1

Lärarprogrammet Examensarbete, 10 poäng vt 2005 ______________________________________________________________ Kurs: Pedagogiskt arbete C

Gifted students? Swedish Upper Secondary School Teachers –

their Awareness of and Presuppositions about Gifted Students Author: Henrika Florén Supervisor: Catharina Höög

2

Abstract The aim of this essay is to look for presuppositions about giftedness in six Swedish teachers, and to evaluate their awareness of the needs and conditions for gifted students in school. This is done through informal interviews and with a hermeneutic approach. This study confirms that teachers do not know enough about gifted students, how they function or how to identify them. The teachers’ knowledge about giftedness appears largely to be tacit and/or fragmentary. They appear unaware of gifted underachievers and that these can be found among disruptive students. Even though the teachers were presented with a definition of giftedness that encompasses much more than academic skill they still discuss giftedness almost exclusively as related to academic skill. Keywords: awareness, attitudes, creativity, education, giftedness, gifted children, gifted students, gifted underachievers, intelligence, learning, presuppositions, school, school dropout, school refusal, Swedish education, Swedish teachers, upper secondary school teachers, teaching problems.

3

List of Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Aim and hypothesis 2 3. Definition of central concepts 3 4. Background 4 4.1 The Individual 4

4.1.1 Giftedness 4 4.1.1.1 Intelligence 5 4.1.1.2 Creativity 5

4.1.2 Identifying gifted students 6 4.1.3 Myths and misconceptions 7

4.2 Society 8 4.2.1 Ideology & power 8 4.2.2 Education 9 4.2.3 Steering document in Swedish education 10 4.2.4 Teaching gifted students 11

5.Method 13 5.1 The study: 13

5.1.2 Research context and description of informants 14 5.1.3 Procedure 14

5.2 Method considerations 14 5.3 Ethical considerations 15 5.4 Method of analysis 15 6. Results and analysis 16 6.1 Presuppositions about giftedness 16 6.2 Awareness of the needs of gifted students 17

6.2.1 How gifted students function at school 18 6.2.2 Special solutions for gifted students 18

6.3 Awareness of conditions for gifted students 18

4

7. Summary of Results 20 7.1 Presuppositions and attitudes 20 7.2 Awareness of the needs of gifted students 21

7.2.1 How gifted students function in school 21 7.2.2 Special solutions for gifted students 21

7.3 Awareness of conditions for gifted students 21 8 Discussion 22 8.1 Discussion of method 22 8.2 Discussion of results and previous research 22 8.3 Conclusion 24 8.3 Further research 25 List of sources 27 Appendices: Appendix 1: Letter to participants (in Swedish) 30 Appendix 2: Questions (in Swedish) 31s

1. Introduction

Child

Your clear eye is the one absolutely beautiful thing. I want to fill it with color and ducks, The zoo of the new …

Sylvia Plath (Baym 1999: 2754) Why choose to write about giftedness, a subject which is both difficult to define and controversial? I was a child and went to school, and I clearly remember what it felt like. It was not all sunshine and fun. There were injustices and difficulties and problems. I remember the feeling of being in a world apart from that of the grown-ups. I remember waiting, watching and wanting things. I remember looking out the window, dreaming and being told off for not paying attention. I remember many things clearly, not just myself but other children as well. I grew up. I had children. My children went to school and many things have changed but many more are just the same. The injustices, the difficulties and the problems remain. Many children still do not fit in at school for different reasons and giftedness is one reason. I remember, and I see today the difficult situation gifted children at times have in school. I am now on my last term of training to be a teacher, and the issue of giftedness has hardly been touched upon at all. The topics of giftedness and intelligence have notably been absent from the required literature studied during the three courses (Pedagogiskt Arbete A, B & C, Högskolan Dalarna August 2003-June 2005) in teacher training. I feel there is a real need for study and information on the subject of giftedness. My position in the debate of giftedness is pointedly on the side of any child in need of help and support, gifted or not. Having thought about the issue of giftedness for a long time, I take the opportunity to use this required study and essay, the last task in my teacher training, to gain an insight into teachers’ experience and awareness of giftedness in the school situation. I do this with a hermeneutic approach and through informal interviews. The teachers who have participated in this study currently work with adolescents in Swedish upper secondary school. Together they have an extensive experience of teaching.

2

2. Aim and hypothesis

The aim of this essay is to examine whether there are presuppositions about giftedness in six Swedish teachers, and to evaluate their awareness of the needs and conditions for gifted students in school. A gifted individual is here defined as someone who continues to surprise in knowledge and skill, with an exceptional ability in one or several behaviours. A behaviour is in this context understood as a human achievement, activity or function.

Den är särbegåvad som kontinuerligt förvånar både kunskapsmässigt och tillämpningsmässigt genom sin osedvanliga förmåga i ett eller flera beteenden. Ett beteende i detta samanhang förstås som en mänsklig prestation, aktivitet eller funktion (Persson 1996: 50).

Persson’s‘särbegåvad’ (gifted) and its definition is used, as it is closer to the English concept ‘gifted’ than ‘begåvad’. ‘Begåvad’ in Swedish is used in a wider context than the English word ‘gifted’. There are problems with the words ‘intelligent’ and ‘begåvad’ (gifted) as they are higly emotive. The purpose of using Persson’s defintion and the word ‘särbegåvad’, is to use a slightly less emotive word and a definition which includes more than academic skills. My hypothesis is that teachers are not fully aware of gifted students, what the needs of gifted students are, or how to identify gifted students. If the study confirms the hypothesis it will give rise to the question what to do about the situation?

