In my research, there appears to be two meanings of “gifted”—the child who seems to possess innate knowledge, scores well on IQ or state tests, and out paces his class is stereotypical definition. Or there is the unnoticed, abstract thinker—the one who has gifts, often beyond recognition in the classroom, beyond the scope of assessment, hides their gifts within.
I recently read The Drama of the Gifted Child by Alice Miller. The reading forced me to look at “gifted” in a new sense, almost. What is a child not allowed to express? Who do they have to be? For whom?
This book placed a new perspective on the gifted child for me, mainly, in the everyday context of school. Gifted is somehow associated with meritorious achievement. Gifted, in another sense, is how we see the world. I think one point Miller tried to convey is that many of us are not allowed to reveal or demonstrate our gifts. Her writing made me wonder if the term “gifted” is an entitlement rather than the truest expression of one curious, obscure, and/or sheltered talent. In a way, how one needs to conform to a community or society deems the “gifted” nature of a human being through context rather than innate talent.
What, then, defines the gifted reader?
From my experience, the gifted reader is one who passes state or standardized tests by exceeding the standard or ardent advancement through reading levels. Recall, the ability to narrow in on characters, or to identify main ideas further define the gifted reader.
One could argue that pedagogy defines the context of the gifted reader, how well a reader functions within the parameters of a class defines one’s talents. If our classrooms are test-centered, multiple choice-based where students derive answers not from close reading, but “right there” answers, a certain population will excel. Such readers score well. Are they not gifted for achieving a score within a particular range?
A gifted child, by traditional definition/perception of intellect, is based in fact or concrete thinking. The abstract may confound such a thinker. A gifted child who is embraced for his thinking is more apt to excel with abstract thinking than the concrete. Such a reader may not care to trivialize facts or concern themselves with “knowns” of the text. Rather, they ponder what might be. For example, while reading One Crazy Summer, kudos to the reader who can recall the most events. But what about the reader, age 11, who realizes Fern defines herself not by name but by proudly emphasizing black her poem performed courageously in front of an unfamiliar audience?
What about transaction? Transactional Theory, as cited by Louise Rosenblatt, takes us as educators and reader to a new definition. Transaction, however, possessed unique signs of giftedness with the concept of perception. Perception and confidence lead to one's ability to interpret text.
Do we believe in transaction or is there an unstated expectation that all students view texts the same way? What about those readers, age 8-13, who actually relate the context of a book to the reality that surrounds them? Interpret text within the constructs of their perceptions today (and maybe someday down the road?) Is this an aspiration we hold for all students?
Transaction with a text is an amazing, if not spiritual, act. But does this reading make a child gifted? If we valued the whole child and their views of the world, the ability in which one transacts with a test could indeed define their “giftedness.” Measuring giftedness on transaction would place experience and background into play. That move would presume giftedness is cultural and socioeconomic related.
What we don't often see is the reaction of the child who defines their ability, comprehension, or transaction, on immeasurable scales. When I find these readers, they don't seek a title to define themselves. Rather, they seek a person who will appreciate and admire their vision. Sometimes simply allowing this reader to define his thinking—through song, poetry, art, charts, or any means defined by them—is enough space for the student to express themselves and reveal their true selves to the world. Anything but a comparative test.
If a classroom desires abstract thinking, response to text with close reading supporting arguments free of predetermined outcomes, a new set of “talented” readers are likely to emerge. As I've watched students in the intermediate grades develop as readers, those who learn the skills of reading in class and are allowed the space to think outside of the four corners of the text outpace their gifted companions through “thinking” ability. This thinking is transactional—an interpretation and understanding of life. Perhaps even rationalization.
Standardized test scores seldom reflect this phenomenon in the classroom. The skill-based, perceptive thinker, call them visceral or cerebral, processes information in an atypical fashion. Despite increased levels of cognition and metacognition, because test scores reflect measureable aspects of reading, these students are rarely recognized for their talents. Particularly if a multiple choice response can be argued with evidence. Despite their gifted thinking, these readers are not labeled gifted. In some cases, they are turned away from reading, creating an imbalance of talent, a public rejection of one's perception for the celebration of unfamiliar intellect. The student trapped in this predicament feels disenfranchised because the standard of intellect has changed without understanding.
I would argue, the child who is free to express their interaction with text and translate the ways of the world is gifted. A child who is breaking through barriers and overcoming their struggles, in the same right, is gifted. Perhaps even more so because the student “comes from behind” to close the “achievement gap.” A child is able become autonomous and creative with the tools they possess and acquire to further their reading and interpretation is also gifted.
We are all born with gifts. Our giftedness is defined within the context we exist.
Justin Stygles is a grade 5/6 ELA/Humanities teacher at Guy E. Rowe Elementary in Norway, Maine. He is currently engaged in a long-term project dealing with emotional involvement in middle grade reading.