A seminar proposal on the social-emotional development of

gifted and talented children

By Carmen-Florentina Ionita

Rationale

The present seminar proposal focuses on the social and emotional development of

children who are gifted and talented (G&T). It aims to increase teachers’ awareness of

the unique needs of gifted children and to encourage them to design strategies to cope

with possible issues G&T children may experience in their social-emotional

development, considering their individual needs.

Individual differences in children’s performance at school arise from socio-cultural,

ability, motivational or socio-political factors; therefore, the educational system should

not propose the same curriculum to groups of students who are the same age, but to

consider the previously mentioned factors in order to offer them an appropriate

education (Borland, 2005). Giftedness involves an advanced mental age of a child

compared with his/her peers (Brody & Stanley, 2005). However, the concept of

giftedness appeared at the same time with the concept of intelligence and it is viewed

as “a social construct of questionable validity” (Borland, 2005, p. 2).

On one hand, it is thought that identifying G&T and promoting their potential is crucial

for the future of a society (Brody & Stanley, 2005), on the other hand, Borland (2005)

proposed that there should be gifted education without the construct of gifted children.

He argued that labelling may impair gifted education to reach its goals and he proposed

the use of differentiated curriculum in order to accommodate the diverse students’

needs, instead of gifted programs. However, applying this could be really difficult,

because it involves changing a system with well-established rules (Borland, 2005). Also,

Borland (2005) did not take in account the difficulty of creating a differentiated

curriculum, ignoring the asynchronous development of G&T.

Gifted education often works with labels in order to offer new learning opportunities to

gifted children (Gates, 2010). However, once labelled, a gifted child is expected to

behave and perform in a certain way which can be different from his/her actual

behaviour and performance, thus leading to confusion and frustration (Gates, 2010).

Teachers involved in gifted education often fail to see the child as a person with

individual needs and feelings, forgetting to look beyond his/her label of gifted (Gates,

2010). Labelling also means changing the perceptions about the labelled – both his/her

self-perception and the perceptions of those who interact with him/her (Gates, 2010).

This could lead to negative behaviours such as social isolation or negative emotional

experiences (Gates, 2010). Thus, gifted education needs to be really careful with the

use of labelling, because it may raise stereotypes and misconceptions (Gates, 2010).

Giftedness was explained in terms of asynchronous development which assumes that

G&T may experience uneven development, heightened awareness, vulnerability, and

social alienation (Silverman, 1997). Adults interacting with G&T may fail to consider that

asynchronous development affects many gifted children, their social-emotional

development being less advanced than their cognitive development (Peterson, 2009;

Gates, 2010). This discrepancy can cause socio-emotional difficulties (Shechtman &

Silektor, 2012). G&T advanced cognitive development leads to emotional sensitivity and

awareness of issues they are not ready to cope with yet (Webb, 1994; Silverman, 1997;

Peterson, 2009). In a socio-cultural environment which promotes sameness, being

cognitively advanced may lead to social isolation (Silverman, 1997).

It was assumed that G&T should be with peers their own age (Cross, 2002). However,

G&T learning experiences need to be based on Vygotsky’s concept (1978, cited in

Callahan & Miller, 2005) of zone of proximal development, which describes the tasks

children can accomplish only with help (Callahan & Miller, 2005; McGlonn-Nelson,

2005; French, Walker & Shore, 2011). The notion of scaffolding defines the tutorial

interaction between a child and an adult or an older peer (Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976).

In order to promote a normal social development in G&T, it is necessary for them to

interact with intellectually equal peers (Silverman, 1997) who can scaffold their learning.

Furthermore, it was proposed that G&T need more than one peer group, because they

have varied interests (Webb, 1994). Teachers should assist G&T in exceeding their

potential, by encouraging them to work with other G&T (McGlonn-Nelson, 2005).

