Conceptions of Giftedness

Socio-Cultural Perspectives

Shane N. Phillipson, Maria McCann

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN: 9780805857504
• eBook ISBN: 9781000149494
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The effective education of gifted children is one of the most significant challenges facing educational systems in many countries around the world, made particularly difficult by the forces of globalization. Conceptions of Giftedness describes the unique and varied ways cultures conceive of giftedness. As language influences perception, different ideas of giftedness may embody different ways of thinking, especially in the areas of creativity and problem solving. This important new volume in special education encourages the understanding, appreciation, and preservation of our "intellectual diversity."

Contributing authors to this book are authorities in the field of gifted education, and represent a range of languages and cultures, including Western, Chinese, Japanese, Australian Aboriginal and Malay cultures. Each chapter describes giftedness from one cultural perspective within the global context, resulting in both local and global educational implications.

Conceptions of Giftedness appeals to an international audience, and will serve as a primary and/or secondary resource for scholars, teachers, and undergraduate and postgraduate students interested in gifted education. Its distinctive universal perspective will attract sociolinguists and anthropologists, as well as educators.

1
A Framework for the Study of Sociocultural Perspectives of Giftedness

Shane N. Phillipson

The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong

Come, let us know you and you us, so that together we can work at transforming this planet. (Haensly, 2000, p. 14)

At the start of the new century, Haensly (2000) recognized that people were only just beginning to understand the variability in the conceptions of giftedness around the world. With this greater understanding, Haensly anticipated that this would position people to make the world a better place. Close to a decade later, Haensly’s appeal seems even more poignant, and, although progress has been made in understanding this variability, there is still a great deal to learn.

The broad aim of this book is to describe conceptions of giftedness as a function of culture. Although comparisons will inevitably be made by the reader, the purpose of each chapter is to allow the authors to describe their conceptions relatively unencumbered by cross-cultural research paradigms. Whether the world will become a better place depends, of course, on many factors. If the purpose of education is social reconstruction, then these different conceptions of giftedness need to be closely examined for the insights they provide in describing different ways of thinking about problems and solutions.

In terms of the education of gifted children, McCann (2000) argued against a single conception of giftedness and encouraged each country to develop indigenous conceptions as this was “healthy” for gifted education. Conceptions of giftedness are likely to be dependent on time and culture, and each culture must articulate its own definition of giftedness before attempting to integrate conceptions from other cultures (Taylor & Kokot, 2000). Because of these differences, protocols used for the identification of gifted children on the basis of tests developed in one culture may be inappropriate for other cultures (Zhang & Sternberg, 1998). Khaleefa’s (1999) meta-analysis of Arab research in these areas concluded that the “… practice of importing methods of studying creativity, intelligence and giftedness without rigorous adaptation is handicapping …” this same research (p. 25). To ignore indigenous conceptions of giftedness is to disregard artifacts that are of value in that culture, with possibly tragic consequences (Taylor & Kokot, 2000). The tragedy is not only because of the loss of cultural identity as Taylor and Kokot pointed out but also because of the potential loss of intellectual diversity in areas such as creativity, problem solving, reasoning and control over memory.

Definitions of giftedness have continued to fuel international debate, with some arguing that from an educational perspective the term should be banished forever (Borland, 2005; Borland & Wright, 2000). Others have argued from a utilitarian perspective, believing that the lack of a definition does not prohibit either effective pedagogy or productive research, if important guidelines are followed (Cramond, 2004). Cramond further expressed the view that the diversity of definitions are “…necessary, to be expected, and beneficial … [and allow for the] representation of various viewpoints [and] consideration of diverse fields, and expansion of the field” (p. 16).

AIMS OF THIS BOOK

At a pragmatic level, there are three reasons for completing this book. First, conceptions of giftedness are important in the education of gifted children because they provide a theoretical basis for the development of educational programs, procedures for the identification of gifted children, program delivery and methods of instruction, program evaluation, and, more broadly, political advocacy (Callahan, 2000; Moon & Rosselli, 2000; Tannenbaum, 2000). Conceptions of giftedness, however, are often based on Euro-American perspectives, with other cultures, along with their conceptions, being relegated to minority status (Cohen, Ambrose, & Powell, 2000). Within an increasingly global context, the notion of minority culture no longer exists, although culture is becoming more complex and less stable (Hernandez de Hahn, 2000). The methodological challenge for researchers in cross-cultural studies is to identify cultural groups that are internally homogenous and externally distinctive (Hermans & Kempen, 1998).

