THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE GIFTED, A DIVISION OF THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

THE UPDATE
Reversing Underachievement
Del Siegle, Ph.D.

FALL 2012

The Underachieving Gifted Child: Recognizing, Understanding, and

This is an excerpt of a chapter from The Underachieving Gifted Child: Recognizing, Understanding, and Reversing Underachievement, A CEC-TAG Educational Resource, used with permission from Prufrock Press, Inc.

The greatest achievement of the human spirit is to live up to ones opportunities and make the most of ones resources. Luc de Clapiers Underachievement is among the most frustrating and bewildering education issues parents and educators face. It is not a crisis of a certain group of people; it is a very real factor in the lives of students from both low and high socioeconomic groups and from rural as well as urban areas. Although it is more common among males, it can also be an issue for females. Underachievement often surfaces around middle school and can continue into high school and beyond (Peterson & Colangelo, 1996). A majority of male underachievers are already underachieving during seventh grade, compared to a majority of female underachievers, who begin to underachieve during eighth and ninth grade (Peterson & Colangelo, 1996). Some researchers have suggested that as high as 50% of gifted students underachieve at some point. However, the extent of underachievement among gifted students is difficult to measure for two reasons. First, there is no universally accepted definition of giftedness. Second, some controversy surrounds what criteria should be used to define underachievement. On the surface, educators and parents may view academic underachievement as a motivation issue. However, underperforming is much more complex than simply not being motivated. Additionally, several factors contribute to individuals being motivated. Students fail to engage and fail to achieve for a variety of reasons. The purpose of this book is to review the reasons why students are not achieving to their full potential and to discuss strategies that they and others in their environment can consider to help reverse their underachievement. In the early 1990s, Csikszentmihalyi (1993) coined the term flow to describe peak experiences people have. During these experiences, individuals are completely absorbed in what they are doing and often lose track of time. Generally speaking, flow occurs when activities offer a high degree of challenge in areas where individuals perceive themselves as possessing a high degree of skill. Maximum performance occurs during these flow experiences. Flow occurs when individuals have clear goals, decisiveness, the merging of action and awareness, complete (yet effortless) concentration, a sense of control, loss of selfconsciousness, an altered sense of time, immediate feedback, and a focus totally on the activity without regard to self (Csikszentmihalyi, 1993). One goal of parents and educators can be to
Continued next page 1

The Underachieving Child (continued from page 1)

help young people become more engaged so they can have flow experiences. My own work (Siegle & McCoach, 2005b) has shown that students who believe they have the necessary skills to perform a task, who find the task meaningful, and who feel supported in their efforts tend to embrace learning and achieve. Unfortunately, these conditions are often not present for many gifted and talented students in school. Gentry (Gentry, Rizza, & Gable, 2001) has suggested that five interrelated concepts should underlie educational programs for gifted and talented students: challenge, choice, interest, enjoyment, and personal meaning. Many gifted students are not being academically challenged because they have long ago mastered the content they are being asked to complete (Reis et al., 1993). This is particularly true during the early elementary years. It can be problematic for students because they fail to develop the self-discipline, work habits, and effective study skills that they need once the curriculum does become challenging. A second danger is that they do not come to expect school to be an exciting place for them to grow or to learn new things. Gifted and talented programs have traditionally focused on identifying students interests and strengths and providing them with opportunities to explore their passions (Renzulli, 2012). Unfortunately, when economic times are difficult, gifted and talented programs are often the first to be cut (Purcell, 1994). Gifted and talented students also spend the majority of their school experience in the regular classroom where differentiation and choice options are limited (Archambault et al., 1993). Although teachers may want to provide appropriate educational opportunities for the gifted and talented students in their classroom, few teachers have received the necessary training to understand the needs of gifted and talented students and how best to serve them (Archambault et al., 1993). Educators are not the only group responsible for making school more meaningful for students; parents also play a role. The importance parents place on schoolwork and the type of work ethic they model for their children also directly influence the meaningfulness and enjoyment young people associate with school. Parents who are unhappy with the educational opportunities their gifted and talented offspring is receiving can inadvertently sabotage the childs educational achievement. This is particularly true when parents share their concerns with the student. Parents have a duty to advocate for appropriate educational experiences for their children, but they should also not impugn the importance of school and education. Although underachievement is not a prominent area of research in general education, it is a major area of concern in gifted education. When The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented conducted a national needs assessment on issues related to gifted education, the underachievement of gifted students was the highest area of concern (Renzulli, Reid, & Gubbins, 1991). Colangelo (2003) reported that underachievement was the problem most often addressed by counselors in his center for gifted students. In fact, entire careers have been built around counseling and reversing the underachievement patterns of gifted students (Rimm, 1996). Because humans are diverse and complex beings, decades of research and counseling experiences in the field of gifted education have not produced a single silver bullet to solve this perplexing issue.
Continued next page