3

3. Central concepts Creativity: The concept of creativity is related to intelligence and is no less complicated. Many researchers in the field of creativity today claim that creativity should be seen as a sophisticated application of intelligence. This means that creativity (and giftedness) can be seen as seen a natural part of all human behaviour (Persson 1996: 74). It is possible that creativity is an application rather than an intellectual function (Cropley 1994). Gardner (1998) states creativity to be the highest form of application of intelligence in his theory of multiple intelligences. Domains in giftedness: Gifteness can be divided into six domains; athletic, communicative, academic, linguistic, artistic and technical (Persson 1996: 124). Giftedness: The definition of giftedness used in this essay refers to someone who continues to surprise those around him/her in knowledge and practice, with an exceptional ability in one or several behaviours. A behaviour is in this context understood as a human achievement, activity or function (Persson:1996: 50). Gifted Underachievers: Gifted underachievers are students who hide their ability or who for other reasons are not spotted by their teachers (Persson 1996: 270, 276). Note that the definition does not include gifted students of whom the teacher is aware, but where the teacher feels the student is not showing the extent of his or her ability in the classroom. Ideology: As used in this essay ‘ideology’ is not limited to a role in reproducing and legitimising class domination. Instead ‘ideology’ is used in the sense that every group has and needs ideologies, which means that ideologies are not right or wrong, only more or less effective in promoting the interests of a group. The cognitive aspects of ‘ideology’ used in this sense is that ideologies “represent the basic principles that govern social judgement- what group members think is right or wrong, true or false” (Bell & Garrett 1998: 24). Intelligence: General intelligence g is thought of as a singular intellectual resource that underpins virtually all intelligent behaviour and is strongly correlated to IQ and academic and social accomplishment (Ceci 1996: 5).

4

4. Background

…The children learn to cipher and to sing, To study reading-books and history, To cut and sew, be neat in everything In the best modern way…

William Butler Yeats 1926 ( Abrams 1999: 2284)

What is giftedness and what does it mean for someone to be gifted? In one sense every person has some gift and something to contribute, just as intelligence is something inherently human. We all possess faculties of thought and logic. In this sense giftedness and intelligence are human traits that can be found in us all. However in the context of this essay it not the usual which is discussed but the exceptional. Giftedness here is something that stands apart and differentiates an individual from the majority. 4.1 The Individual 4.1.1 Giftedness Gifted individuals think in a different way and perceive the world differently. They know more than others and are more aware of what they know. There seems to be an uncommonly high number of ‘connections’ in the brain between representations of their knowledge. This makes its easier to assimilate new knowledge and information, which simply means that gifted individuals learn faster than others (Rowe 1997: 135). As a result the knowledge and insights of gifted children often cause surprise. In cognitive terms a gifted individual compared to normal individuals knows more, has a better memory, a more effective way of learning, an ability of selective cognitive speed, an unusually high ability to apply his/her knowledge and is able to find and formulate important problems (Persson 1996: 53, 56). The Swedish researcher Persson (1996: 124) suggests giftedness be divided into six domains; athletic, communicative, academic, linguistic, artistic and technical. Winner (1996) on the other hand only discusses exceptionally gifted children in art, music and academic domains. There is no generally accepted definition of how to divide and define the different domains or fields of giftedness but, giftedness as such can be attributed to all human behaviour. Gifted individuals become very skilled in their field of interest. This is because they have a capacity to work more efficiently than the majority. Note that a majority of researchers in the field of giftedness today agree that intelligence is only one part of the concept giftedness, and that gifted behaviour is not limited to activities found in school (Persson 1996: 57, 113). Research identifies certain personality traits in gifted individuals. Winner (1996: 14) finds three distinguishing traits in gifted children. They are precocious, want to follow their own pace and have an overwhelming desire to learn and master their chosen field of interest. According to Tardiff and Sternberg (1998 cited in Persson 1996: 54) gifted people are prone to take risks, prone to confront opposition, curious, unconventional, intuitive, emotional, humoristic, devoted to their chosen field of occupation or task, organised and self reliant and thrive in environments and with problems where no outcome is certain. Gifted individuals are often colourful personalities. They are intense and fascinating. Some gifted children are resilient and can fend for themselves, but by no means all. Gifted individuals appear to be more sensitive than the average person, and it is not easy to be

5

exceptionally sensitive. Not only do gifted children take criticism very seriously, but they can develop an extreme sensitivity to the slightest indication of a certain attitude, especially if they feel their identity threatened. Some individuals then turn inwards and distance themselves from the world which is so painful (Persson 1996: 272). To be gifted is to be vulnerable. Gifted individuals may trigger feelings of dislike and hostility at any stage from kindergarten to professional life as an adult. This is because gifted people have a tendency to reveal weaknesses in other people and systems through their insight and knowledge (Persson 1996: 198). 4.1.1.1 Intelligence There are difficulties with the word ‘intelligence’. One problem is that expressions such as ‘intelligence’ and ‘high IQ’ are emotive and carry ideological meanings (see ideology below). Another that the word ’intelligence’ seems to have strong associations to the classroom. This may suggest that intelligence is mainly about learning in a school situation, which it is not (Cooper 2001: 16). Learning to read early can be a characteristic of a gifted individual (Winner 1996), but not all gifted individuals learn to read at an early age (Persson 1996: 204). Intelligence may involve different functions for different individuals which makes it even more difficult to identify who will live productive and successful lives by a traditional IQ-test (Ceci 1996, Persson 1996: 57). There are different ways to measure that which we call intelligence, but it is not probable that a test or a single index can measure the abundance of mental functions which are the base for human intelligent behaviour. Traditional IQ is doubtful as a measure of intelligence as it only measures one facet of intelligent behaviour (Ceci 1996: 44). General intelligence, g, may be a better term for evaluating intelligence. General intelligence g is thought of as a singular intellectual resource that underpins virtually all intelligent behaviour and is strongly correlated to IQ and academic and social accomplishment (Ceci 1996: 5). There are also Gardner’s (1998) theories about multiple intelligences, which have become popular with educators. If there are different intelligences the teacher can look for other areas to encourage if a child has learning problems in one area. However it is not probable that a student who is far below average in verbal or mathematical ability would be far above average in some other field of ability (Cooper 2001: 71). But no matter how we try to define and measure intelligence we have to keep in mind that we measure intelligence in the context of Western culture, education and social stratification (Ceci 1996: 35, 46, 60). 4.1.1.2 Creativity The concept of creativity is related to intelligence and no less complicated. Many researchers today claim that creativity should be seen as a sophisticated application of intelligence. This means that creativity (and giftedness) can be seen as a natural part of all human behaviour (Persson 1996: 74). It is possible that creativity is an application rather than an intellectual function (Cropley 1994), and Gardner (1998) states creativity is the highest form of application of intelligences in his theory of multiple intelligences. Different theories and observations do at times contradict. The existing theories are tools and as such useful but with built-in limitations, which should not be forgotten (Persson 1996: 97). Some researchers separate giftedness meaning high IQ but not necessarily creative, from creative giftedness combined with a high IQ. In this context the creative personality (Ericson & Smith 1991) is often talked about. Researchers generally agree that a creative individual

