, peak, and end; and opportunities provided by society are crucial at every point in the talent-development process. We argue that society must strive to promote these opportunities but that individuals with talent also have some responsibility for their own growth and development. Furthermore, the research knowledge base indicates that psychosocial variables are determining influences in the successful development of talent. Finally, outstanding achievement or eminence ought to be the chief goal of gifted education. We assert that aspiring to fulfill one's talents and abilities in the form of transcendent creative contributions will lead to high levels of personal satisfaction and self-actualization as well as produce yet unimaginable scientific, aesthetic, and practical benefits to society. To frame our discussion, we propose a definition of giftedness that we intend to be comprehensive. Giftedness is the manifestation of performance that is clearly at the upper end of the distribution in a talent domain even relative to other high-functioning individuals in that domain. Further, giftedness can be viewed as developmental in that in the beginning stages, potential is the key variable; in later stages, achievement is the measure of giftedness; and in fully developed talents, eminence is the basis on which this label is granted. Psychosocial variables play an essential role in the manifestation of giftedness at every developmental stage. Both cognitive and psychosocial variables are malleable and need to be deliberately cultivated. Our goal here is to provide a definition that is useful across all domains of endeavor and acknowledges several perspectives about giftedness on which there is a fairly broad scientific consensus. Giftedness (a) reflects the values of society; (b) is typically manifested in actual outcomes, especially in adulthood; (c) is specific to domains of endeavor; (d) is the result of the coalescing of biological, pedagogical, psychological, and psychosocial factors; and (e) is relative not just to the ordinary (e.g., a child with exceptional art ability compared to peers) but to the extraordinary (e.g., an artist who revolutionizes a field of art). In this monograph, our goal is to review and summarize what we have learned about giftedness from the ...

show abstract

Section: Consensus and Controversy: What Do We Know From Psycholmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education

Subotnik

Olszewski‐Kubilius²,

Worrell

2011

Psychol Sci Public Interest

Self Cite

772

476

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the need for gifted education programs remains critical during the current time period in American education when our nation’s creative productivity is being challenged by European and Asian nations” (p. 308). More recently, talent development has been put forth as a conceptual model that emphasizes early enrichment for all children and long-term, domain-specific educational programming with the ultimate goal of enabling more individuals to reach eminent levels of achievement in their domains of talent (Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011; Subotnik & Rickoff, 2010).…”

Section: Rethink the Role Of Gifted Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gifted Identification and the Role of Gifted Education

Steenbergen‐Hu

Olszewski‐Kubilius

2016

Journal of Advanced Academics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article by Davis, Engberg, Epple, Sieg, and Zimmer (2010) represents one of the recent research efforts from economists in evaluating the impact of gifted programs. It can serve as a worked example of the implementation of the regression discontinuity (RD) design method in gifted education research. In this commentary, we first illustrate the basic logic or principles of a RD design using Davis et al. (2010) as an example, explain the structure of the study, and summarize its key findings. We then critique the credibility and validity of the study findings from the perspective of gifted education. We discuss its potential implications for gifted education. We highlight some noteworthy recent progress or research findings concerning gifted identification. Finally, we reflect the role of gifted education in current social, economic, and educational context.

show abstract

“…In addition, some researchers have noted that gifted children faced some problems such as anxiety, depression, and eating disorders when their particular needs were not met or appropriate support was not provided to them (e.g., Fonseca, 2011). Therefore, gifted children should need support to actualize their potential (Neihart, Reis, Robinson, & Moon, 2002; Reis & Renzulli, 2010; Subotnik & Rickoff, 2010; VanTassel-Baska, Bracken, Feng, & Brown, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship Between Psychological Symptoms, Creativity, and Loneliness in Gifted Children

Oğurlu

Yalin

Birben

2018

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between psychological symptoms, creativity, and loneliness among gifted middle school students and to analyze gender difference in psychological symptoms. The study used a correlational design, consisting of 91 gifted middle school students. The Brief Symptom Inventory, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale, and the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking were used as data-collection instruments. The results showed that there was no significant difference between gifted female and male students in the Brief Symptom Inventory total score and subscales except in the depression subscale. In addition, the Brief Symptom Inventory including subscales was significantly and positively correlated with the UCLA Loneliness Scale. There was no significant correlation between the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking and the other scales. Loneliness was found to be a significant predictor of psychological symptoms. The results of this study suggest that loneliness is a major factor for the psychological well-being of gifted students.

show abstract

Should eminence based on outstanding innovation be the goal of gifted education and talent development? Implications for policy and research

Cited by 48 publications

References 11 publications

Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education

Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education

Gifted Identification and the Role of Gifted Education

The Relationship Between Psychological Symptoms, Creativity, and Loneliness in Gifted Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About