Although G&T were found to be as well-adjusted as their peers, there are particular

situations which may affect their social-emotional development – inappropriate school

environment for their level and pace of learning, lack of support in their home, social or

school environment (Neihart et al., 2002, cited in Reis & Renzulli, 2004). G&T advanced

cognitive development compared with their age peers can make G&T appear different,

have fewer friends, become introverted and lonely (Neihart et al., 2002, cited in Reis &

Renzulli, 2004). They may hide their academic abilities in order to feel accepted by their

group, but finding intellectually equal peers would reduce the pressure to make friends

among their age peers (Reis & Renzulli, 2004).

Specialists working with G&T found that some of these children may be affected by

anxiety, depression, bullying, stress related to their giftedness, or even suicidal ideation

(Peterson, 2009). In addition, they may experience perfectionism, self-criticism,

underachievement, and indecision about their career path (Peterson, 2009). However,

Estell et al., (2009) reported that G&T were less involved in bullying than their non-gifted

peer, as rated by their teachers.

G&T difficulty in making friends among their peers could be now easily overcome

through the use of technology. The communication of gifted children sharing the same

interests can be facilitated by social media which promotes a feeling of connectedness

perceived as really beneficial by these children, even though they do not always meet

their virtual friends in person (Cross, 2013).

G&T may fail to reach their potential if the affective component of their giftedness is

ignored (Robinson, 2002, cited in Reis & Renzulli, 2004). Traditionally, gifted education

focused more on the identification of G&T and on designing instructional strategies in

order to promote their cognitive abilities, rather than their social and emotional skills

(Peterson, 2009). However, in the last years, gifted programs started to address the

affective component of giftedness, as well (e.g., Potential Plus UK). Persson (2012)

argued that the ineffectiveness of gifted education programs is due to the

misunderstanding of the concept of giftedness. He further explained that it is necessary

to understand the phenomenon from a socio-biological perspective as well – the

experience of being different in a group leads to unaware behavioural processes:

inclusion, exclusion, or submission.

Gifted children may prefer to work alone if they perceive the learning environment as

being unsupportive or inappropriate for their learning goals (French et al., 2011).

Teachers should create, therefore, learning environments based on social

constructivism, which promotes learning through scaffolding, thus stimulating the

interaction between students (French et al., 2011). Moreover, teachers should support

G&T by creating communities of learners (French et al., 2011) and a caring environment

where kindness and positive behaviour are promoted, whereas acts of unkindness are

not tolerated (Reis & Renzulli, 2004).

Teachers of G&T need to adopt creative ways to cope with these children’s needs,

looking beyond the traditional label of giftedness (Gates, 2010). For example, it was

proposed that exploring opera with G&T can promote their social-emotional

development, by presenting them with universal truths of humanity and stimulating their

self-expression and ethical awareness (Berman, 2003). This is because gifted children

are often concerned with existential problems – love, death, war (Berman, 2003). It is

important to appreciate and understand the complex and meaningful experiences of

gifted as they develop their identity, in order to support their psychosocial development

(Silverman, 1997; Cross, 2000).

Intended audience and necessary prior knowledge of participants

The audience of this seminar would ideally be represented by primary and secondary

school teachers who have professional experience in working with gifted and talented

children. This is because one of the aims of the seminar is encouraging participants to

share experiences in order to better understand the construct of giftedness and its

implications for children’s social-emotional development. Gifted children’s psychosocial

needs should be addressed as early as possible; however, some issues related to their

socio-emotional development occur during adolescence, when G&T tend to hide their

abilities in order to be accepted by their peers (Reis & Renzulli, 2004). This is the

reason why the present seminar would be useful for both primary and secondary school

teachers.

Moreover, it would be beneficial if participants came from different cultural backgrounds,

considering the fact that giftedness is directly linked to intelligence, and it was

recognised that the meaning of intelligence is culturally-dependent (Sternberg &

Grigorenko, 2004). Also, it is desirable that teachers involved in this seminar would

know how to use social media in their teaching.

Planned content

Morning session: Identifying and defining the problem

9:00-9:30: In the first half of hour, teachers will present themselves to the group, sharing

their names and describing what giftedness means to them in a few words. Also, they

will write on post-it notes their expectations about the seminar.

9:30-10:00: The tutor will present a brief overview of the session and then, there will be

a presentation about gifted education and the characteristics of G&T (see Appendix 1).