6

has the ability to think metaphorically, is flexible and handles new situations well. He/she is an individual who is a relatively independent, logical thinker, who visualises mental concepts easily and can disregard the usual, and possible hindering ways of thinking in different contexts (Persson 1996: 72-73). Creativity research today, as summarised by Tardiff and Sternberg (1988), agrees that a creative act requires time, but there may be moments of sudden insight during the time it takes to complete the creative process. There also appears to be an element of friction involved. There are some unconscious elements to creativity but that is not all there is to is. Creative behaviour can be described as a group of cognitive characteristics; a creative person has a relatively high IQ, produces originality, is well-spoken with a large vocabulary, expresses him or herself easily and has a vivid imagination. Gifted people are often considered to be not only exceptionally intelligent but also exceptionally creative. They seem to become absorved in the creative process in a way that is more emotionally intense than for most people. When tested for creativity and intelligence, children who score well on both tests do better in school than children who have a high score in just one or the other test (Persson 1996: 64, 75, 78-81). But creative children may have problems concentrating on the teacher and often show non-conformist behaviour. This is generally not regarded as something positive in school (Carlsson 2004: 258). According to creativity researchers Albans and Runcos (1986: 340) the typically creative child is met with more hostility than other children who are equally intelligent but less creative. People with a strong imagination are less effective in controlling their thoughts and feelings, and they often develop behaviour which is meant to keep demands from the environment at bay. Threats and/or rewards are not effective which means creative people are not easy to control. They are not people who follow a ‘normal’ mould of how to behave (Carlsson 2004: 264). 4.1.2 Identifying gifted students It is not to be taken for granted that gifted students show the real extent of their ability in a normal classroom, or that a teacher can be successful in identifying gifted behaviour without help. It may very well be that a disruptive student is simply bored and under-stimulated (Persson 1996: 52). Some gifted children even refuse school completely. School refusal behaviour or drop-out in youth may be triggered by above or below normal intelligence as well as by “general discrepancies between a student’s ability and performance and specific discrepancies between a student’s grade level and reading level” (Kearney 2001: 199-200). Students who hide their ability or who for other reasons are not spotted by their teachers are called gifted underachievers. Note that gifted underachievers in this definition are not gifted students whom the teacher is aware but who, the teacher feels, are not performing as well as they could. Gifted underachievers as used in this study are a category of gifted students or children who are not identified as gifted by their teacher or teachers. Gifted underachievers either hide their ability or have some sort of handicap, which gets in the way of learning. This may include problems with eyesight or hearing, dyslexia, disabilities and emotional disorders. Among the gifted underachievers are also found students who may consciously choose to do badly just to conform better or who misbehave to get attention. They may disrupt the order in the classroom and the teaching in such a way that it becomes impossible for the teacher to teach. The teacher may well feel it would be better not to have the child in the classroom at all. These students are hardly classed as gifted by their teachers as they sometimes behave as if the opposite was the case. Exceptionally creative and practically gifted children may also belong to this category of children who hide their

7

capacity, as may children from homes with very limited economic resources and some groups of immigrants and ethnic minorities (Persson 1996: 270, 276). The Israeli researcher Butler-Por (1993) believes teachers and parents sometimes miss creatively and /or practically gifted children because they are completely focused on the child conforming to academic achievement. According to Butler-Por a teacher who wants to find out if a student really is gifted needs to be observant of differences in how the student performs in tests, quizzes, homework and how the student otherwise formulates questions and suppositions. The teacher should be attentive of if the student appears to have extensive knowledge, (general or specific), which has been learned from reading at home but lacks knowledge that is specific to homework. Furthermore the teacher should try to find out if the student has activities or interests outside school which require commitment but appears to be uninterested in school. If possible the teacher should compare observations to those of other teachers and the student’s parents. 4.1.3 Myths and misconceptions In fiction and on film, geniuses are to this day portrayed as more or less strange. The myth that gifted people are mentally unstable has historic explanations. Renaissance man believed in something called nervous energy. Anything which deviated from the normal had to do with nervous energy. The belief was that the Creator had given every individual a certain amount of nervous energy. If it was spent too quickly or too early it led to psychological exhaustion, which was believed to cause insanity. This meant that during the renaissance it was thought necessary to conserve mental and emotional energy. This myth still prevails. Every time it is said of a gifted, precocious child that he or she should go out and play instead of sitting and reading, it is the renaissance myth which pokes its head up. Even though many scientific discoveries have been made into how the human mind works it appears that the renaissance belief is still present. Research into how the mind works and the modern concept of intelligence means that the scientific community has left the idea of nervous energy and the risk of depleting it behind (Persson 1996: 82). There is another stereotype of the gifted being small, skinny and wearing glasses, but there are no physical differences between gifted individuals and others. You cannot see who is gifted by simply looking at a person. Gifted children are physically like most children, possibly with the exception of the linguistically gifted who appear to be more nearsighted as a group than the population in general (Persson 1996: 82). There is also a prevailing idea of the gifted being socially maladjusted, but according to Freeman (1979) gifted children do not differ in their psychological and social development from other children. However for children who can be regarded as extreme even within the group of gifted children, there do appear to be problems with relations to children of average intelligence and of the same age. This social isolation can be broken up if these gifted individuals are grouped with others like themselves. If not, giftedness, just like a handicap, can lead to feelings of sadness and social isolation. It is the lack of understanding and communication at a certain level which is the cause of social isolation and not some genetic predisposition of gifted individuals to be asocial (Persson 1996: 82, Winner 1996: 21). Winner (1996) argues that it is a myth that gifted children are equally gifted or intelligent in all domains. Gifted children have often shown interest and aptitude for a domain at a very early age. It is generally believed that gifted children have a high IQ, but according to Winner there is little evidence of a high IQ when it comes to being gifted in the domain of music or art. Another myth is that gifted children are just a product of ambitious parents who train and nurture their children into excellence. Exceptionally gifted children often have supportive