The Underachieving Gifted Child (continued from page 2)

An excerpt from The Underachieving Gifted Child: Recognizing, Understanding, and Reversing Underachievement, A CEC-TAG Educational Resource, used with permission from Prufrock Press, Inc. However, promising practices exist, and many individuals have been successful in helping students turn their underachievement around (Baum, Renzulli, & Hbert, 1995; Rimm, 1995; Whitmore, 1980). Underachieving students have traditionally benefitted from counseling interventions, modifications in their curriculum, or a combination of both. What works for one student may not work for another. An individual student may find a topic interesting while another student finds it mundane. What motivates one individual to pursue a challenging course of action holds little relevance to another individual. Although achievers share some central beliefs about themselves and their attitudes to school, underachievers differ much more from each other on these issues (McCoach & Siegle, 2003a). Therefore, no single plan for reversing underachievement works with every student who is not achieving to his or her potential. However, because achievers do share some common characteristics, this information is useful to consider when helping low-achieving students reverse their underachievement pattern. What we do know is that if nothing is done, many underachievers will not catch up after they leave high school. The greater their underachievement, the less likely they will reverse it. Students with high IQ scores and mediocre grades tend to produce in life what students with average IQ scores and mediocre grades produce. In other words, their life accomplishments are more closely related to their grades than to their academic potential. Their unexplored talents represent potential loss for society and for their own self-fulfillment. However, students with highly educated parents and students with high aspirations have a greater chance of catching up and reversing this pattern (McCall, 1994). Therefore, extra attention needs to be given to students of poverty and students from traditionally underrepresented groups. So, why do some gifted students fail to perform at a level commensurate with their abilities? What happens to underachieving gifted students in occupational settings if they do not achieve academically during their adolescent years? How can parents and educators help gifted students reach their potential? Can anything be done to reverse underachievement? This book reviews research related to these questions and describes several practices that have helped students recognize their potential and strive to achieve it.

From the President

The TAG Board is a working board that focuses on issues that affect the lives of students with gifts and talents. The Board met in Waco, TX in September and as a result, we approved revisions to the Diversity Award from last year. It is now the Equity for Under-represented Minority Students Teacher Award. TAG Board members Dr. Fred Bonner, Dr. Tarek Grantham, and Dr. Donna Ford have built on the work of Dr. Gloria Taradash and forged a set of criteria and guidelines for this national award. According to this committee, the purpose of this national award is to recognize a teacher who has: (1) demonstrated a commitment to enhancing excellence and equity for under-represented gifted student populations, (2) infused culturally responsive classroom or program innovations that meet the needs of students who are under-represented in gifted and advanced programs, and (3) provided leadership to advance the NAGC/ CEC teacher standards and positions on diversity. For the guidelines and the application process, please visit our website at www.cectag.org . It is not too early to plan to attend the CEC 2013 Convention & Expo to be held April 3-6 in San Antonio, TX. Please mark your calendars and tell your supervisors how important it is for you to attend! Registration is now open at www.cec.sped.org . Our famous TAG Symposium will be on Wednesday, April 3 from 9-3. Watch for registration information. The TAG Business Meeting will be Thursday, April 4 from 5:30-6:30 pm, and the TAG Social will follow at 6:30. We will provide the locations as soon as that information is available. These events will also be listed in the program book. This is my last newsletter as President of TAG. Dr. Julia Roberts of Western Kentucky University will be stepping into the role of President as of January 1, 2013. I have appreciated the support of the TAG Board during my presidency and the willingness of each person to take on any task or request enthusiastically. I want to particularly thank Dr. Susan Johnsen for her wisdom and guidance as Past President. Her willingness to provide assistance any time I asked was invaluable. We have just elected new board members and officers. Following are brief bios for those who won in this election. The TAG board invites those of you who are interested in getting more involved with TAG to let us know your area of interest. We continue to look for energetic members who want to add their expertise to any of our committees.