10:00-10:30: Teachers will be asked to create the profile of a gifted child they worked

with, using the given characteristics and adding their own if needed, and then, to

mention how these characteristics may impact (positively or negatively) on the child’s

social-emotional development. The profiles created will be analysed later.

10:30-11:00: The whole group will create a problem tree, having as main problem

“Issues in the socio-emotional development of G&T”. Participants will have to write on

post-it notes possible causes (e.g., asynchronous development) and effects (e.g.,

underachievement) of the problem presented. Their notes will be collected by the tutor

who will display them on a big “problem tree” (see Appendix 2).

11:00-11:15: Short break

11:15-12:00: Participants will work in small groups (4-5 people). Each group will receive

a case study (see Appendix 3) and will be asked to identify the potential socio-emotional

issues (and to write them down) that the gifted children presented in the case studies

may experience.

12:00-13:00: Teachers will participate in a large group discussion and will have the

chance to share their experience of working with G&T. The peer tutor will lead the

discussion, encouraging participants to emphasise how they cope with children’s social

and emotional adjustment.

13:00-15:00: Break

Afternoon session: Finding solutions

15:00-15:30: There will be a presentation about some potential strategies to promote

G&T social and emotional development (see Appendix 4).

15:30-16:00: Teachers will work in groups and each group will be given a topic related

to the socio-emotional development of gifted (e.g., bullying, depression, perfectionism,

social isolation). They will have to complete a table (see Appendix 5) and share their

answers with the whole group.

16:00-17:00: Participants will work again in small groups of 4-5 people, different from

those in the morning. They will analyse again the case studies presented before, along

with the identified issues, but this time they will be asked to generate a set of strategies

or to design a program to promote gifted children’s socio-emotional development. The

strategies proposed will be written on post-in notes. Teachers can use the strategies

mentioned in the presentation as a starting point, but they are required to add their own

ideas.

17:00-18:00: Based on the problem tree created in the morning, the group will be

required to create a solution tree (see Appendix 6), which will include the strategies

proposed for the case studies as solutions, but also participants will think about the

potential outcomes of applying these strategies.

18:00-18:30: Teachers will be given the profiles created in the morning session and will

be asked to think about the approach they would use to cope with children’s emotional

needs, based on the discussions and activities they were involved in during the

seminar.

18:30-19:00: The tutor will lead a free discussion about the session, summarizing the

outcomes and emphasising the need to understand the gifted as individuals having

unique needs. Teachers will write down on post-it notes their feedback about the

seminar. In the end, all participants will be added on a Facebook group to keep them

connected after the session, in order to share their experiences and the outcomes of

putting in practice the strategies they developed together in the session. The tutor can

add photos of the problem tree and the solution tree on the Facebook group or any

other materials used in the session, at participants’ request.

The content of the seminar is summarized in a table (see Appendix 7).

Planned method of delivery

The proposed seminar involves two 4-hour sessions – one in the morning and one in

the afternoon. The tutor leading the sessions will be a specialist in working with G&T,

who will be familiar with teacher’s perspective, but who will also have the expertise to

lead a seminar of this kind. Peer tutoring was found to increase learners' motivation

(Ormrod, 2006).

The sessions will include Prezi presentations, group activities, small group and large

group discussions, brainstorming, individual activities and case studies. Group based

activities will give teachers the chance to share their experiences and their methods to

cope with potential issues. However, there may be participants preferring to work alone

rather than in groups; therefore, the seminar will propose individual activities, as well.

The seminar is designed according to Bloom’s taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002), being

based on six cognitive processes which vary from simple to complex:

knowledge – teachers are expected to have a basic knowledge about the topic,

but there will be presentations about gifted education and G&T during the

sessions

comprehension – they need to understand the information presented in order to

add new ideas

application – they are required to create profiles of gifted children they worked

with and then to apply their knowledge to create strategies to cope with these

children’s needs

analysis – participants will analyse case studies

synthesis – as a group, they will create a solution tree which will summarize all

their ideas

evaluation – they can apply the strategies designed in real-life situations and

evaluate their effectiveness.

