Giftedness is the ability to do something beyond the expectations of one’s peer group. It’s a trait innate to the individual. Scholars and practitioners often wrestle with how giftedness is defined and how gifted students ought to be served. These discussions are incomplete if they do not account for the influences of cultural context and socioeconomic background on gifted individuals.
As an educator I have worked in several countries, spoken at conferences for the “more able”(as giftedness is referred to in the United Kingdom), delivered workshops in the Middle East about gifted children, and collaborated with teachers and foundations for the gifted in Spain. Wherever I go, I always find teachers who do not know enough about gifted education, parents who are desperate to help their children, and children who are withdrawn, making school a negative experience for all involved.
When talking about gifted populations, educators sometimes overlook culture and socioeconomic background. In his recent study of gifted Syrian students in Jordan, Dr. Ali Alodat
presents clear evidence that the most disadvantaged gifted groups are gifted immigrants, refugees, and low-income students.
A 2015 research brief called
“Missing Talent” from Sutton Trust, an educational charity in the UK, shows more able pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are most at risk of underperformance. A 2018 follow up called “
Potential for Success” showed similar results, with Dr. Rebecca Montacute concurring that pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are very likely to fall behind in secondary school.
It is crucial to understand our students’ backgrounds in order to best support their needs within their own cultural context. What one culture may see as a gift may not be celebrated by another culture. For example, in the UK the phrase “gifted and talented” is no longer used because for some “gifted” is an elitist, less inclusive concept. By contrast, gifted and talented students in Jordan and Spain are referred to as such broadly and proudly.
Teachers in the UK are not taught in great depth during their post-graduate certificate in education year about special educational needs and disabilities, leaving them with limited awareness of learning difficulties and only a general understanding of gifted students. Such a lack of support for teachers in these areas does not bode well for the prospects of gifted students. Further signs of government disinterest in these issues include the cessation of specific funding for gifted populations in 2011, and the omission of the terminology “more able” from the latest
Schools Inspection Handbook (2019).
In October 2019, England’s Department of Education published an updated version of Pupil Premium, a government grant program, which posited that increased funding for disadvantaged pupils should not be based on ability. Opportunities for working-class children have always been a concern and some public officials have recently called for radical changes. This includes Chief Education and External Officer from Tes Global Ltd and former UK Minister for Schools Sir Jim Knight, who argued in Parliament in March 2020 the need for enhanced opportunities for such disadvantaged children.
Beyond the impact of socioeconomic forces on gifted students, cultural considerations cannot be neglected during conversations about gifted education. Curricular reading lists, for instance, can be exclusionary if identifying with main characters is not a shared possibility among readers from different cultures. What if more able learners from minority backgrounds never identify with a character in books they read at school? How would they feel if none of the displays in school represented parts of their own daily lives, or if their special dates were not celebrated?
Not only do we need an inclusive education system where all students feel supported, but we need to provide a safe environment where students are represented, identified, cared for, heard, and comfortable sharing their different backgrounds and experiences. In September 2019, the UK’s Office for Standards in Education added the term “cultural capital” to its updated
Education Inspection Framework in order “to help children experience the awe and wonder of the world in which they live” and for schools to focus on providing for each child the best start to fulfill their full potential. However, there is currently no practical framework or funding to implement this wish list, beyond stretch and challenge activities, which results in varied implementation among individual teachers and schools.
In the Middle East, Jordan’s education model is similar to Britain, but the curriculum reflects Jordan’s cultural elements such as traditions, religious beliefs, customs, patterns of thinking, and behavior. The Jordanian Department of Education promotes acceleration from fifth grade onward. In spite of these advantages, many teachers feel unprepared teaching gifted children, especially those below the fifth grade and those who are twice-exceptional. A perspective from the
Queen Rania Teacher Academy (QRTA) argues that “Teachers in Jordan are under-resourced, under-supported and disconnected from one another,” hence the need for the academy to give every educator the skills, recognition, and support to help their students excel.
When discussing with teachers in Jordan the
Templeton National Report on Acceleration from Davidson Institute for Talent Development, I saw clear acceptance of this intervention method for gifted students to support both academic and also social-emotional growth. Parents were proud of their children being accelerated, which was seen as a positive step, rather than an exclusive measure or taboo. But in the UK, acceleration is a rarely used means to support the more able.
In Spain, the Spanish Ministry of Education clearly sets out expectations for schools when it comes to gifted and twice-exceptional students. They need to be identified as early as possible in order to put in place an educational program through acceleration, curriculum enrichment, and differentiation. Each region is free to customize the policy for gifted students in their area. For instance, I have collaborated with a non-profit organization in Seville called
Fundación Avanza in order to give teachers support within the field of high intellectual abilities. Listening to other teachers’ concerns in Spain, I found that they don’t feel armed with tools to best support gifted students. Having to simultaneously support both the less and the more able can be a daunting task, given that they all need to be stretched and challenged in vastly different ways.
In Spain, only 0.42 percent of the estimated overall gifted student total of two percent of the population were identified during the 2017-18 academic year, which leaves thousands of gifted students unrepresented. If we applied Joseph Renzulli’s (1978, 1986) research on the size of gifted populations, that number would be even higher, with 15 to 20 percent of the population having high intellectual abilities. While the exact number may be disputed, a simple question remains: where are all the missing gifted students?
In Spain, all students identified as gifted are offered grants to follow regional enrichment programs. Students benefit from such programs both academically and socially, given that they meet with like-minded peers. There are no comparable programs in the UK or Jordan.
[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]It is crucial to understand our students’ backgrounds in order to best support their needs within their own cultural context. What one culture may see as a gift may not be celebrated by another culture.[/perfectpullquote]
In comparing these three situations in three different countries, there is undoubtedly a shared awareness of the field of gifted education. Despite the lack of funding from the government, the UK still provides conferences and courses in order to keep teachers up to date with latest research and sharing of classroom practice. There is still the cultural stigma of gifted programming as privileged and elitist, however, which complicates access to a high-quality education for gifted students in low-income areas.
In Jordan the government has put some provisions in place. Due to administrative and legislative problems, as well as a lack of teacher training in this field, gifted students are often under-identified with little impact on day-to-day teaching. Though giftedness is embraced culturally, the lack of resources and poor socioeconomic conditions in some areas still have negative impacts.
In Spain there is still more work to be done identifying gifted students and differentiating their programming. There are implementation issues amongst stakeholders for shared public services. Often children who fall on the left of the intellectual bell curve are given first priority.
Public education must embrace gifted children and children with atypical learning needs. Society must raise awareness of the complex needs of gifted children and the detrimental consequences of a lack of institutional and programmatic support on their mental health and overall wellbeing. We must abandon the stereotype of gifted children not needing as much support as children with specific learning disabilities such as dyslexia, ADHD, or autism spectrum disorder. Only then will specific training, resources, and funding be put in place.
Throughout my professional experience, I have observed that teacher training is the common denominator for providing gifted students with quality programming. Teachers are the key pieces of the puzzle and they need to be supported in order to support their gifted students. Without that support, inclusive education cannot be successful. Educational systems and governments must acknowledge that the specific needs of gifted students are real, and that giftedness does not denote a privileged cohort with no need for support.