8

parents but no parent can produce a Mozart of a child if the potential is not there to begin with. Biology cannot be disregarded. The common consensus in the academic world today is that there are genetic influences on intelligence (Cooper 2001: 106). Finally Winner (1996: 20) disposes of the myth that gifted children become successful and exceptionally creative adults. There are many factors that interact in an individual’s life other than giftedness; personality, motivation, family environment, possibilities and chance all affect the outcome of any individual’s life. Gifted individuals are no exception. 4.2 Society 4.2.1 Ideology & power The French philosopher Bourdieu (1977, 1991) sees the emergence of modern society in terms of differentiation of fields. The economy, the state, the legal system, religion, culture and the arts emerge as separate fields which are partly autonomous, but at the same time linked. Each is marked by its own separate form of institution. Schools are one example of institutions in society. The schools are there to educate and socialise children into democratic and productive citizens. Schools have throughout history played an institutional role in a system of control and coercion (Chomsky 2000: 16). According to Chomsky, schools are institutions that reproduce the dominant ideology. This results in schools being undemocratic by nature even in democratic systems. Chomsky even goes as far as to claim “that the less democratic schools are, the more they need to teach democratic ideals (Chomsky 2000: 27). From the child’s and parents’ point of view, school is a place to learn. For the children and parents to influence the education system in any major way they need to find politicians to represent them (Fairclough 1995: 182). In relation to institutions in society, the single individual has very little power. Schools are in this light not only a place for learning, but also institutions where the power structure (Foucault 1972) places the student in a position where he has little chance to affect his own situation. The Swedish curricula Lpo-94 and Lpf-94 are in intent meant to give the student more influence over the school situation than earlier curricula. These curricula give every child the right to have his or her individual needs in education met, but the student has to rely on the teachers’ help if this is to happen. The child is also dependant on the teacher’s ability to see and understand his needs. Children and adolescents have to rely on adults to stand up for them assertively and protect them from abuse of power, whether societal or individual in nature (Miller 1987: 75). Modern systems of education in general take into consideration the development of children and adolescents and their individual and socio-emotional needs, but gifted students seem to be trapped in an unfortunate situation, which is often made political (Persson 1996). The far right consider intelligence to be hereditary and draw political conclusions from that. The extreme left oppose psychological tests, discard the idea of general intelligence g and specifically the genetic background to general intelligence, and stress the importance of the environment and the development of every child’s individuality (Cooper 2001). The Swedish researcher Persson (1996) poses the question whether there is such a thing as genetic equality1, but concludes, supported by research in cognition and behavioural sciences, that there is not. We differ from each other not only because of our environment but also because of our genetic make up. Persson’s view is that as we cannot rely on genetic equality,

1 referring to the Swedish concept ‘jämlikhet’

9

we need to develop a moral equality. This includes understanding, acceptance and an active responsibility toward all individuals regardless of their individual potential (Persson 1996: 107, 110). The aim in research about giftedness and its applications to teaching is to see to all children’s needs on every level in society, but no study in the field of giftedness and intelligence is unaffected by ideological issues. Every text has an ideological perspective, which means a system of norms and values about social relations (Renkema 1993: 145). Fairclough understands ‘ideology as ´meaning in the service of power’ […]2 Ideologies are propositions that figure as implicit assumptions in text, which contribute to producing or reproducing unequal relations of power, relations of domination” (Fairclough 1995: 14). As used in this text, ‘ideology’ is not limited to a role of reproducing and legitimising class domination. Instead ‘ideology’ is used in the sense that every group has and needs ideologies, which means that ideologies are not right or wrong only more or less effective in promoting the interests of a group. The cognitive aspects of ‘ideology’ used in this sense is that ideologies “represent the basic principles that govern social judgement- what group members think is right or wrong, true or false” (Bell & Garrett 1998: 24). 4.2.2 Education Bergström (1995) and Gardner (1998) both criticise the basic school systems in the industrialised world for lack a of creativity. Bergström even claims that the schools of today actively destroy children’s creativity, and affect the brain negatively, by making them slaves under knowledge in ‘training’ institutions. The Swedish school of today can hardly be accused of this as the current curricula (Lpo 94, Lpf 94) expressly state that a child’s creativity should be encouraged. However the world of education has been rather cautious when it comes to the concept of creativity and its potential applications. It is in the Western school tradition that academic skills are given more merit than practical skills, regardless of the intentions of current curricula. The concept of creativity is probably incompatible with the many centrally controlled education systems around the globe. As for gifted individuals, not many fit into a rationalistic school (Persson 1996).

