Articles from February 2023

In my previous civic issue post, I discussed the problems regarding the identification process of gifted students, specifically the racial inequalities and biases present in these programs across the country. There is a multitude of other inequalities besides race, such as socioeconomic status and disabilities that I could discuss. Truthfully, there is a lot more information on this topic than I originally thought. So, for this week’s post, I decided to deviate to a slightly different area that personally interests me: the gifted kid burnout.

The trend of gifted kid burnout has been around for a while, and it got another round of attention when the line “I can’t talk right now, I’m doing sad gifted kid burnout sh*t” went viral on TikTok. Following the line, students shared the random activities they were doing. Some examples from a YouTube compilation video included, “reading papers I got a 100 on to feel the rush of academic validation,” “giving up on hobbies if I don’t immediately excel at them”, and “taking every possible personality and mental illness test so I can try to label myself because I have no idea who I am anymore” (1). Can you relate to any of these? I know I certainly found some. Plus, I even went down my own rabbit hole just finding all these said TikToks and memes. At first glance, these things may seem funny because they are so relatable, but is that not the crux of the issue? The videos are not talking about trivial matters; they are exposing serious struggles that are often overlooked. Why do so many gifted students feel this way?

One major factor is perfectionism and the expectations that come with being labeled as gifted. Like the one TikTok described, gifted kids frequently receive validation for their academic achievements. Teachers and parents tell them they are “smart” or “highly intelligent” and that they have “great potential.” These words are seen as compliments, but they can instill this notion that they must constantly perform at a high level. The pressure to be meet their families’, teachers’, or personal expectations creates an instant recipe for high levels of stress and anxiety. Students who only focus on their achievements can feel “less satisfied with life in general” (2). A famous psychological study, the Terman Study of the Gifted, “followed 1,528 high-IQ children from their childhood in 1921 for the next 80 years. An analysis of their lives … found that those who were more aware of their ‘gifted’ status when they were young were less likely to rate their life accomplishments positively as adults” (2). The results of this study highlight the negative effects of labeling young children as “gifted.” This categorization can cause students to believe that their worth is based solely on their intelligence, which leads to a fear of failure. If they do not meet expectations or get a lower grade, then they feel that they have failed. This way of thinking has come to be viewed as a fixed mindset.

Perhaps you have heard of this term in your classes or even before coming to Penn State. The fixed and growth mindsets correspond to how people view intelligence. Those with the growth mindset believe that intelligence is not innate and can be grown through learning and hard work. On the other hand, people with a fixed mindset believe that intelligence is, well, fixed and cannot be increased—you’re either born intelligent or you’re not. As you may have guessed, the latter mindset is the one many gifted students possess.

In classes where gifted kids are not being challenged, they become accustomed to receiving high scores without putting in much effort. They are praised for their intelligence, and this makes them believe “the dangerous notion that no-effort academic achievement defines them as smart or gifted” (3). These students are under the impression that if something is challenging, then they must not be good at it, or they are no longer smart. Because of this, the transition to high school and/or college oftentimes spells trouble for gifted students. A 2020 study in Gifted Child Quarterly found “that many talented kids don’t adjust well to college life and start underperforming. Some take on too much, while others find the new challenges and learning situations difficult (2). This can be attributed to the fact that gifted students are faced with rigorous courses for the first time. Suddenly, they need to put forth effort in order to succeed, causing those with a fixed mindset to “lose confidence and motivation” (3). And thus begins the cycle of gifted kid burnout.

Moreover, it is not simply the mindset that leads to burnout. Many gifted kids struggle socially and emotionally, which stem from their cognitive abilities developing at a different rate than their emotional and social ones (4). Children may find it difficult to get along with peers their same age and may also have behavioral issues. One professional clinical counselor states, “’These kids are so smart, and people are used to talking to these kids like they’re adults already. They’re just kids. Just because they can understand what you’re saying doesn’t mean that they’re mature’” (5). Her words seem to exemplify the problem of gifted children being too often viewed as “perfectly fine with no issues or struggles” simply because they are labeled as “intelligent.”

Another characteristic of gifted students is overexcitability. A research article titled “Stress, Anxiety & Mental Health Problems in Gifted Adolescents” claims, “Gifted adolescents are considered to be more sensitive to the world than their peers and have strong reactions to various stimuli” (6). Some overexcitabilities include psychomotor, sensory, imaginational, intellectual, and emotion overexcitability. All of these can lead to various mental health issues such as anxiety, panic attacks, insomnia, existential depression, and more (6). These mental health struggles compounded with all the other expectations, stress, and fixed mindset makes a burnout seem inevitable. It is quite apparent that many gifted kids are simply not okay. The struggles they are dealing with should not be left alone–left to fester for the rest of their lives. Society needs to take a long, hard look at gifted programs and the entire concept of labeling students as “gifted” to see if this is really beneficial for children in the long-run.

Resources:

1. https://youtu.be/GhVNqwQZoyE
2. https://www.bustle.com/wellness/gifted-kid-burnout-syndrome-videos-tiktok-experts
3. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-secret-to-raising-smart-kids1/
4. https://raisinglifelonglearners.com/navigating-social-and-emotional-needs-of-gifted-kids/
5. https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/22/23322571/gifted-kid-education-without-funding-leads-to-burn-out
6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347942691_Stress_Anxiety_Mental_Health_Problems_in_Gifted_Adolescents

Gifted programs are seen in schools across the nation. More recently, they have come under scrutiny for a variety of issues, including inequality and creating divisions amongst students, but for now, most of them are not going anywhere anytime soon. Seeing as we are currently in an honors course, with some of us being in the honors college as well, I feel that this topic is quite relevant to many of us.