Cheryll Adams, President

cadams@bsu.edu

At the end of this newsletter, you will find the CEC Professional membership application. If you are interested in another membership type (retired; student; associate; or premier), please see http://www.cectag.org.

From the President (continued from page 4)

Vice President (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015) Jennifer L. Jolly, is an associate professor in elementary and gifted education at Louisiana State University. Her research interests include the history of gifted education and parents of gifted children. She is the current editor of Parenting for High Potential and serves on the editorial advisory boards of the Journal for the Education of the Gifted and Gifted Child Today. Dr. Jolly also served two terms as secretary for the CEC/TAG Board. She received the 2011 Louisiana Council for Exceptional Children Higher Education Professional Award and the 2012 Michael Pyryt Collaboration Award. Her classroom experience includes eight years in the Texas public school system working with both gifted and general education students. Secretary (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015) Jennifer H. Robins, Ph.D., received her doctorate in educational psychology with an emphasis in gifted education from Baylor University. Prior to receiving her doctorate, she spent four years teaching elementary gifted and talented students in Waco, TX. She is currently senior editor at Prufrock Press, focusing on the development of scholarly materials, including gifted education textbooks and professional development books, as well as classroom materials for teachers of gifted and advanced students.

Members at Large (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015) Cecelia Boswell, Ed.D., is the Director of Advanced Academics for the Waco Independent School District and an educator who has more than 40 years of experience in education. She has been a teacher of migrant and gifted/talented students, served as the advanced academics consultant for a Texas Education Service Center (ESC) and as the state director for AP/IB Projects. Under her leadership, the Small Schools Guide for Gifted, Advanced Placement (AP) Task Force research, and AP/International Baccalaureate Projects across the state were developed. Dr. Boswell is a past president of the Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented and founder of Austin Creek Educational Systems. She has worked throughout Texas with schools and EDCs, created curriculum and on-line courses for educators of the gifted/talented, and developed a variety of products for the Texas Education Agency. She worked with Florida in the development of their standards for gifted education. For three years she co-directed research for Texas International Baccalaureate Schools. Dr. Boswell has served on the CEC-TAG Board for the past three years. She has made multiple presentations at state and national CEC conferences, including the CEC-TAG Policy Position Statement symposium. She has been a part of the planning committee and made presentations for the highly successful fall CEC-TAG Conference at Baylor University for the past three years. Tarek Grantham, Ph. D., is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at the University of Georgia (UGA). He teaches in the educational psychology degree program, primarily in the Diversity and Equity Strand in the Gifted and Creative Education (GCE) emphasis area. He has developed and taught courses to address recruitment and retention of under-represented groups such as Multicultural Gifted and Talented Education, Retention of Ethnic Minorities in Advanced Programs, Gifted and Advanced Black Students in School, Creativity and Equity, and Action Research. He has served as program coordinator for the GCE on-campus and online graduate programs. Dr. Granthams research addresses the problem of under-representation among minority students in advanced programs. He has guest edited a special issue for Roeper Review entitled Under-representation Among Ethnically Diverse Students in Gifted Education, and recently,
5

From the President (continued from page 5)