Participants will be involved in authentic activities (e.g., creating a program for gifted

children) which can be easily transferred to real-world contexts (Ormrod, 2006).

However, authentic activities require participants to have a good knowledge about the

topic (Ormrod, 2006) and even though the seminar involves teachers who worked with

gifted children, they may not have the necessary knowledge to complete all the

activities proposed in a highly effective way. This is why additional information about

G&T is provided during the seminar.

Group activities and discussions aim to encourage cooperating learning which is based

on social constructivism, according to which knowledge is socially constructed through

the collaborative interaction between people (Ormrod, 2006). In this way, it is expected

to achieve an in-depth understanding of the socio-emotional experiences of G&T.

Moreover, sustained dialogue and interaction between participants help create a

community of learners which has multiple benefits including a sense of community

among participants who are supporting each other (Ormrod, 2006). The strategy of

dividing teachers into small groups to address different subtopics (e.g., social isolation,

depression, etc.) has the same purpose – to create a community of learners. The

analysis of case studies aims to increase teachers’ empathy for the unique needs of

gifted children.

All the activities proposed were designed to accommodate all the learning styles

described by Honey and Mumford (1992, cited in Coffield et al., 2004):

activists – those who learn better be doing, by taking action (e.g., brainstorming)

reflectors – those who learn by thinking and carefully observing (e.g., thinking

back at their own experiences with G&T)

pragmatists – practical, realistic learners (e.g., authentic activities which can be

transferred to real-life situations)

theorists – rational learners who like to analyse and synthesise (e.g., problem

tree-solution tree activity).

Based on the principle that “quantity helps breed quality”, brainstorming is a creative

way to generate ideas which are subsequently evaluated and processed to produce

solutions for a proposed problem (Osborn, 1963). The “problem tree/solution tree”

activity illustrates the brainstorming technique. However, the use of brainstorming was

criticised for not being a useful method to generate creative ideas, because telling

participants to be creative may inhibit them. In addition, people may generate more and

better ideas if they work individually (Bronson, 2010). Considering that those

participating in this seminar have experience in working with G&T, it is expected they

will have enough resources to generate ideas in order to complete the tasks effectively.

Furthermore, the tutor will scaffold their performance, being a specialist in the field of

gifted education.

Social media interaction is promoted through the use of the Facebook group which aims

to extend the impact of the seminar beyond the two sessions and to keep teachers

connected. This corresponds to the concept of connectivism according to which

individual is the starting point of the process of learning, but his/her knowledge consists

in a broad network, he/she being connected with other individuals, organizations or

institutions (Siemens, 2005). Teachers will be able to keep sharing their experiences

with the group and maybe to apply the strategies developed during the seminar and to

present their outcomes.

The post-it notes written by teachers at the beginning and at the end of the seminar will

be used to evaluate the impact of the seminar, in order to improve it in the future. The

summary made by the tutor at the end of the session helps teachers to review and

organise the ideas presented during the seminar (Ormrod, 2006).

Level of audience participation

The sessions proposed are based on learner-directed instruction, learners having most

of the control over the seminar, addressing the issues in the way they consider useful

(Ormrod, 2006). The tutor will only guide teachers’ interaction and discussions. The

benefits of a learner-led seminar include increasing participants’ self-esteem, because

each of them will bring a valuable contribution to the sessions, by sharing their own

unique experiences. Also, this type of seminar is more likely than a teacher-led one to

create a community of learners. Gates (2010) proposed that involvement in a

“community circle time” is beneficial for teachers to discuss and analyse gifted children’s

feelings and needs.

Intended outcomes

The present seminar aims to increase teachers’ awareness of how important the

affective component is when working with G&T and to emphasise the fact that G&T

should be seen as individuals, beyond their label. Teachers working with G&T will be

given the opportunity to share their experiences in order to learn from each other how to

effectively address potential issues in the socio-emotional adjustment of G&T.

Moreover, they will design instructional strategies to cope with gifted children’s social

and emotional needs. It is expected that teachers’ involvement in this seminar will

positively affect the socio-emotional development of the G&T they are working with.

Also, it will be created a community of learners who can interact and share their

thoughts about the topic after the seminar, by using social media (i.e., the Facebook

group).

