ABSTRACT
The notion that learners who are gifted and talented can legitimately be considered to have special educational needs has been slow to gain general acceptance. This is particularly true in countries where egalitarian ideals have traditionally dominated decision-making on social policy. Such ideals have tended to focus on equality or sameness of provision, rather than on equity or fairness of provision. More recently, as many countries have become much more sensitive to the needs of diverse groups, treating people equitably has become much more common than treating them the same. Gifted and talented learners have definitely benefited from this shift, and there is a much wider acceptance among educators and educational policy-makers that these learners have needs that often require differentiated provisions. The view that this is blatant elitism appears to be much less prevalent nowadays. As a result, in a number of countries there has been a greater attention to policy development in gifted and talented education. Another factor that has increased awareness of the needs of this group has
been what is sometimes referred to as ‘parent power’. Educational reforms over the past 20 years, in western countries at least, have tended to elevate the role of parents in school governance. Research undertaken in the early 1990s in New Zealand, where some of the most radical reforms in educational administration were introduced, found that as parents were given a greater voice in educational matters, advocacy for the needs of gifted and talented students also increased (Moltzen 1992). This increased attention to the nature and the needs of gifted and talented
learners has brought to the forefront issues concerning how these needs can most appropriately be met. In some educational jurisdictions, this decision is largely taken away from schools. However, in most instances individual schools enjoy a level of autonomy in deciding the most appropriate educational provisions for these young people. In virtually all countries of the world, the majority of our most able learners spend the majority of their time at school in regular classrooms alongside their same-age peers. Experts,
advocates and parents have lamented this ‘default’ environment for decades as an intellectual wasteland for gifted and talented learning. The reason for such disillusionment with the inclusive classroom is easy to understand. Within this environment, the needs of these students were more often overlooked, and probably continue to be so in many such classrooms. The reasons for this neglect are easily identified by those with an understanding of the needs of gifted and talented learners. First, there is frequently a lack of professional knowledge of the needs of learners with exceptional ability. Often these students do not present overtly as having special needs. Many may have switched off, some passively and others expressing their frustration through non-compliant behaviour. Some teachers may acknowledge these students’ needs, but lack the professional knowledge to respond appropriately to them. Learners identified as gifted and talented are far from a homogeneous group of students. The regular teacher will likely rely on some widely held stereotypes and remain ignorant of behavioural indicators of exceptionality that fall outside this concept. Second, there is a widely held misconception that these students have the ability to ‘make it on their own’ and thus have much less need for support than most other students. In a classroom replete with competing demands, the needs of these learners can fall well down the busy teacher’s priority list of what can be achieved in any single day. Unfortunately, without appropriate support some of these young people do not ‘make it’, and the impact of repeated neglect can have consequences well beyond their time at school. Third, rigid adherence to a set curriculum, designed for the majority and delivered in a lock-step manner, sees many of those with gifts and talents being asked to engage with ideas and activities that they may have mastered some years previously. It is important to point out that any oversight of gifted and talented students
in regular or inclusive classrooms has been more the result of teachers’ ignorance than teachers’ arrogance. Such a situation is unsurprising, given the widespread omission of attention to this area in both pre-service and in-service teacher education. On the other hand, some teachers with little specific knowledge of gifted and talented are skilled at providing for exceptional ability and nurturing the talents of these young people. These are teachers who respond to the needs of learners as individuals in their classrooms. They get to know the needs, strengths and interests of each class member and structure the learning in response to this. Of course, these teachers’ practice would be further enhanced with greater knowledge of the specific nature and needs of gifted and talented students, and of research and effective practice in gifted and talented education. However, appropriate provisions for this group are not inconsistent with the broader principles of effective pedagogy. While there is a greater awareness now of the special needs of gifted and
talented students, the response of schools to addressing these has tended to be conservative. The spectre of elitism raises its head when alternatives to the regular classroom are tabled for consideration by schools and teachers. In contrast, many experts in gifted and talented education, and advocates for
gifted and talented students, maintain that the inclusive classroom represents the most, not the least restrictive environment for this group. However, in an educational era that has moved philosophically and practically from exclusion to inclusion, the argument that gifted and talented learners should be an exception can elicit fierce debate. Nonetheless, ideological arguments can be sustained only where it can be demonstrated that people will benefit from the practices associated with this way of thinking. In the minds of many people, inclusion is totally antithetical to the needs of gifted and talented students.