It is among the commonplaces of education that we often first cut off the living root and then try to replace its natural functions by artificial means. Thus we suppress the child’s curiosity, for example (there are questions one should not ask), and then when he lacks natural interest in learning he is offered special coaching for his scholastic difficulties (Miller 1987: 75).

The important issue for an education system is not where giftedness is found but how it is nurtured, and children without backing from home are once again the most vulnerable. Many students with very high intelligence do not even get passing grades in school (Ericson 2005). Susanna Lindelöw who is a member of the board of Mensa in Sweden3 states in an interview ’School does not measure intelligence. Grades are a measure of adaptability’4. Persson (1996: 197, 265) portrays people who have been gifted in different domains. He draws the conclusion that many of them were misunderstood and obstructed in their activities. Many were also told that they were no good, incompetent and that they would never be able

2 Thompson (1984, 1990) in Fairclogh (1995: 14) 3 Mensa is an international organisation for the highly intelligent. 4 “Skolan mäter inte intelligens. Betygen är ett mått på anpassningsförmågan” (Lindelöw in Ericsson 2005).

10

to succeed in academic training. They were able to succeed anyway thanks to people in their environment who served as mentors at critical points in their development. In the academic discourse on the role of the teacher, professionalism and mentorship are central concepts (Carlgren & Marton 2003, Hartman 1995). However mentorship and professionalism are not completely compatible. The concepts have different ideological and sociological connotations. Professionalism is a rationalistic concept in Weber’s theories, according to Persson (1996: 149), is an expression of a bureaucratic, computable, controllable and predictable society which views the individual as a unit of production. Professional relations between people are formal. A mentor on the other hand functions in loco parentis and the relationship between mentor and student is always informal (Persson 1996: 149). A mentor encourages the student to work on difficult problems. He is supportive when things get difficult and helps the student get a realistic estimate of his skills and abilities and encourages the student to try again if he fails (Cohler & Galazer-Levy 1992, Persson 1996: 276). In this light mentorship is the opposite of rationalistic professionalism. A study by Mårdqvist & Welin-Andersson (1993) about Swedish teachers’5 understanding of the concept of professionalism, shows that teachers define professionalism as being skilled in their subject, being able to teach, to follow curricula and reach the goals set in these, have a general capacity as a fellow human being and the ability to proceed from each individual child. In Sweden there are no separate schools for gifted students nor are there any central guidelines of how to deal with this category of student in school, but curricula (Lpf-94, Lpo-94) state that every student should be taught according to individual need. The general international practice, as in Sweden, is to integrate all children in regular schooling. This is regardless of whether the child has learning difficulties, a more or less average intelligence, or is in some way gifted (Persson 1996: 287). 4.2.3 Steering documents6 in Swedish education The steering documents are the framework in education. In the steering documents for compulsory school (Lpo94) and upper secondary school (Lpf 94) the fundamental democratic values are always in focus. Swedish schools have a democratic assignment.

The first part of their task is to teach the student democracy and fundamental values…The second part is that schools and preschools shall themselves operate democratically, where both staff and students are empowered and participate in schoolwork and the learning/teaching environment. This influence can be both formal, by way of different councils etc., or informal, through opportunities to discussion and influencing work methods and the content of lessons. The third part of the democratic assignment is the responsibility of schools and preschools to foster democratic members of society able to live and function in a democratic society. This involves working with the fundamental value system, i.e., democratic values such as solidarity, equality between people and equal opportunity. In general, it can be said that these parts that make up the democratic whole contribute to the development of democratically aware children, youths and adults (The National Agency for Education 2005).

This is based on the UN children’s convention (Bartley 2001). To practice democracy is also the best way to discover how a functioning democracy works according to Chomsky (2000). 5 The teachers taught Swedish compulsory school, ages 6-16 6 The choice of vocabulary for ’styrdokument’, ’värdegrund’ etc. is that of the Swedish National Agency for Education.

11

All children shall have equal rights and equal worth and shall be protected from all forms of discrimination. The best interests of children shall always come first. A child shall be given the right to express his/her views freely in all matters affecting that child. (Summary of content from articles 2, 3 and 12 of the UN Children’s Convention.) (National Agency for Education 2005).

The democratic fundamental values are very much a teaching concern which permeates all activities in Swedish schools. The steering documents do not regulate teaching methods or choice of materials. The teacher is free to chose his or her own path together with the students toward the goals defined in the steering documents. In this process the focus should always be on the individual student.

Education in the Swedish education system is to define goals in order to administrate, to inform in order to influence and to review in order to improve… Regardless of the method, however, the focus is always on asserting the right of each individual to knowledge and personal development (The National Agency for Education 2005)

The steering documents are very clear that the needs of each and every student should be met. Gifted students are no exception to this. 4.2.4 Teaching gifted students The steering documents are clear on the rights of the individual child. Nevertheless studies (Thulin & Johannesson 1996) of teachers in Swedish schools show that they can find democratic principles threatened when focus is on giftedness. They point out that all students have their special talent, but yet act according to the rationalistic school ideal, which in general only recognises academic skills. All too often teachers judge the compliant or accommodating student as gifted. When teachers are asked to describe what it means to be gifted in the classroom they start to discuss traditionally academic subjects and the ability of students to quickly learn these subjects and to solve typical problems, and when asked about gifted students they most often identify those who adhere to the ideal classroom behaviour (Persson 1996: 172, 269, 282). The students in Thulin & Johannesson’s study (1996) who were identified as gifted were exclusively academically gifted, and they adapted to the school situation in a way which made them do well in school. But as has been discussed above some gifted students are underachievers, which does not make them any less gifted. A teacher with an academically gifted student in the classroom will inevitably be faced with his own inconsequence and lack of logic. The teacher who does not have adequate information or knows enough often finds it difficult to identify gifted students. Not knowing enough about gifted students, their needs and behaviour, makes a teacher less suitable to teach this category of student (Webb 1992). Gifted children are often creative and many of the traits attributed to the creative individual are also attributed to the gifted (see above). Research on how teachers define creativity shows that they attribute traits to the creative child, which fit the actual working methods of school rather than the picture given by creativity research. In an American study where teachers were asked to choose what traits were the most typical for the creative child, they chose honesty, responsibility, kindness and logical skills (Westby and Dawson 1995). A Swedish follow-up (Nordin & Billing 2001) gave much the same results, whilst research about creativity shows that the creative child comes up with fresh ideas and new approaches, is original and has strange ideas, but can have problems adapting and