he co-edited Gifted and Advanced Black Students in School: An Anthology of Critical Works. Dr. Grantham has consulted for university programs, schools, community groups, and parents on issues of underrepresentation and underachievement among culturally different students enrolled in advanced programs. Dr. Grantham has served as a Board Member on the Education Commission and on the Diversity and Equity Committee for the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC). He serves on the Council for Exceptional Children, Talented and Gifted Division as co-chair of the Parent, Community, and Diversity Committee. Dr. Grantham has been awarded the Mary M. Frasier Excellence and Equity Award by the Georgia Association for Gifted Children for outstanding achievement in practices that promote equitable identification procedures and/or provision of high-quality services to gifted students from under-represented groups. Claire E. Hughes, Ph.D. is an associate professor of in the Department of Special Education/ Elementary Education at the College of Coastal Georgia. She graduated from The College of William and Mary with dual emphases in gifted education and special education. Her research areas include: twice-exceptional children, particularly children with high-functioning autism; the role of ability and language in stress management; and response to intervention issues in gifted education. She has been a visiting fellow at Oxford in the area of high functioning autism, and has authored several articles, chapters and books and an ongoing blog at professormother.com. She is a former elementary and middle school teacher, has presented at numerous national and state conferences and is currently the Chair of the Special Populations Network of the National Association for Gifted Children, She lives on St. Simons Island, GA, and is the mother of two twice-exceptional children. Webmaster Tracy Ford Inman, Ed.D., is associate director of The Center for Gifted Studies at Western Kentucky University, and is active on the state, national, and international levels in gifted education. She has taught English at the high school and collegiate levels, as well as in summer programs for gifted and talented youth. In addition to writing and co-writing several articles, Tracy has co-authored two books with Julia Roberts through Prufrock Press: Strategies for Differentiating Instruction: Best Practices for the Classroom, now in its second edition, and Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation. Tracy and Julia received the Legacy Book Award from the Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented for Strategies for Differentiating Instruction. Tracy was co-editor of Parenting Gifted Children: The Authoritative Guide from the National Association for Gifted Children, a compilation of the best articles in Parenting for High Potential, which won the Legacy Award in 2011. CAN Coordinator Ken Dickson has been a member of the Council for Exceptional Children and The Association for Gifted (TAG) for over 20 years. He currently serves as Specialist for LD/GT for the Baltimore County Public Schools in Towson, Maryland. He has served in a variety of educational leadership roles in several organizations at local, state and national levels including TAG Board membership. Ken is an active advocate involved in academic and cultural diversity relationships, educational equity, public policy, and interventions that support students access, support, and opportunities for learning. Chair of Diversity, Parent, and Community Committee Fred A. Bonner II, Ed.D., is professor and the Samuel DeWitt Proctor Endowed Chair in Education at the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey. Prior to his appointment, he was professor of higher education administration in the Department of Educational
6

From the President (continued from page 6)

Administration and Human Resource Development at Texas A&M UniversityCollege Station. He earned a B.A. Degree in Chemistry from the University of North Texas, an M.S. Ed. in Curriculum & Instruction from Baylor University, and an Ed.D. in Higher Education Administration and College Teaching from the University of Arkansas-Fayetteville. He has been the recipient of the American Association for Higher Education (AABHE) Black Caucus Dissertation Award and the Educational Leadership, Counseling, and Foundation's Dissertation of the Year Award from the University Of Arkansas College Of Education. In 2010, Dr. Bonner was awarded the 2010 Extraordinary Service Award from the Texas A&M University College of Education and Human Development, College Station, Texas and the 2010 Faculty Member of the Year, Texas A&M University Student Affairs Administration in Higher Education (SAAHE) Cohort, College Station, Texas. He is the author of Academically Gifted African American Males in College, a book focusing on the postsecondary experiences of Black males in Historically Black College and University (HBCU) and Predominantly White (PWI) settings.

Be sure to check out and "Like" CEC-TAG's new Facebook page. It will include TAG updates/announcements, links to interesting articles/ resources and will also serve as a space to communicate/share ideas with fellow TAG members! Search for CEC-TAG -The Association for the Gifted or this link: http://www.facebook.com/pages/CEC-TAG-The-Association-forGifted/345144215516610
7

