Understanding the Social and Emotional Lives of Gifted Students

Thomas P. Hébert

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000490206
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The second edition of Understanding the Social and Emotional Lives of Gifted Students presents a comprehensive treatment of social and emotional development in high-ability learners. This text:

• Discusses theories that guide the examination of the lived experiences of gifted students.
• Features new topics, such as cyberbullying and microaggressions.
• Covers social and emotional characteristics and behaviors evidenced in gifted learners.
• Includes considerations for gifted underachievers, gifted culturally diverse students, twice-exceptional students, LGBTQ gifted students, and young people from low-income backgrounds.
• Describes gifted students' friendships and family relationships that support them, contextual influences that shape their social and emotional lives, and identity development.

The author provides a wealth of field-tested strategies for addressing social and emotional development. In addition, the book offers a plan for designing a gifted-friendly classroom environment to support the social and emotional well-being of gifted students and a comprehensive collection of resources to support professionals in gifted education research and practice.

CHAPTER 1 Theories of Psychological Development Guiding Our Understanding of Gifted Students

DOI: 10.4324/9781003239338-2

This chapter:

• 
  Introduces theories that guide your understanding of the social and emotional development of gifted individuals.
• 
  Provides an opportunity to reflect on what each theory explains or does not explain.
• 
  Has you reflect on how the theories may support each other in guiding your understanding of the social and emotional lives of gifted students.
• 
  Serves as a theoretical foundation for chapters that follow.

He who loves practice without theory is like the sailor who boards ship without a rudder and compass and never knows where he may cast.

—Leonardo da Vinci

With the sagacious words of Leonardo da Vinci in mind, I believe it is meaningful to begin this journey with a discussion of theoretical frameworks that may enlighten us. To establish the foundation for much of the discussion of the psychosocial development of gifted students, I have chosen to focus on several theories that can help guide our understanding of their social and emotional lives and also guide decision making regarding what is best for gifted students. An understanding of theory may support teachers and counselors in their efforts to identify students who have high levels of social and emotional intelligence and may need special programming to develop skills in the social and emotional domains or prepare for careers that may require strong social and emotional competence. Theories of social and emotional intelligence or intrapersonal problem solving provide appropriate frameworks for designing educational programs for gifted students. Moreover, an understanding of such theory may support educators in helping gifted students who lack social and emotional intelligence to develop the ability it takes to build strong friendships and work effectively with others as they improve their academic abilities (Moon, 2009).

In addition to the theories presented in this chapter, additional relevant theories are presented in later chapters. My objective for this first chapter is to highlight several overarching theories that are helpful in understanding and appreciating the social and emotional lives of gifted students. I examine the work of Kazimierz Dabrowski on emotional development and consider how it informs our understanding of the social and emotional components of giftedness. Dabrowski’s theory of personal development has received considerable attention in the gifted education literature because it captures multiple aspects of the experience of giftedness (Moon, 2009). I continue with a discussion of Howard Gardner’s theory of personal intelligences. I explore the contemporary theory of emotional intelligence as proposed by John Mayer and Peter Salovey and popularized by Daniel Goleman to shed further understanding. I examine Robert Sternberg’s theory of wisdom as a form of giftedness and conclude with work of Joseph Renzulli, examining his Houndstooth theory to explain the development of social capital.

Theories that guide a field of knowledge undergo a series of stages through which they emerge, grow, and transform our thinking and practice. Sternberg (1990) characterized these stages as initial, early developmental, mature, and postmature:

• » In the initial stage people become interested in a phenomenon and begin to study it.
• » In the early developmental stage, theorists and researchers present paradigms In their attempt to convince others of the worth of their ideas.
• » The mature stage evolves when one or more of the paradigms become prominent while others “wither on the vine.”
• » The postmature stage emerges when researchers become frustrated with inconsistencies with research findings and a paradigm’s inability to answer the questions they raised, (p. ix)

Sternberg (1990) maintained that during the final stage, individuals search for new paradigms. If successful, they reenter the initial stage, which merges indiscernibly with the last stage. If unsuccessful in creating another paradigm, a field risks becoming dormant until other researchers and theorists propose new ideas that may guide thinking and practice.

