Giving Pause to Giftedness: Where Do We Go From Here?

Abstract

At the dawn of a new millennium, experts and novices in the field of giftedness may be summoned to use this time to review, scrutinize, and ponder various aspects of the field and their roles in advancing it. Giving pause to giftedness allows us to unearth some interesting perspectives and salient insights for the future. The most distinct observation emerging from this reflective process is that the field of giftedness has yet to balance its function as a unique entity and its role as an interrelated component of existing fields. Metaphorically, the field of giftedness is operating like a young child who engages mostly in parallel play alongside other children. As a relatively new domain of study, much of its activities have focused on exploring basic concepts and establishing fundamental features within its parameters. Just like for young children, progression to the next phase of development occurs when we become more knowledgeable and comfortable with ourselves in our environment, actively exploring the world and others around us. Although the field's reserved behavior may well have been justified up to this point, in order to establish its identity and a secure a meaningful place in the 21st century, it must engage more interactively with other fields. In considering the next stages of development of the field of giftedn ess, there are a few considerations worth mentioning. The first three points primarily involve collaboration among members, and the latter three points focus on collaboration with members from other fields. First, it is important that a strong collaborative relationship exist between experts and novices. On the surface, this mentorship role involves experts providing a strong knowledge base, nurturing and guiding novice members. A deeper interrelationship would ensure greater preparedness to take on challenges like modifying the regular curriculum to address the advanced learning needs of gifted students. Through their expertise and research, teachers would feel supported in their advocacy efforts. In the future, experts might establish and maintain interactive web sites that provide immediate communication and resource support for teachers. Imagine, for example, a Renzulli chatroom online. Second, various aspects of the field are more developed than others, and it is important to decide when to focus efforts close to home and when to venture forth to access related information. For example, Callahan (1993) and Carter (1991) immersed themselves program evaluation when evaluation activities within our field proved to be problematic. Their efforts highlighted for us the critical aspects of the evaluation process. This encouraged program developers and educators of the gifted to make their programs more effective, thereby securing necessary administrative, political, and financial support. Future collaborations involving core areas from other fields and related areas of giftedness remain important in facilitating and sustaining the field of giftedness. Consider the possibilities resulting from interactions with computer technologists in developing virtual school programs for gifted students. Third, a critical area for development within the field of giftedness is in defining itself. This is a core question. Our struggle to establish an identity is analogous to what Erikson referred to as adolescents' role confusion verses identity formation. We have become distracted by loose and varied definitions. Attempts have been made to bring the various definitions of giftedness together in seminal texts (Colangelo & Davis, 1997; Sternberg & Davidson, 1986) and engage in scholarly dialogue with colleagues to scrutinize specific perspectives such as Gagne's (Coleman, 1999). The future of the field of giftedness must continue and even accelerate the coalescence of definitions and models of giftedness. Maybe it is time to call for a summit gathering, a research survey, a vote, or bring in a mediator to facilitate this process. …