Researchers working within gifted education are beginning to question whether the role of gifted education is to maintain or to weaken the many conceptions of giftedness, particularly when services for gifted children are required to be sensitive to the needs of children of different cultures (Rudnitski, 2000). If the role of gifted education is to maintain each unique conception, then greater effort is needed to understand the various conceptions and to develop instruments for the identification of gifted children that are either highly dependent on culture or simultaneously fair to all cultures (Borland & Wright, 2000). This can only be achieved if elements common to all conceptions are understood. The situation becomes more complex if different cultures view giftedness and the purpose of education in different ways (Moon & Rosselli, 2000), resulting in potential bias on the perceived success of the outcomes of gifted programs.

In terms of research trends, Heller and Schofield (2000) concluded that between the years 1990 and 1998 most of the proceedings of major international conferences, as well as articles published in the six major journals in the area of gifted education, were concerned with practice reports and gifted education, with less than 20% being concerned with either theory and basic research. They concluded that progress in gifted education depended on research that contributes to an understanding of the theoretical basis of giftedness. Furthermore, Heller and Schofield suggested that research in gifted education should move away from a pedagogical focus and use more effectively methods of interdisciplinary research to understand the nature of giftedness.

The second aim of this book is to suggest a way forward for the inclusion of gifted children from diverse cultures. Although some progress has been made in understanding the ways giftedness is understood, the focus of many studies has largely been concerned with making comparisons from the viewpoint of one dominant culture. Although this approach has noted that there are differences between the conceptions, little can be learned from this method concerning the conception in a second culture. The primary aim of each chapter in this book is to describe the conceptions of giftedness from the perspective of one culture, rather than to draw comparisons between the different conceptions. A further and equally important aim of each chapter is to understand the educational implications of each conception. The purpose of the last chapter is to examine each conception against the meta-theoretical model of giftedness proposed in Ziegler and Heller (2000). The knowledge that is generated by this approach will help to encourage a multithreaded understanding of each conception, rather than simply noting that there are differences.

In the concluding comments of the International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent, Mönks, Heller, and Passow (2000) referred to the fact that the underrepresentation of minority groups in gifted education programs at that time was a major concern to educators. They cited a number of barriers to the inclusion of children from these groups in gifted programs, many of which have a basis in a lack of knowledge of the impact of cultural differences. Because there has been little progress in understanding the basis of cultural differences since 2000, it is likely that the barriers to the inclusion of gifted children into gifted programs remain intact.

Inherent in any conception of giftedness are different ways of looking at the world and of thinking, including creativity and problem solving. The third and final reason for this book is a desire to further an understanding, appreciation, and preservation of the various conceptions of giftedness to guide future research efforts into the different ways that human thought has developed. Returning to Haensly’s (2000) plea, the current impact of globalization on education, together with the mounting problems facing the modern world, provides an added impetus for valuing, maintaining, and understanding humankind’s intellectual diversity for the same broad reasons that biological diversity is valued.

AIMS OF THIS CHAPTER

This chapter describes a framework for the study of conceptions of giftedness and argues that conceptions of giftedness are best described using an emic approach (Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen, 2002, p. 291), where the complexity of a psychological concept such as giftedness can be best understood from the context of the culture of its origin. Thus, different conceptions of giftedness are described by authors who are part of or intimately associated with different cultures. To facilitate a greater understanding of the task, the authors of each chapter are also conversant with the various Western conceptions of giftedness, although their task is not to draw comparisons.

Research into the effectiveness of gifted programs is often criticized for its lack of scientific rigor, such as research design and adequately described control groups (Craven, Marsh, & Print, 2000). Although cross-cultural research in conceptions of giftedness is a relatively new area of study, such criticisms may already be warranted in this aspect of gifted education. This chapter, therefore, attempts to provide a sound theoretical basis for the study of conceptions of giftedness across different cultures. A basis that is essential if we are to design meaningful gifted programs.