References

Berman, K. B. (2003). The Benefits of Exploring Opera for the Social and Emotional

Development of High-Ability Students. Gifted Child Today, 26(2), pp. 46-53.

Borland, J. H. (2005). Gifted education without gifted children. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E.

Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 1-19). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Brody, L. E., & Stanley, J. C. (2005). Youths who reason exceptionally well

mathematically and or verbally. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.),

Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 20-37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bronson, P. (2010). Forget brainstorming. Retrieved 12 January, 2014, from

http://www.newsweek.com/authors/po-bronson.

Callahan, C. M., & Miller, E. M. (2005). A child-responsive model of giftedness. In R. J.

Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 38-51).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and

pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Retrieved 8

January, 2014, from

http://sxills.nl/lerenlerennu/bronnen/Learning%20styles%20by%20Coffield%20e.

a..pdf.

Cross, T. L. (2000). Social/Emotional Needs: Gifted students’ social and emotional

development in the 21st century. Gifted Child Today, 23(2), pp. 14-15.

Cross, T. L. (2002). Social/Emotional Needs: Competing with Myths about the Social

and Emotional Development of Gifted Students. Gifted child today, 25(3), pp. 44-

65. DOI: 10.4219/gct-2002-76.

Cross, T. L. (2013). Uncharted Territory Growing Up Gifted Amid a Culture of Social

Media. Gifted Child Today, 36(2), pp. 144-145. DOI:

10.1177/1076217513475450.

Estell, D. B., Farmer, T. W., Irvin, M. J., Crowther, A., Akos, P., & Boudah, D. J. (2009).

Students with exceptionalities and the peer group context of bullying and

victimization in late elementary school. Journal of Child and Family

Studies, 18(2), pp. 136-150. DOI 10.1007/s10826-008-9214-1.

French, L. R., Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2011). Do Gifted Students Really Prefer to

Work Alone?. Roeper Review, 33(3), pp. 145-159. DOI:

10.1080/02783193.2011.580497.

Gates, J. (2010). Children with gifts and talents: Looking beyond traditional

labels. Roeper Review, 32(3), pp. 200-206. DOI:

10.1080/02783193.2010.485308.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into

practice, 41(4), pp. 212-218. DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.

McGlonn-Nelson, K. (2005). Looking outward: Exploring the intersections of

sociocultural theory and gifted education. Prufrock Journal, 17(1), pp. 48-55.

DOI: 10.4219/jsge-2005-391.

Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: developing learners (5th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative

problem-solving (3rd ed.). New York: Scribner’s.

Persson, R. S. (2012). A bold and promising model with a few loose ends. High Ability

Studies, 23(1), pp. 97-99. DOI: 10.1080/13598139.2012.679103.

Peterson, J. (2009). Myth 17: Gifted and talented individuals do not have unique social

and emotional needs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), pp. 280-282. DOI:

10.1177/0016986209346946.

Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional

development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future

possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41(1), pp. 119-130.

DOI: 10.1002/pits.10144.

Shechtman, Z., & Silektor, A. (2012). Social competencies and difficulties of gifted

children compared to nongifted peers. Roeper Review, 34(1), pp. 63-72. DOI:

10.1080/02783193.2012.627555.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.International

Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), pp. 3-10.

Silverman, L. K. (1997). The construct of asynchronous development. Peabody Journal

of Education, 72(3-4), pp. 36-58. DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.1997.9681865.

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2004). Intelligence and culture: How culture

shapes what intelligence means, and the implications for a science of well-

being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B,

359(1449), pp. 1427-1434. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1514.

Webb, J. T. (1994). Nurturing social emotional development of gifted children. Retrieved

15 December, 2013, from

http://www.casenex.com/casenex/ericReadings/NurturingSocialEmotionalDev.pdf

.

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem

solving. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 17(2), pp. 89-100.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x.