For me, personally, I was placed into my school’s gifted program (called S.E.E.K.) in third grade. Two days out of a 6-day cycle, I went to my S.E.E.K. class instead of having the usual gym or art class. With the other students classified as “gifted”, I learned about topics and completed projects that were not part of the normal curriculum. Rather than finding the class to be stressful or extra work, I greatly enjoyed engaging with the topics, and I met many of my closest friends there. However, at such a young age, I was completely unaware of all that went on behind the scenes to place me into such a program. So, what exactly are gifted programs?

Gifted programs are meant to enhance the education of students who are considered gifted and talented. They are supposed to academically challenge students and set them up for future success. Estimates show that about 6% of public-school students are enrolled in these programs (1). Some gifted education strategies include acceleration, enrichment, curriculum compacting, grouping, and pull-out and other specialized programs (1). There are different ways to implement these programs, and it will vary from state to state and even from district to district. According to the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC), the fact that gifted education is left to local discretion means there is “variability in the quality of services and creates inequities of access for students in poverty, from racial and ethnic minority groups, English learners, and those with disabilities” (1).

The idea of inequality in gifted programs had never crossed my mind when I was younger. While my hometown has very small black and Latinx populations, there was still not a single student from those racial/ethnic demographics in my gifted class. I could probably count on my hands the number of black and Latinx students who were in the accelerated track in middle and high school. My school is far from the only one to underrepresent certain student populations in gifted programs. It is estimated that African American students are underrepresented by 43%, 30% for Latinx students, 13% for Native American students, and 75% for students with disabilities and those still learning English (2).

These jarring percentages highlight a serious issue in gifted education, but why are these groups so underrepresented? To answer that question, we first need to examine who is considered gifted and how gifted students are identified.

The term “gifted” is defined differently by everyone. The NAGC has a long-winded definition that, in simple terms, goes as follows, “demonstrates outstanding levels of aptitude or competence in one or more domains” (3). On the Pennsylvania Association for Gifted Education (PAGE) website, there’s a map showing each state’s own definition of “gifted.” Pennsylvania defines gifted as “a student who is exceptional … because the student meets the definition of ‘mentally gifted’” which is later defined as, “Outstanding intellectual and creative ability the development of which requires specially designed programs or support services, or both, not ordinarily provided in the regular education program” (4). Based on these definitions, one can easily see that the term “gifted” is quite subjective.

This element of subjectiveness makes identifying gifted students difficult and is one reason for the lack of diversity in gifted education programs. Many processes for finding and selecting gifted students are based on nominations or evaluations by teachers, administrators, and parents. There are also objective assessments. These include student cumulative records, achievement tests that may be standardized or focused on specific subjects (math, science, or English), and ability tests that usually measure IQ (3).

When I was in third grade, I have little recollection of how I was selected. I vaguely remember being taken to a little room and taking some strange test, but no one told me why I was taking it. At the end, all I got was a tootsie roll and then was told to go back to class. A few years later, I learned that my parents had to submit papers for me, providing consent to be evaluated and describing any instances of “giftedness” from me that they observed. My second-grade teacher also told me that she originally wanted to recommend me for the gifted program, but that year the school district stopped allowing teachers to nominate students.

While there may have been no bias in my selection (I will never know for sure), it is a criticism of the identification process. There have been various studies that have looked at how racial bias may play a role in who gets selected for gifted programs. One such study was conducted by Rachel Fish, an assistant professor of special education at New York University. She found that a student’s race/ethnicity impacted whether a teacher referred them for special education or gifted education. In the study, teachers were more likely to refer white students for gifted testing who displayed “academic strength and emotional sensitivity, clues for good candidates for gifted education” compared to students of color (5). Fish stated, “If students are placed in special education and gifted programs differentially because of racial bias among teachers, then students are likely receiving inappropriate educational services” (5).

Unfortunately, racial bias is a difficult thing to get rid of it because many are not even aware of it and how it affects their daily actions. This leaves minority students at a disadvantage if they are never recognized as gifted and given the opportunity for enrichment or acceleration that will academically challenge them. Furthermore, if students of color only ever see people who do not look like them in the gifted programs, then they may believe that they do not belong there. It may discourage underrepresented students from reaching their full potential in school, which can have a negative impact on the rest of their lives. This can also evolve into a lack of diversity in the workplace, especially in high-paying jobs that typically require college degrees. Taking all this information into consider, we can begin to understand that the issues with gifted programs are not small. They do not just pertain to lower-level education but extend far beyond into multiple aspects of society.

*There are many more issues related to the identification process for gifted programs that I plan to delve into in the future, but I simply did not have space for in this post.

Resources:

1. https://dev.nagc.org/resources-publications/gifted-education-practices
2. https://soeonline.american.edu/blog/lack-of-diversity-in-gifted-education/
3. https://www.giftedpage.org/
4. https://www.pacodeandbulletin.gov/Display/pacode?file=/secure/pacode/data/022/chapter16/s16.1.html
5. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161018094738.htm