When Does Potential Meet Performance: A Question of Giftedness?

Recently, my daughter came home from school and asked me why a child in her class was placed in the gifted program.

“I don’t get it,” she said. “He has Cs and Fs, and he behaves badly.”

I did my best to explain how a student gets enrolled in a gifted program, but I think I failed to get my point across.

The conversation caused me to reexamine the definition of giftedness and what criteria should be used to determine not only if a child should be admitted into the program—but should be allowed to remain in the program.

The question I am raising is this: should a child have to demonstrate higher-level performance over a period of time to continue receiving gifted services? At what point do we say “Ok, Johnny (or Jane) you’ve had plenty of opportunities to show your higher potential, but the time has come.”

Before exploring the issue, let’s look at some standard definitions for being identified as gifted (since there’s no universally agreed upon definition, and the definition changes from state to state, let’s look at several examples).

The National Association for Gifted Children defines giftedness as:

“Gifted individuals are those who demonstrate outstanding levels of aptitude (defined as an exceptional ability to reason and learn) or competence (documented performance or achievement in top 10% or rarer) in one or more domains. Domains include any structured area of activity with its own symbol system (e.g., mathematics, music, language) and/or set of sensorimotor skills (e.g., painting, dance, sports).”

In 1993, the U.S. Department of Education declared giftedness to be:

“Children and youth with outstanding talent who perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment.”
 

Florida, the state I where I teach, states that a gifted student is “one who has superior intellectual development and is capable of high performance.”

By the way, the last definition is my least favorite because it stresses potential over actual performance.

Now, coming back to the issue of whether gifted students should remain in a program if they fail to perform is interesting when you look at how the U.S. Department of Education and the NAGC consider giftedness.  Both definitions mention the demonstration of higher levels of performance—not just the potential for high performance. This suggests that maybe gifted programs need to establish criteria for remaining in those programs.

There’s a strong emphasis on identifying gifted students, which is typically done through the use of I.Q. tests. But what happens if a child, for example, scores a 150 on the test, but then fails to demonstrate any kind of higher performance in any subject whatsoever for a period of several years? What then?

Performance criteria is certainly not a new subject. If students want to remain  on the football team, they have to maintain a certain grade point average. Schools that offer honors and advanced placement classes may require students maintain a certain G.P.A.

In gifted programs, that’s not always the case. My daughter’s classmate, for example, is clearly not demonstrating above performance, at least not academically. Understand  that I am not suggesting that students be instantly eliminated from receiving gifted services, just because they get a C in math. What I am suggesting is that we look closer at the requirements to remain in such programs and establish where potential and performance cross lines. This would involve many factors. For instance:

1. How many years would be needed to establish that above or below average performance was demonstrated?
2. What assessments/work samples, baselines, etc. would be used to establish above average performance?
3. What subjects would be considered?
4. Would students be placed on a probationary period?
5. What are the legal repercussions?

Obviously, this is a very complex matter, one that’s not going to be decided in this blog.  I just think we need to think more about the definition of giftedness in the light of actual performance over time, not just mere potential. At some point, a potentially gifted person needs to kick into gear, has to use all cylinders, otherwise, what makes them gifted?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Please share.

Thanks for reading,

Steve