The theories I chose to include in this book represent paradigms at various stages of development. Some are more mature than others. They may or may not explain all that educators want to know about gifted individuals. What one mature theory provides may support or reinforce another in the early developmental stages. My hope is that readers consider the strengths of each theory as well as what each theory does not explain. I also want readers to reflect on how the various theories support each other in helping us make sense of the affective development of gifted students.

To support my readers, I will raise a few questions here to keep in mind as they review the theories presented. Do the personal intelligences described by Gardner reflect similar characteristics represented in Dabrowski’s view of overexcitabilities in gifted individuals? Does the understanding of the heightened sensitivities seen in Dabrowski’s theory help educators to understand emotional intelligence proposed by Mayer and Salovey? If gifted young people are advanced in the development of emotional regulation, is that growth consistent with strong intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence? Does a child with strong personal intelligence have the natural capacity to develop wisdom proposed by Sternberg? Will that child naturally engage in lessons in wisdom? Will the emotional sensitivities and personal intelligences lead gifted students to become naturally involved in the development of social capital proposed by Renzulli? I ask my readers to reflect on these questions. I chose theories that represent what I believe are critical ideas that are important to understanding social and emotional development in gifted young people. My hope is that readers will also raise questions of each of the paradigms presented in this chapter.

Following the discussion of each of these theories, I pose several questions as I ask my readers to consider how an understanding of them may assist us in appreciating the social and emotional lives of gifted children, and prepare us for our practice of teaching and counseling gifted young people.

Dabrowski's Theory of Emotional Development

Kazimierz Dabrowski (1902-1980), a Polish psychiatrist and psychologist, survived two world wars. As a teenager during World War I, he observed acts of self-sacrifice during a period of horrendous atrocities. He struggled to understand how individuals who were selfless could coexist in the same world as those who were responsible for the incomprehensible inhumanity of that time in history. As a young man, he was “repelled by the cruelty, duplicity, superficiality, and absence of reflection he saw in those around him” (Piechowski, 2014, p. 20). During World War II, as he risked his life, he provided asylum to Jews escaping the Nazi regime. He was imprisoned by the Nazis, tortured, and forbidden to conduct his professional practice. During his internment, he witnessed acts of complete self-sacrifice on the part of others imprisoned with him. His theory evolved from his being confronted by death, suffering, and injustice, and wanting to understand the human condition (Nelson, 1989; Silverman, 1993b).

During his early youth, Dabrowski began his quest for universal values and searched for authentic individuals who lived according to them. By examining an untold number of biographies of gifted, creative, and eminent people, he found the values he sought and many of the agonies he too had experienced. He found inspiration in Socrates, Gandhi, and the great saints (Piechowski, 2014).

Following his release from prison, he returned to his private practice in Warsaw, Poland. His practice attracted gifted individuals, and he was able to continue pursuing the questions he had posed while imprisoned by the Nazis. He noticed early on that his clients displayed an emotional richness similar to what he had seen in his biographical studies and in fellow survivors of imprisonment. He noted that these individuals could not reconcile themselves to a concrete reality; instead, they held on to their personal visions of what ought to be. He found that his clients described how they experienced intense inner conflict, self-criticism, anxiety, and feelings of inferiority while pursuing their ideals. The medical community at that time labeled this conflict psychoneurotic and attempted to “cure” individuals who experienced life this way. Dabrowski took a different view of these conflicts and saw these symptoms as a natural part of striving for higher level development. As a result, he attempted to convince the profession that inner conflict was a sign of developmental potential rather than a degenerative sign (Nelson, 1989; Silverman, 1993b).

Through his continued work in biographical analysis and his clinical practice, he came to understand that the intensity of emotions, sensitivity, and tendency toward emotional extremes was a natural part of the psychological and physical makeup of gifted individuals. In their intensified approach to feeling, thinking, imagining, and experiencing life, he recognized tremendous potential for further growth (Dabrowski, 1964,1972). He recognized internal forces within these individuals that generated overstimulation, conflict, and emotional pain; however, he also saw a search for a way out of the pain and disharmony. He dedicated himself to protecting those individuals “who are tuned in to the pain of the world and who see its dangerous trends, are not heeded, and those who being open to higher realities are poorly adapted to living in this world and thus at risk” (Piechowski, 2002, p. 28).