Appendices

Appendix 1) An example of presentation on gifted education and characteristics of G&T

http://prezi.com/nyz5tmdpnuox/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy

Appendix 2) Problem tree

Appendix 3) Examples of case studies

Case study 1 – Andy

“At only three years of age, Andy’s emotional intensity, curiosity, and inability to relate to

his peers were evident to his parents and his preschool teachers. When Andy was in

the second grade, he was described as “out of sync,” demonstrating notable academic

advancement over his peers while simultaneously showing signs of social isolation. In

addition, Andy began to complain of stomachaches and begged his parents to allow him

to stay at home. Despite the efforts of his parents and educators, these problems

continued sporadically throughout elementary and middle school. By the time Andy

entered middle school, his reputation as a “nerd” was established and his differences

exacerbated to the extent that his parents sought an evaluation and support both in and

out of school. The school psychologist observed Andy to spend the majority of time

trying to avoid the school bullies who had made him a favorite target. His feelings of

social isolation were accompanied by increasing academic invisibility, as he spent most

days trying not to be noticed either socially or academically.” (Reis & Renzulli, 2004, p.

120)

Case study 2 – Daphne

“Daphne was once heralded on the cover of Parade as one of the brightest high school

students in the country and the smartest girl in Maine. Although she grew up in a home

with few resources, from the time she entered school it was clear that she was

extremely advanced intellectually. Her parents and teachers recognized these talents at

a very young age, but while school personnel made some efforts to help Daphne, little

encouragement and support were offered at home. Daphne learned little about effort,

earning high grades with absolutely minimal effort.

When she was in middle school, she won a scholarship to attend a summer program for

gifted and talented students. Despite this opportunity and her work with a gifted and

talented program specialist in her public school, the absence of consistent school and

home support took a toll. Daphne’s grades in high school were variable. Few home

resources, non-supportive parents and little high school challenge affected Daphne,

who eventually attended and subsequently flunked out of college. Later, she lost a few

low paying jobs and struggled to find a way to utilize and further develop her talents and

find personal support. Friendships have been slow to develop and personal

contentment is yet to be realized in her life.” (Reis & Renzulli, 2004, pp. 120-121)

Reference

Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional

development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future

possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41(1), pp. 119-130.

Case study 3 – Jenny

“’Jennie’, a pseudonym given by Martha Morelock (in press) in a wonderful case study,

is a good example of this kind of advanced development. I want to tell you about Jennie,

because her plight stimulated the development of a new conception of giftedness.

When she was 4 1/2, Jennie went through a period of inner turmoil that was so alarming

that her mother sought assistance from a number of experts all over the United States

who had worked with highly gifted children. Jennie had been complaining that her

preschool was boring. One day she was uncharacteristically quiet while riding home

from school. When they reached the house, she announced to her mother that she was

not going back to school; they had nothing to teach her there. She went upstairs, turned

on the television set, then the record player, then she took out a third grade math book

and began to do the problems, and she initiated a conversation with her mother--all at

the same time. Her mother guessed that she was trying to make up for not getting

enough stimulation at school. That night, Jennie had the first tantrum in her life. She

beat her mother with both fists and cried herself to sleep. Her mother attributed the

tantrum to the intensity of her frustration with a school program that was not sufficiently

complex to meet her daughter's needs. When Jennie awakened the next morning, it

seemed as though everything took on a new and different meaning to her. For three

weeks, she kept asking where everything had come from and how long they had had

such things as the refrigerator, the computer, the desk, etc. Then she began asking

about the universe and how life began.

She seemed to be "going back to the very beginnings... she wanted to know

about...how the ocean was created" (p. 25). One night while bathing Jennie, her mother

realized what Jennie was really trying to find out: "Gee, Jennie, when you were asking

about the computer and how long we've had this and how long we've had that, you

meant how long have they been here on earth." (p. 25) "Yes, Mommy," Jennie replied

tearfully. At night Jennie would lie awake trying to understand how knowledge is

passed on from generation to generation, and then she began to ask about God and

death. She asked her mother if God loves everyone. Her mother replied, "Of course,

Jennie. He loves everybody." "Well, where do the bad people go? Don't they go to

Heaven?" If God loves everybody, then all people would go to Heaven... (p. 26)