Does Obamas Win Signal Changes for Education in Second Term? By Kimberly Hymes, CEC
The election results which secured wins for President Obama, Senate democrats and House republicans have us all speculating what the next four years will hold for education policy issues. Here are a few initial observations: Education Funding will Still Face Hurdles: Although President Obama has been historically supportive of increasing funding for education programs, we cannot forget that Congress is the branch of government that actually sets funding levels and the impact of the political split between a Republican-led House of Representatives and a Democratic-led Senate will likely result in a continuation of the recent fiscal debates. As a result, the prospect of reinstating funding for the Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act which was eliminated in 2011 remains an uphill battle. However, as the only federal program dedicated to addressing the needs of students with gifts and talents, CEC, together with the National Association for Gifted Children and voices from the gifted education field, will continue to advocate for this funding. Of course, the most immediate education funding issue is the looming threat of sequestration, the 8% automatic cut to many federal programs, including education, set to go into effect on January 2, 2013. If Congress does not act to avoid sequestration, education will be cut by $3.5 billion including a $1 billion cut to special education programs. Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee have estimated that sequestration could cost 12,000 special education layoffs and impact over 500,000 children with disabilities. President Obama and other Congressional leaders have publically stated the need to avert such cuts. But, with many fiscal hawks in Congress and public pressure to decrease the deficit, it remains unknown how policymakers will reach an agreement. Rewriting No Child Left Behind will be Impacted by the New Waiver Reality: Congresss stalemate over reauthorizing rewriting No Child Left Behind/Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) became the Obama Administrations gain when Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced schools could be freed of some of NCLBs most controversial requirements in exchange for adopting certain education reforms which were priorities of the Administration. To date, 34 states plus the District of Columbia have been granted ESEA waivers and many states have waiver applications pending. The waivers have allowed states to propose with certain conditions differing criteria for establishing their own accountability systems. Gone is 100% proficiency for all students by the year 2014, now the conversation has evolved to adopting college and career ready standards and setting ambitious but achievable goals. Over the last two years, the House and Senate have both taken steps to reauthorize ESEA, which could be used as a starting point for conversations as the 113 th Congress takes office. But with the majority of states participating in the waiver process and a Congressional agenda that may include politically charged issues such as immigration reform, it remains unclear how certain an ESEA reauthorization is in the coming year.
8

Does Obamas Win Signal Changes for Education in Second Term? (cont. from pg. 8)
Sweeping Changes to Education Move to Implementation Stage: In the first weeks of his first term, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the economic stimulus package. This law made a $100 billion investment into education programs, including doubling funding for most IDEA programs and $4.35 billion for education reforms, such as Race to the Top. As a signature Administration initiative, Race to the Top has spurred the creation of new teacher evaluation systems; adoption of college and career ready standards in 45 states (AKA common core state standards); funded the development of the next generation assessments which will use computers and be given throughout the school year; and supported the expansion of charter schools, among other issues. Many of these reforms are now moving from the planning and policy phase to the implementation phase in states throughout the country, marking a turning point in education policy over the next few years. (Read CECs Position on Special Education Teacher Evaluation which includes gifted educators) Many changes in policy and practice are imminent for educators across the country whether it is learning new standards common across most states, implementing new evaluation systems that incorporate student performance, or using new assessments that move far away from the traditional paper and pencil, one-day test. The leadership in the White House, U.S. Department of Education, House of Representatives and Senate will all impact the next few years in education policy. CEC is committed to providing nonpartisan, timely information on special and gifted education policy. Often, we need the collective voice of the special and gifted education communities to explain how children and youth with exceptionalities will be impacted by certain policies. CECs Legislative Action Center makes contacting policymakers EASY! Want to become more involved with CECs advocacy efforts? Email pubpol@cec.sped.org!

Double Lines
Double Speak: The Language of Twice-Exceptionality
Claire E. Hughes, Ph.D. During one of the campaign debates, both President Obama and Governor Romney riled disability advocates with their phrasings- specifically autistic children by Obama, and disabled children by Romney. The blogosphere and the Twitterverse lit up with advocates, parents, and individuals weighing in on the complexities of their language usage. While the candidates continued to debates the issues of Medicare and taxes and wealth distribution, a parallel debate was erupting online. Perhaps nowhere are the differences between special education and gifted education more highlighted than in the way they refer to the groups of children; we have The Association for THE Gifted (TAG), whereas there is the Individuals WITH Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Even in the language, it is made clear that giftedness is a part of who you are- from personality to learning needs to identity- whereas disability is something you have that is separate and apart from who you are. I have seen children with gifts and talents as a designation in some educational circles, but within the field, the language remains Gifted children. There are many who accuse disability advocates as being overly sensitive. However, person-first language is a concept that goes beyond political correctness- or, as seen in the debate, lack of political usage- and has been a long, hard-won battle to change perceptions. I tell my preservice teachers that I will take off points from their papers if they refer to disabled children; they are children with disabilities. A routine exam question in my Special Education 101 class is Why is the use of person-first language so important? The answer is a complex one. Person-first language places the person first, so that the disability is not the first expression of their personhood- a child with learning disabilities may also be a 7-year old boy who loves Minecraft, riding bikes, and enjoys watching the Saints play football. It may be a 17-year old girl who plays soccer, loves the color blue, and watches iCarly and the Saints as well. Their disability is a disability defined by school and their performance within those walls. When a teacher or a parent refers to a child as a disability first, they are dehumanizing those aspects of a child that leads to success, and emphasizing the areas of challenge. I know that I, personally, hate to be known as the absent-minded professor or the messy wife- adjectives that describe me, but the me that is me is so much more than those adjectives. We have seen this already. The terms moron and idiot used to be medical ones, describing the level of intellectual challenge faced by certain individuals. These words were quickly absorbed into common language to indicate poor choices and intentional stupidity, instead of the typical level of functioning at which some people exist. Weve seen it recently with the use of the word retard- a very painful and negative word that does not honor the challenges and strengths that families and individuals with developmental delays face. We see it, to a lesser degree, with the terms geek and nerd to dehumanize those with intellectual strengths. The range of human diversity is wide and acceptance of that range is necessary- and in biological terms, an expression of strength. With dehumanizing, comes lack of acceptance. With dehumanizing, comes bullying. With dehumanizing, comes torture and suicide and murder and all kinds of pain and degradation that has been visited upon people with differences over the centuries and across cultures. (Continued next page)