Through his clinical observations and research, Dabrowski (1964) developed his theory of positive disintegration, in which he proposed that advanced human development requires a breakdown of existing psychological structures in order for an individual to form higher, more evolved structures. The intellectual capacity and emotional makeup of the individual determine the extent of development possible. Moon (2009) explained this succinctly:

Dabrowski’s theory suggests that personality development occurs when the press of internal and environmental forces propels a person to grow through a paradigm shifting mechanism that begins with disintegration of current psychic structures and ends with a higher order reintegration. (p. 22)

Dabrowski maintained that inner conflict generates the tension that impels a person toward higher levels of functioning. Positive disintegration is a breaking down of current ways of thinking and dedicating oneself to the service of greater compassion, integrity, and altruism (Dabrowski, 1964). Mendaglio (2007) explained, “Through positive disintegration, instincts and drives leading to egocentric gratification are replaced with values and morals leading to altruistic behavior” (p. 45). Tire process of positive disintegration involves serious self-examination that consists of taking an inventory of one’s motives and behaviors. This process can be emotionally loaded and may result in moral self-evaluation and self-loathing. Dabrowski referred to this as “dissatisfaction with oneself,” and he noted that this dissatisfaction often is accompanied by feelings of guilt. This guilt is not necessarily associated with any wrongful behavior. Individuals experiencing these feelings of guilt may believe they are simply not living according to their self-determined individual ideals. He posited that inner turmoil—or positive disintegration—enables a person to strive toward personal and spiritual growth (Piechowski, 2014). He proposed that negative disintegration is a breakdown that does not involve a moral or ethical component; it is self-centered, containing none of the qualities that would enable development at a higher level.

Dabrowski’s theory incorporates the role of emotions in human development; therefore, since his death it has become known as Dabrowski’s theory of emotional development. In this theory, the relationship between cognition and emotion, the evolution of value structures, and the heightened intensity of gifted and creative individuals are addressed. The theory is composed of two parts: levels of development and the overexcitabilities.

Dabrowski's Levels of Development

Dabrowski’s theory involves five levels of adult development: selfinterest, group values, transformative growth, self-actualization, and the attainment of the personality ideal. Dabrowski’s five levels represent five stages of human personality or emotional development along a continuum. Mendaglio (2008) explained, “The five levels of development represent a movement from an egocentric mode to an altruistic mode—from behavior being motivated by basic drives and conformity to being motivated by values and autonomy” (p. 35). The levels are in ascending order, with the higher levels representing individuals whose personalities are defined by altruistic values applied to everyday living. In this theory, development does not take place in a lock-step fashion in which an individual reaches the criteria of one level before moving on to the next. Mendaglio (2008) noted, “Individuals may be at one level of development for certain aspects and at a different level with respect to other areas” (p. 34). Moreover, he indicated that there are no age-related criteria associated with each level, as young children may exhibit advanced development associated with the higher levels. Table 1 provides a summary of the five levels.

At Level I, individuals have very little concern for others. Their lives revolve around the question, “What’s in it for me?” As self-centered beings, they are serious competitors determined to win. As adults, their goals become limited to financial success, power, and glory. These individuals are strongly influenced by the social environment and driven by a high need for approval of others. Others are motivated by gratification of their needs and will use others to reach that end (Mendaglio, 2008).

At Level II, individuals are motivated often by what others think of them or fear of punishment. They are ambivalent in many areas of their lives. These people have not established core values that guide their behavior. For this reason, they can be easily swayed. “What will people think of me if I...?” is a question that serves as the basis for much of their decision making. These individuals are more aware and concerned for others than Level I individuals; however, their insecurities do not enable them to establish meaningful, authentic relationships (Mendaglio, 2008).

Level III marks the beginning of movement toward advanced development. An individual at this stage has acquired a hierarchical value system. This value system may no longer be aligned with the values of one’s peer group. There is a struggle to elevate one’s behavior to higher standards. Individuals have begun a search for self-improvement that has enabled them to transcend societal norms. They may feel out of sync with their peers; however, they are relieved to discover that the intense questioning they are experiencing actually leads to personal self-improvement (Silverman, 1993b). Mendaglio (2008) noted that, at ...