And she'd lay at night with tears in her eyes and not wanting to cry, cause she was so

self-controlled, knowing that she could die at any time. Cause she knew her own

mortality... You'd say to her "Oh you're gonna be fine, of course." "You're gonna live

and I'm gonna be a Nana and..." And she'd say, "Well, nobody knows for sure what's

gonna happen, Mom. Nobody knows for sure. You can get in an accident and nobody

knows really when they're gonna die. It's nice if everybody lives to be old, but that's not

always what happens, cause children die sometimes." (pp. 26-27)”

Reference

Silverman, L. K. (1995). The universal experience of being out-of-sync. Advanced

development: A collection of works on giftedness in adults, pp. 1-12. Retrieved

15 December, 2013, from http://talentdevelop.com/articles/TUEOBO.html.

Appendix 4) An example of presentation on strategies to promote the socio-emotional

development of G&T

http://prezi.com/ot-xzluobrae/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy

Appendix 5) Worksheet for a group based activity

Subtopic (e.g. social isolation)

Observable behaviour How to deal with it?

-

-

-

-

-

-

Appendix 6) Solution tree

Appendix 7) Brief outline of the seminar

Time Task Justification

Mo

rnin

g s

essio

n

9:00-9:30 Ice breaker Getting to know each other is essential if the aim of the seminar is to create a community of learners. Also, teachers need to feel comfortable with each other, because they will work together in small groups during the sessions.

9:30-10:00 Prezi presentation including information about G&T and

Bloom’s taxonomy (Learners need to have a basic knowledge about

the field of gifted education the topic.)

Expository instruction using both visual (the Prezi presentation itself) and auditory stimuli (the voice of the tutor) in order to accommodate different learning preferences.

10:00-10:30 Creating the profile of a gifted child participants worked with

Authentic activity which helps teachers to make connections between the information presented and real-life contexts (Ormrod, 2006). This may be an activity preferred by both pragmatists – who like to apply theory into practice and reflectors – who learn by analysing their previous experiences (Honey & Mumford, 1992, cited in Coffield et al., 2004).

10:30-11:00 Creating a problem tree This activity is based on the brainstorming technique and aims to provide an in-depth understating of the topic.

It may be beneficial for both activists who like to take action and theorists who prefer to analyse in order to understand a problem.

11:00-11:15 Short break

11:15-12:00 Group work – analysis of case studies

Vygotsky’s social contructivism theory proposes knowledge is socially-constructed, as a result of a cooperative interaction between people (Ormrod, 2006).

Working in groups may be beneficial for a deeper understanding of the cases proposed.

12:00-13:00 Large group discussion – sharing experiences

The purpose of this activity is to increase participants’ self-esteem, because they get the chance to make a valuable contribution to the seminar, by presenting their own

experiences.

Break 13:00-15:00

Aft

ern

oo

n s

essio

n

15:00-15:30 Prezi presentation about potential strategies to promote G&T socio-emotional adjustment

This presentation aims to provide a starting point for the next activities, by suggesting methods teachers can use when working with G&T.

15:30-16:00 Group activity The main topic (socio-emotional development of G&T) is split into few subtopics (e.g., perfectionism, social isolation, depression, bullying) and each group will have to analyse a subtopic; in the end they will share their answers. This technique helps create a community of learners (Ormrod, 2006).

16:00-17:00 Group work – analysis of case studies

Based on the information provided, teachers will work again in groups to create strategies appropriate for different gifted children. The aim of this activity is to increase teachers’ awareness of the G&T individual needs and to increase their empathy for these children and their unique experiences.

17:00-18:00 Creating a solution tree This activity involves a synthesis of all discussions and activities from the afternoon session, being based on one of the six cognitive processes of the Bloom’s taxonomy – synthesis.

18:00-18:30 Individual activity – finding appropriate strategies for each profile created before

Reflectors may prefer working alone rather than being involved in group activities.

This activity is a chance to apply all the information teachers were exposed to during the seminar to a profile of a gifted child.

18:30-19:00 Summary The purpose of the summary made by the tutor is to organise all the

FB group

material presented during the sessions.

The Facebook group aims to keep teachers connected after the seminar so they can continue sharing their experiences.