JOIN CEC-TAG!!
Member benefits: Four issues of the Journal for the Education of the Gifted (JEG) per year (includes online access to current and past issues) Six issues of Teaching Exceptional Children Four issues of Exceptional Children Quarterly newsletters from CEC and from CEC-TAG A discounted member rate for all meetings of CEC and TAG 30% discount on all CEC products 10% discount on Prufrock Press products Peer-to-peer support A network of colleagues who are leaders in the field of gifted education 10

Double Speak (continued from page 10)

However, there are some disability advocates, particularly among the autism and the Deaf communities, who note that such use of personfirst language promotes the very lack of acceptance that it is trying to avoid. Jim Sinclair, in his seminal blog Why I Hate Person-First Language notes that the use of with autism implies that autism is a bad thing, rather than an element of the richness of human diversity. One would never describe a person as the person with left-handedness or the person with maleness, or the person with Catholicnesshandedness, gender, and even religious background are considered important enough aspects to ones identity that they are placed first in descriptions. Amanda, an autistic woman who is nonverbal, but communicates through typing on a computer, notes that her difficulty with our language of verbal expression is considered a disability, but our refusal to learn her language of sensory engagement is considered perfectly normal. The Deaf community is even more assertive- stating that deafness is, indeed, NOT a disability at all, but merely a difference in how perceives the world, and that it is hearing people who miss out on a rich, sensory experience because of their over-reliance on one sense. In my classes, I draw an overly-simplistic line between the deaf, who have hearing impairments, and the Deaf, who have a rich, shared language and culture and community. Such distinctions are too simplistic, simply because there is no easy right response, and as a person with average hearing and average neurological wiring and above-average language skills, I cannot- and should not- represent the characteristics of a group to which I do not belong. But it is important that people like me understand that there are multiple viewpoints to the use of language that respects others. There is another, more insidious and significant implication as well to the use of language as well. If you have a disability, then you seek to cure it. If you are a disability, then you learn to manage it and to embrace it. My mother is left-handed. She has learned to cut with right-handed scissors, but would never try to cure her handedness; she recognizes that the world was not designed for her, and that being lefthanded is just a wonderful oddity. It is worth noting that it has taken the school system decades of trying to convert lefthanded people to realize that there is no changing them, and perhaps we can just teach them how to manage in a right-handed world, and at times, perhaps to change the world in small ways for them. Its why I just bought her a left-handed peeler. Twice-exceptional children (children with twice-exceptionality?) straddle this language divide; I often refer to them as gifted children with disabilities. This is a use of language that honors their abilities and defines them by their strengths while acknowledging their areas of challenge as something that, well, challenges them. In my case, I am the mother of a gifted boy with Tourettes simply because he IS gifted, but he HAS Tourettes and there are some days when he is impacted by Tourettes, but there are days and times when he is not. In my case, I am also the mother of a gifted girl- who on some days has autism and on other days is autistic. Its a small linguistic difference, but a critical one. And its one that I would prefer that you ask me about- does she have autism, or is she autistic? Given our situation, my answer may change from day to day, but that choice of language is mine-and hers- alone to make. I would prefer that you appreciate all aspects of her and understand that on some days, her giftedness is a challenge and on other days, her autism is a strength and that it all adds up to the wonderful kid that she is. I teach my preservice teachers to ask parents how to refer to their child, because it is their choice and their decision of how they want the world to understand. However, in writing and in public, I teach them to refer to children who fall within the exceptional categories as gifted children, but children with disabilities, and finally, gifted children with disabilities. Or they will get points taken off of their papers. Which means, President Obama and Governor Romney, had you taken my class, you both would have gotten a C+ for language! References: Boggs, A. (2007). In my language. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnylM1hI2jc Sinclair, J. (2011). Why I dislike person first language. Retrieved from http://www.cafemom.com/journals/read/436505

