Are gifted children different socially emotionally?

There has been an argument in the research community for many years as to whether the gifted child`s advanced ability makes them more resilient socially emotionally or more vulnerable.

“The gifted child may be concerned that they will be bullied or that their peer relations will be negatively impacted by their label”

When considering this argument, it is essential to keep in mind that gifted children are not a homogenous group and that there are various intrapersonal as well as environmental factors at play. It is also important to be aware that gifted students face far more challenges in both their community and school environments than their same age peers. This is largely due to the congruence between the gifted child’s advanced ability and societal expectations.

Think for a minute about some of the stereotypical myths that you have heard associated with giftedness. This column has addressed 3, there are, of course, many more, but the important point here is to be aware of their psychosocial impact.

Myth 1: Gifted students are antisocial.

While many schools in Australia are now providing gifted programming for their gifted students, the affective side of giftedness is often not understood. In order to support positive peer relations, external factors such as school structures and type of gifted program selected need to be carefully considered alongside the social milieu of the school.

Think for a moment what it must be like to be labelled gifted in a school where giftedness is stigmatised. The gifted child may be concerned that they will be bullied or that their peer relations will be negatively impacted by their label. This type of situation may lead the gifted child to believe that they have to must choose between developing their gift or denying their giftedness in order to maintain positive peer relations. Mirica Gross (1998), a well-known Australian gifted researcher, has described this situation as the forced choice dilemma. Most children do not have to make this difficult choice, it is therefore important that we acknowledge the unique position that gifted children may find themselves in.

In schools where no type of gifted programming exists, things can be even more difficult socially for the gifted child. While gifted programs afford gifted students the opportunity to meet likeminded peers, gifted students without this option are often expected to form friendships with children that have very different play interests, language development and friendship expectations. If they find it difficult to form social attachments with classroom peers, they might be perceived as socially immature or awkward.

Myth 2: If you are gifted you must be good at everything.

The stereotypical perception that gifted students need to achieve highly across all domains stands completely opposed to current models and definitions of giftedness. This type of thinking fails to recognise giftedness in domains other than the intellectual, or students that are gifted in a specific subject area. It also does not acknowledge gifted students that have become unmotivated due to the consistent delivery of an undemanding curriculum or those that are twice exceptional, that have a gift and a disability. Failure to accommodate gifted students who do not meet the expectations of this myth can lead to frustration, underachievement, and poor classroom behaviour. Additionally, this myth often incorporates the added pressure that gifted children need to be role models and therefore never have a bad day.

Myth 3: Gifted students do not need to be accommodated, they can make it on their own.

Despite two Senate inquiries stating that gifted students are one of the most neglected student populations in our schools, schools are not legally bound to accommodate their atypical learning needs. Lack of accommodation can lead to underachievement, which can negatively impact the talent development process as well as the overall wellbeing of gifted students. Far from making it on their own, it is estimated that over 50% of gifted children underachieve in school, which cannot only lead to disengagement but poor levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy levels.

This is of course a complex issue, which due to the confines of this column has only been cursorily addressed. While most gifted children are socially well adjusted, the intention here has been to present some of the obstacles that they can face so that a conversation can be started, whereby this type of stereotypical thinking can be debated and challenged. By taking proactive steps in our schools, communities and simply talking about them, as a family we can hopefully support gifted children to deal with these types of challenges in their daily lives.