EDG 551 Module 1 Discussion Post

1. How does and understanding of the overexcitabilities shape your thinking of how school

curriculum is structured and taught?

Two overexcitabilities resonate the most with my experiences. The first is emotional. I

worked with a student, Jade, who could not abide by any form of perceived injustice, whether

towards herself or towards others. Jade was frequently kicked out of classrooms because she

addressed concerns immediately and with great force, regardless of the situation, often putting

her at odds with teachers who were trying to address the problem. I watched my colleague spend

time with Jade discussing how her behavior did not accomplish what she sought and how it

sometime injured those who were trying to help. She taught Jade alternative options for

expressing her frustration and fighting for herself and others. During the 4 years I was able to

work with Jade, I saw her grow immensely in productively tackling issues of injustice within the

school. Jade’s passion was not diminished, but her ability to use it for a constructive purpose

was greatly enhanced.

The second overexcitability that resonated with me was psychomotor. Theo has a very

difficult time sitting during my class. I ask him to sit down and the next time I look, he is

moving around the room. Once, after asking him to sit down, he said something to the effect of,

“I sit all day.” I read the comments about Tony Hawk and Theo immediately came to mind.

Theo is not labeled as gifted, but I wonder if he feels as frustrated as Tony was, “The school

system came to understand that Tony was gifted and learned to appreciate his frustration with his

energetic approach to life being out of sync with his school environment” (Hébert, 2011, p. 20).

In thinking about Jade, I wonder how she would have fared without the intervention and

intentionality of my colleague. When I think about Theo, during class I am often frustrated with

him, but I am also frustrated with myself because I know that I am not addressing his needs and I
 don’t know how to do that within the confines and resources of my classroom. I think the

structure of schools, and particularly the core subject classes at traditional secondary schools, is

designed to teach students how to behave and does not adapt to the needs of students who are

different. That is at least how I feel in my classroom. The argument that schools must adjust to

support talented students is not new. Subotnik et. al includes this quote from Fund for the

Advancement of Education, published in 1957,

the risk of adhering stubbornly to a clearly imperfect set of practices that are frustrating

the development of young talent at a time in history when this nation urgently needs to

develop its human resources to the fullest . . . Greater attention to the educational needs

of the ablest students is an effective way to improve education for all young people

(2011, p. 9).

2. How might teachers and/or counselors use Gardner’s personal intelligences to shape the

school experience for students?

Teachers and/or counselors could use Gardner’s personal intelligences to shape the

school experience for students by explicitly teaching these intelligences.

Hébert describes about Gardner’s intrapersonal intelligence, “Individuals with strong

intrapersonal intelligence have established mental models of themselves and can draw upon that

knowledge of self to make decisions. They are able to distinguish their feelings, moods and

intentions and anticipate their reactions to future situations” (Baum et al. in Hébert, 2011, p. 32).

Students need to have opportunities to reflect on their feelings and identify connections between

their emotions and the situations that cause those. Teachers and counselors can facilitate this

process through supports such as meditation, discussions, and journaling, encouraging students

to link their thoughts, feelings, and actions to build their intrapersonal intelligence.
 Hébert describes Gardner’s interpersonal intelligences, “Interpersonal intelligence is an

individual’s capacity to understand the motivations, desires, and needs of other people, and

consequently, to work effectively with others” (Hébert, 2011, p. 32). I wonder if teaching

students how to work in a group jumps ahead of where we should really be starting. If working

effectively with others is a natural consequence of strong interpersonal intelligence, why do I not

begin with teaching and strengthening those skills? Instead, I jump to how to act instead of

addressing the underlying purpose and why. Some “good” students struggle with group work. Is

this because they have weak interpersonal intelligence?

Subotnik et al. support the need for explicitly teaching psychosocial awareness and skills

to students,

It is also our view that psychosocial awareness and skills should be taught in all domains

by parents, teachers, coaches, and mentors explicitly and deliberately, not left to

chance…Students should be helped to prepare for coping with the stresses, strains, and

rewards of each stage of talent development, from potential to eminence” (2011, p. 40).

3. Both Robert Sternberg and Joseph Renzulli have recently been influenced by the positive

psychology movement. How do you see this movement changing how we think about the

social and emotional lives of gifted students?

The positive psychology movement, “focuses on what is good in life rather than

attempting to fix what is maladaptive behavior” (Hébert, 2011, p. 46). Renzulli asks, “Can a

better understanding of people who use their gifts for the greater good help us create conditions

that expand that number of people who willingly contribute to the growth of both social and

economic capital?” (in Hébert, 2011, p. 45). This requires an understanding of the social,

emotional, and environmental conditions that led talented people to use their talents for the good
of society and to attempt to create conditions conducive to having more talented people use their

gifts for good.

I have taught many students who were stronger than I am in different areas, either

mathematically, or socially, or athletically, but it didn’t always mean that they were able to

translate these talents into productive outcomes. Sternberg’s definition of wisdom includes his

argument that, “people are wise to the extent that they use their intelligence in seeking the

common good. They are able to do so by balancing their personal interests with the interests of

other people and of larger entities” (in Hébert, 2011, p. 39). I wonder if this positive psychology

movement is related to our frustration when we see a student with immense intelligence or

talents waste them.

Next year, my district is adopting a social skills and character skills training curriculum

into our advisories. This is the direction that I see the positive psychology movement taking

traditional school systems. We already know that gifted students possess special abilities and to

capitalize on these talents, we have to adjust our educational thinking to include more attention

to the social and emotional needs of our gifted students.

References:

Hébert, T. (2011). Understanding the social and emotional lives of gifted students. Prufrock

Press Inc.

Subotnik, R., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted

education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological

Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54.