11

Empowering Gifted Potential in Early Learners: Part 3, Affirmative Risk Taking

Charisa M. Owens, Ph.D.
Developing a sense of independence is a rewarding stepping stone in the healthy development of young children. Parents and caregivers notice this stage almost immediately when they hear phrases like do it myself or I do it from their toddlers. As any veteran parent and teacher of early learners will tell you, a toddlers new found surge of self-sufficiency comes with higher risks for messes, bumps, bruises, and yes, more tantrums. In my household, the phrases I got this and Leme do it, and Okay. Okayy. Okayyyy mom, I can do it are exclaimed with excitement and pride from Champ, my 4-year-old son. Exerting his independence is not new to my family and we have learned to embrace it. We noticed it as early as 3 months when his behaviors suggested that he wanted to hold the bottle to feed himself. But too often, his advanced thinking and ideation do not take into consideration the limitations of a toddlers physical abilities. As a result, Champ becomes frustrated and disappointed with himself. Many of his tantrums developed into pity parties as he would often declare Ill never do it or I cant learn. It is hard to hear words of defeat from such a young child, especially your own children who demonstrate great potential in one or more areas of talent. My expertise in gifted education along with a history of identified gifted family members helped my family understand and embrace Champs assertion of independence. My husband and I felt confident to support our sons need adequately for experiences that allowed him independence without hampering his emerging sense of self as a talented young African American male. We embraced his ability to recognize the challenges and benefits of a task by celebrating and encouraging his original ideas. Through trial and error, we created opportunities for him to practice his judgment without our influence. It was nerve-wracking at first; however, he quickly began to show improvement in assessing what tasks he could take on independently and what activities he would need help with. In a few months, we noticed he was more confident with his independence. Looking back at my sons behaviors during the summer and how we responded to this challenge as parents, I reached an aha moment. To confirm this moment of clarity, I read research by June Maker, Kathi Kearney and Alina Morawska about nurturing talent in early learners. I discovered that my husband and I helped our son achieve a more mature sense of independence by allowing him to take on appropriate and positive risks. Our response to our sons assertion for independence fostered greater confidence in his judgments. Taking Risks Taking risks is the ability to discern between the advantages and disadvantages of an opportunity and weigh the impact of varying outcomes. This is a natural human behavior that helps identify and sharpen ones strengths. Overtime, experiences with risk taking can develop confidence or insecurity as a part of ones identity. A part of early childhood is to discover how ones abilities, characteristics, and features are uniquely different from family members. In doing so, young children learn to see themselves as separate from their relatives, which includes exploring different situations, testing boundaries, and taking risks. According to Eriksons theory of development, young learners between the ages of 1 and 5 years old are seeking for opportunities to develop their self-esteem during what is known as the Autonomy vs. Shame and Initiative vs. Guilt stages of development. Appropriate and positive risk taking behaviors in young children can manifest into some behaviors that we as parents, caregivers, and educators identify as fussiness, stubbornness, disobedience, and/or insubordination. In the case of toddlers demonstrating characteristics of giftedness, these problem behaviors can be more pronounced. Research on nurturing young learners who are gifted contend that early childhood learning should include experiences that teach children to make calculated decisions about a different opportunities (Maker, J. C. and King, M. A. (1996) , Kearney, K (1988), Morawska, A. and Sanders, M. R. (2009)). Early learners who demonstrate characteristics of gifts and talents also need informed guidance with differentiating between the advantages and 12