12

conforming to the working methods in school. The studies show that the teacher did not make the connections between creative traits and the creative child (Carlsson 2004: 275). It is important to know that when gifted children are referred to the school psychologist, therapeutic sessions seem not to be effective if these are the only thing done for the child in the school situation. Something also needs to be done about the teaching environment (Persson 1996: 269-274)). Group activities in the classroom with both gifted and non-gifted students should be avoided unless the purpose of the activity is to develop social skills. This is based on research and empirical evidence. Gifted students need to meet and interact with other gifted students of approximately the same age (Feldhusen 1985). This one aspect appears to be extra important for gifted students. They need to know that they are not alone in their situation (Persson 1996: 289). This applies to the gifted just as to individuals with different handicaps. To be different in some way can lead to feelings of isolation. Meeting others in a similar situation or with similar problems can do a lot to dispel that feeling. There is no single method for teaching gifted students. Any method can work as long as it is on the terms of the gifted student. What a gifted child needs is to feel that his or her talent is acceptable and valuable, and is stimulated and encouraged to develop it. This applies to all people, but for the gifted it appears to be extra difficult to be given this recognition (Persson 1996: 284). It is a matter of integrity, the individual's right to be respected in her own right. Integrity as well as identity are not just individual issues but are experienced, tested and noted in interaction with others (Johansson 2001: 28). There are ethical rules for Swedish teachers. The most important of these are that a teacher should always place the student in focus, and always respect the integrity of the student (Yrkesetiska principer för lärare). Ultimately it is the individual teacher who is going to meet the gifted student in the classroom and who will be responsible for teaching that child.

13

5.Method This study has a hermeneutic approach and is based on a qualitative study of informal interviews (Trost 1993: 16) with six teachers in upper secondary school ( ages 16-19). Hermeneutics is a scientific approach in which the researchers’ subjective outlook and previous knowledge of the subject matter are valid variables in the study. It is accepted that there is a subjective relationship between the researcher and the informant (Patel & Davidsson 1994: 25). In hermeneutics the researcher is seeking insight into the research problem. Hermeneutics is based on the hypothesis that human reality is linguistic in nature and thus can be understood by interpreting what people say or write. The aim is not to explain, but to understand through language, people and the human situation, thoughts, experiences, feelings and actions (Wiedersheim & Eriksson 1991: 151). Facts about the concept of giftedness are objective, but the attitudes and ideological positions which affect the debate about gifted students are very much subjective. Every person has an ontological and ideological base in thought and life. This applies to researcher as well as informant. With the hermeneutic approach a qualitative study is logical. The choice of a qualitative study is reasonable if the aim of the study is to try to understand the way people react or reason (Trost 1993: 13), which is the aim in hermeneutics as well as in this study. The aim of the study is to search for what presuppositions Swedish teachers have about giftedness, and to evaluate their awareness of the needs and conditions in school for gifted students (Persson 1996: 269-282). 5.1 The study The study has been based on informal interviews with six upper seconday school teachers, which were recorded and later analysed. The interviews had a low degree of standardisation (Trost 1993: 15). The questions were adapted to the informant and the direction of the conversation. However there was a paper with a few general questions as a memory aid for the author (appendix 2). These questions were not shown to the informant. Random influences in interviews were accepted and encouraged (Trost 1993: 67). There were also questions concerning date of qualification, number of years in teaching, what subjects the informant teaches, what age-group the informant currently works with or has worked with previously. Material about age-groups other than adolescents has not been analysed in this study, which has been limited to upper secondary school. It was also noted whether the informant was male or female (appendix 2). This minor part of the interview had a high degree of standardisation (Trost 1993: 16). These standardised questions were asked either before or after the interview. In a couple of cases complementary information was asked for during the main interview as it came naturally in the course of conversation. The first interview served as a pilot interview. After this first interview there were a few changes made. The results from the pilot interview are used in the study as only minor changes were made. A small part of the interview had a high degree of standardisation (Trost 1993: 16). These were questions about date of qualification, number of years in teaching, what subjects the informant teaches, what ages the informant currently works with or has worked with previously, and whether the informant is male or female (appendix 2).