Global perspectives in education have increased people’s understanding that different cultures hold different worldviews (Sadowsky, Maguire, Johnson, Ngumba, & Kohles, 1994) and that these worldviews unite individuals within a cultural group and distinguish one cultural group from another (Cooper, 2005; Hewitt, 2000). The Aboriginal people of Australia, for example, hold a worldview that is not shared by Australians from an Anglo-Celtic origin as reflected in their relationship with each other, the environment, and their approach to learning (Hewitt, 2000). The worldviews are so different that it is imperative that the design of any educational program reflects these cultural differences if they are to succeed. For gifted education, the fundamental issue is not so much that the differences need to be acknowledged and respected as it is a definition of these differences. To learn from the limited Australian research in this field is to base the education of gifted students on the worldview of their culture, rather than to impose an educational program based on a “foreign” culture. For this to occur, it is essential to not just know that they are different but to know how they are different.

This chapter begins with a discussion of the impact of globalization on gifted education. Although research in this area is yet to be fully developed, it is possible to draw some parallels with other fields of education and make some tentative conclusions regarding the pressures of globalization on gifted education. The chapter then describes some of the preliminary evidence that suggests that there are differences in conceptions of giftedness across cultures. Some of the difficulties in making comparisons are then illustrated using recent research published within gifted education. In many ways, however, such research is situated within the broad field of culture and cognition, and it is clear that there is a growing body of evidence that supports the conclusion that cognition is highly dependent on culture. Some of this evidence is also considered.

Important developments in the understanding of giftedness are the “super” theories of giftedness. Accordingly, an outline of the meta-theory of giftedness (Ziegler & Heller, 2000) and the prototypic theory of giftedness (Sternberg & Horvath, 1998) is also given, including their implications for this study. The theoretical framework for this book, including guidelines to authors are then described.

GLOBALIZATION AND EDUCATION

Although Wilson (2003) asserted that globalization is not a new phenomenon, it is the pace and pervasiveness of modern globalization that characterizes the modern situation. The vehicle of modern globalization is information communication technologies (ICTs), including the Internet, which allow for instantaneous and interactive delivery of content. At the same time as the development of ICTs is the rise of English as the dominant medium of delivery (Green, 2002).

Wilson’s (2003) preferred definition of globalization emphasized the economic interdependence between private and public institutions. Other definitions of globalization place the emphasis on the blurring of national boundaries and the establishment of social relationships between geographically and culturally distant locations (Held, 1991). The influence of modern globalization on economic, social, and political systems is the topic of ongoing debate (see, e.g., Castells, 2000; Held, 2000; Kofman & Youngs, 1996).

Increasingly, the relationship between globalization and education, including its relationship with educational transformation (Mebrahtu, Crossley, & Johnson, 2000), open and distance learning (ODL) as facilitators of globalization (Edwards & Usher, 2000), and the increasing importance of quality assurance in higher education (Vidovich, 2002) are also being studied. The philosophical issues raised by distance learning have been recently explored and include the diminishing role of teachers, the perpetration of social inequities resulting from the use of virtual classrooms as opposed to “real” classes, and the specific nature of the transactions between provider and consumer (Monkman & Baird, 2002).

As the importance of the nation-state and citizenship is declining, there is at the same time a trend toward cultural heterogeneity rather than homogeneity (Torres, 2002). This growing sense of ethnicity, a possible reaction against globalization, is also reflected in the growth of other “solidarity” groups based on language, religion, and lifestyle and other “… bewildering arrays[s] of n...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• Preface
• Foreword
• List of Contributors
• 1 A Framework for the Study of Sociocultural Perspectives of Giftedness
• 2 Giftedness and China’s Confucian Heritage
• 3 The Germanic View of Giftedness
• 4 Thai Conceptions of Giftedness
• 5 When Geniuses Fail: Na-Dene’ (Navajo) Conception of Giftedness in the Eyes of the Holy Deities
• 6 Conceptions of Giftedness Among Tagalog-Speaking Filipinos
• 7 The Australian Aboriginal View of Giftedness
• 8 Constructions of Giftedness Among the Shona of Central-Southern Africa
• 9 Toward an Understanding of a Malay Conception of Giftedness
• 10 Giftedness and the Turkish Culture
• 11 Slavic Conceptions of Giftedness and Creativity
• 12 Giftedness in the Culture of Japan
• 13 Giftedness in the Euro-American Culture
• 14 Such Is Life … in the Land Down Under: Conceptions of Giftedness in Australia
• 15 The English Model of Gifted and Talented Education: Policy, Context, and Challenges
• 16 Meta-Theoretical Conceptions of Giftedness