Empowering Gifted Potential (continued from page 12)

disadvantages of a situation. This allows a child to experience some success with taking risks and aids in maintaining the childs aspirations to explore and create. Providing various types of guided opportunities for taking risks is critical in the development of a positive self-image and identity as a child with gifted potential. Without guidance, young children with emerging talents may be deterred from developing confidence in their talents (Smutny, 1998). Role of Parents and Professionals Parents, caregivers, and educators of young children are the pillars of guidance and support. Our response to young children taking risks can encourage or suppress a part of their identity and their understanding of their own abilities. When a child is willing to engage in an activity independent of our consent; we must seize the opportunity and make the moment a teachable one for the child. It is in the moment when we recognize what is occurring that we will be able to guide the child through the process of judging between advantages and disadvantages of an opportunity, and weighing the impact of varying outcomes. This begins with shifting our approach to the childs action(s) and demonstrating patience, flexibility, and resourcefulness. Enabling Appropriate and Positive Risk Taking The most common methods Ive used in the classroom and at home to assure appropriate risk taking for young children are choice-based independent activities. This method is used frequently in my classroom and home because it can be easily modified to correspond to any childs abilty(ies), area of strength, and environment. Whether teaching a large class of students or being a mom to my son, I have found this method very successful in empowering appropriate risk taking. Choice-based activities allow young children to select what type of activity they want to participate in, or what they want for lunch, or what they want to wear for school, bringing their desires to life. For children who demonstrate emerging gifts and talents, choice can be a powerful tool for demonstrating their gifts and talents. Choice-based activities are a great way for early learners to practice their advanced and/or emerging talents at their own pace. Some examples of choice-based activities that Ive used are pictorial learning menus and choice boards. Examples of choice boards and learning menus can be found at teacherspayteachers.com. References Kearney, K. (1989). Parenting highly gifted children: The challenges, the joys, the unexpected surprises. The Gifted Education Communicator, 19(2), p 10 12. Maker, J. and King, M. (1996). Nurturing giftedness in young children. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. Morawska, A. and Sanders, M. R. (2009). Parenting gifted and talented children: Conceptiual and empirical foundations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(3), p 163 173. Smutny, J. F. (Ed.) (1998). The young gifted child: Potential and promise, an anthology. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Interested in learning more about empowering early learners with emerging gifts and talents? You may tweet your comments or questions to @DrCMOwens.
13

The electronic version of the Journal for the Education of the Gifted (JEG) is available through SAGE Journals Online (SJO). To activate your account please follow the steps below. 1. Go to the SAGE Journals Online site: https://online.sagepub.com/cgi/activate/basic. 2. Where it says Activate Your Online Subscription: enter your Member ID then select The Association for the Gifted-CEC (TAG-CEC) from the Society drop down menu and click Submit. 3. On the Instructions page be sure to check your personal data. Enter a username and password and click submit to confirm activation. Do not click the Journal Title link until the confirmation process is complete. 4. Once complete, return to the electronic Journal homepage and select the Journal cover for access to the current issue or click Current Issue. 5. To select an issue from the archive click All Issues. 6. To search for articles either click Search this journal or use the Advanced Journal Search.

The username and password you create you will use when returning to the site http:// jeg.sagepub.com/. If you forget your username or password go to the Subscribe tab and look for the link What to do if you forget your User Name and/or Password under Managing your Subscription to Journal for the Education of the Gifted which will take you to the following link http://online.sagepub.com/cgi/recnamepwd. You will be asked to provide some information about yourself. Upon confirmation of the information your username and/or password will be emailed to you. If you require further assistance, please contact your Societys Member Services Dept. or contact SAGE directly at societymember@sagepub.com.

14

CEC-TAG IS A WEB AFFILIATE WITH PRUFROCK PRESS!

CEC-TAG is a web affiliate with Prufrock Press. This means that CECTAG receives a 10 percent commission on sales made by customers going to the Prufrock Press website from the CEC-TAG website, http:// cectag.org/. Please note this is not just on purchases of the CEC-TAG Educational Resources, but rather this is for any purchases made during that visit. Tell your friends and colleagues to help CEC-TAG! Thanks to Prufrock Press for its generosity!

15

Differentiation: Nuts and Bolts

Fall Institute in Gifted Education Presented by The Association for the Gifted, Council for Exceptional Children Waco, Texas

16

Fall Institute in Gifted Education Presented by The Association for the Gifted, Council for Exceptional Children (cont. from pg. 16) Photos courtesy of Dr. William Shiu

17

18

19