14

5.1.1 Research context and description of informants The upper secondary school where the study has been conducted is in a small Swedish town. There are approximately 1000 students in both preparatory and vocational education. All informants were active in their profession. They work at the same school and know each other. The informants worked with adolescents at the time of the study but among them there were those who had previously worked with younger children and others had taught adults. There is a deliberate spread of competence in the informants over different categories of students and different subjects taught. As a group they taught both traditionally academic subjects and vocational ones. Together they spanned most of the six domains (Persson 1996: 124-125) of giftedness; athletic, communicative, academic, linguistic, artistic and technical in the subjects they taught. Four of the six informants were male and two were female. No informant had less than 15 years in the profession. Five of the teachers were native Swedish speakers and the sixth had another mother tongue and another country of origin. 5.1.2 Procedure A coordinator at the school helped with contacting teachers in different fields and with setting appointments for interviews, but some informants were contacted directly by the author. The choice of informants was one of convenience (Trost 1993: 71). The coordinator’s help insured that a variety of teaching subjects and student categories were represented by the informants. Note that the group of teachers interviewed is not statistically representative (Trost 1993: 72). Swedish was spoken during the interviews, except with one informants, where the interview was in English. The interviews were recorded and later analysed and in part written down, but no detailed transcription of spoken language has been made. The recordings were made with a small portable recorder which was placed on the table between the informant and the interviewer. Some of the informants were bothered by the recorder but only one seemed to keep this feeling all through the interview. The interviews were carried out at the school in any available room that was convenient. One interview was made in the home of that teacher. No interview was disturbed while it was in progress. The interviews were more like conversation than a formal interview in character. At times conversation drifted away from the main subject of the study and it was allowed to. There was no time limit to the interviews. Before the interview the teacher was sent or given a letter (appendix 1) with information about the study, the interview and the author. The letter supplied contact information should the informant wish to get in touch with the author, and gave a definition of giftedness. The letter also expressed a thank you for participating and helping with the study. The definition of giftedness was important so that everyone participating in the study knew what was meant by giftedness in the context of the study. A copy of the definition was given the informant for reference during the interview. The definition of giftedness was also verbally repeated at the start of the interview. 5.2 Method considerations Reliability and validity are concepts from quantitative methodology and cannot be directly applied to qualitative studies (Trost 1993: 68), but care has been taken to insure as much

15

validity in the study as possible. The definition of giftedness is important for validity reasons so that everyone participating in the study knows what is meant by giftedness in this context. The concept of reliability involves congruency, precision, objectivity and constancy (Trost 1993: 66). In a hermeneutic study these are not applicable. A hermeneutic study is by its nature subjective. The qualitative interview encourages random influences in conversation which makes it impossible to try for precision, congruency and constancy. 5.3 Ethical considerations To ensure the integrity of the participants everyone who participated in the study was informed that they could at any point withdraw from the study if they wished to do so. They were also informed that their identity would be kept anonymous. The recordings of the interviews will be erased after the study is completed. All informants were informed of this prior to the interview. The interviews were recorded and later analysed and in part written down, but no detailed transcription of spoken language has been made. As this is not a linguistic study, and a direct transcript may endanger the integrity of the participant, it is more ethical not to include information in the form of direct transcripts of utterances (Trost 1993: 77). 5.4 Method of analysis Temporary transcripts of the interviews were made. These were then analysed looking for presuppositions and attitudes, as well as for utterances which would indicate the degree of awareness the informants have regarding gifted students; their needs, conditions in school and how they function. The temporary transcripts were also searched for utterances which may indicate the prevalence of myths surrounding the concept of giftedness.

16

6. Results and Analysis

The results and analysis are based on informal interviews with teachers working in upper secondary school in Sweden. The study is not statistically representative. It is a qualitative analysis with a hermeneutic approach to the interviews. The involvement in this study is completely voluntary and has required an active choice by the informants to participate. It may be assumed that the informants are to some degree interested in the subject or at least not actively opposed to discussing the issue of giftedness in a school situation. The informants will here be called Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon and Zeta. Alpha is female. She has worked with teenagers and adults; Beta is male. He too has worked with teaching teenagers and adults; Gamma is male. He has worked with teenagers and younger children; Delta is male. He has taught teenagers and adults.; Epsilon too is male and has only taught adolescents; Zeta is female and has worked with teenagers and adults. 6.1 Presuppositions about giftedness The informants were asked to describe gifted students they have taught. Alpha talked about two gifted students in upper secondary school. One boy and one girl, both of whom had some handicap that made learning in a regular school situation difficult. Alpha describes the boy as extremely gifted in several areas. He taught himself to read in German. He read advanced English texts without difficulty. He made fantastic drawings and folded miniature models of objects in paper with many details. He was very musical and knowledgeable in his field of interest. He knew almost everything there was to know about this and was constantly reading about it. However he was completely uninterested in school and found it pointless to attend. He quit without finishing his upper secondary education. The girl Alpha describes was severely dyslexic but had the motivation of wanting to attend a vocational program at the school, which she succeeded in doing with help. Alpha judges dyslexia to be very rare. She does not include general difficulties in reading and spelling in the concept of dyslexia. Alpha describes this girl as very bright and with a high ability to discuss, analyse and remember fact, but she needed help with reading. She did exceedingly well in the vocational program. Beta describes two students who he judges to be gifted, a boy and a girl whom Beta has taught in upper secondary school. The boy was very well adjusted. Beta describes the boy as pleasant and kind. He had high grades and everything he did scholastically far exceeded the level of all the other students. Beta says the boy was very low-key in the classroom and did not want to stand out in any way. Beta feels the boy consciously kept a low profile. The girl Beta describes had studied abroad and Beta feels this influenced the girl’s classroom behaviour. The girl behaved in a challenging and defiant manner toward other students and teachers. She challenged the group, always wanted to answer questions and criticised the other students. She often answered without putting up her hand. The other students were irritated as were several of her teachers according to Beta. It was felt she tried to be superior. Beta further describes her as cheeky, domineering and someone who looks down on those less gifted. Beta feels this girl to be an exception. He mentions other students he has felt are gifted and they have all kept a low profile. This he thinks is a cultural phenomenon in Sweden. It does not do to be too good or to stand out from the group.

17

Gamma does not describe any specific gifted student in detail. He does however mention a girl who is very logical and analytical but at the same time has problems with reading and writing which makes things difficult for her in school. Delta has no example of gifted students either. Epsilon describes gifted students as teenagers who have either been very good at school or who Epsilon has felt had the potential to be excellent if they wanted to. He remembers several gifted adolescents but chooses to talk about two fairly recent students. Both were boys and both had some sort of nervous breakdown. Epsilon feels this was related to their situation at school. He says he did not quite realise it at the time, but thinking about it afterwards, he has come to the conclusion that these two boys could not cope with the conflict between their own intellectual needs and peer-group pressure. Gamma feels there is an attitude in school and society which dictates that you should not be too good. One of the boys was very musical and later chose to put his effort and energy into music. Epsilon believes this was a way for the boy to solve the internal conflict he was living through. Epsilon thinks it is generally more accepted to be very good at music. That is not the case with traditional school subjects according to Epsilon. Zeta describes two gifted girls. One girl was clearly very gifted but did not apply herself. Why Zeta does not know. This girl had social problems outside school. Zeta suggests that young people bring their problems to class, as a possible explanation. The girl had “it”, something which cannot be taught. This girl got through her courses with the help of teachers and classmates. Zeta knows the girl is doing well now after having finished school. Zeta’s other example is a girl too, who Zeta at first thought was completely hopeless but who surprised her. Zeta discovered with time that this girl had a very special gift which was not immediately apparent in the classroom but which surfaced with time. In upper secondary school the girl had the chance to start to develop her gift and applied herself to her task. When she started upper secondary school she was behind the others in skill but practised hard and did very well by the end of the three years of upper secondary school. This girl has continued in her chosen field after secondary school and is doing very well. Zeta says gifted students are almost always lazy. For some reason, and she does not know why, gifted students do not apply themselves. Zeta also define gifted students as having something extra, something Zeta cannot teach. 6.2 Awareness of the needs of gifted students 6.2.1 How gifted students function in school The informants were asked how gifted students function in school. The boy Alpha describes does not function at all in school. He cannot adapt to the school situation, but he has a handicap which makes it hard for him to adapt and to communicate. Beta describes gifted students as well adjusted, as ‘good’ students. The girl may have been cheeky but she too did well and had high grades. Gamma says some students do fantastic work. He is aware that gifted students may have problems with reading and writing which makes it difficult for them to function well in school.

18

Delta talks about difficulties some students have but not the gifted as such. Delta says that students with difficulties develop other skills to compensate. Epsilon is aware of the fact that some gifted students have difficulties in school and that they may get depressed, which means they do not function well at school. Zeta has noticed that gifted students often underachieve but has not figured out why. 6.2.2 Special solutions for gifted students The informants were asked if there had been any special solutions for gifted students and if so, how this had worked out. The gifted students Alpha talked about both had extra help and resources allocated to them, but not because they were gifted but because of their handicaps. Beta has offered students more work or other solutions to meet their intellectual needs, but they have always said no to this. He is not aware of any special solutions for gifted students in the school. He mentions that the steering documents require teachers to individualise teaching for all students. Beta describes how he adapted the situation in the ‘cheeky’ girl’s case so that the work in the class would be better both for her and for the other students. She was given individual instruction and then participated in seminars with the class on some occasions. After a while Beta remembers that students still in mandatory school have participated in classes at upper secondary school. Gamma may offer gifted students the opportunity to sit an exam that covers the course and finish the course that way. He will if possible split the students into smaller groups so that those who progress at a higher speed can work together. In the case of the gifted girl with reading problems he does what he can to adapt the situation for her to overcome the obstacles reading difficulties pose. Gamma points out that there is a high degree of individualisation in teaching today. Delta cannot remember any special solutions for gifted students. Epsilon does not remember any special academic solutions for gifted students. Zeta does not remember any special solutions either for gifted students. 6.3 Awareness of conditions for gifted students The informants were asked how the school situation could be improved for gifted students. Alpha thinks the gifted boy who sees no point in going to school just needs to grow and mature. Beta suggests placing gifted students together in for example a special course in mathematics with accelerated teaching which might go as far as university level mathematics. Beta thinks the social situation for gifted students would improve if they met others like themselves who

19

were at their level. He has a feeling that gifted students are not viewed in the same way as other students and that they are not given what they need in school. Gamma says that the steering documents already require the teacher to individualise the teaching, but he also expresses the view that the gifted are not given the time and the support they need because the money is spent on students with learning difficulties. He suggests that splitting the students into groups according to ability and skill would be good for gifted students. Delta has no suggestions for improvements for gifted students. Epsilon has a lot to say on the subject. He says he feels there is an attitude in society and in school (this applies to both staff and students) to not show off, not be too good, not stand out. He also feels that school staff and people in a position to influence the work in schools, more or less expressively communicate the view that gifted students should not be given too much school resources. These should be spent on students with learning difficulties. Epsilon suggests there is an opinion that students learn more from practical work and not academic studies, and that this is better for gifted students too. Epsilon further says he has a feeling that the general opinion from politicians down to many teachers is that the gifted can fend for themselves and do not need help and support. Epsilon says it appears to him that this attitude has become more marked. Epsilon says students brag about how drunk they have been. No one brags about how much work and effort they put into school. What Epsilon wants improved is the general attitude in society and school toward gifted students. Zeta feels it is the gifted students who need to improve. They need to be ‘hungry’. They need to want to work and improve.

20

7. Summary of Results 7.1 Presuppositions and attitudes Alpha and Zeta discuss giftedness in more than just the academic sense, as more than intelligence. Alpha appears to have a wide definition of giftedness that reaches outside the traditional academic subjects although she includes these (languages and knowledge). Alpha comes across as observant and sensitive to the needs of the students. She describes what she has tried to do for the students and where she has failed and expresses regret for this. Zeta has noticed that gifted students often underachieve but has not figured out why. Zeta defines giftedness as skill rather than just academic skill. Zeta thinks gifted students almost always are lazy. For some reason, and she does not know why, gifted students do not apply themselves. Zeta also define gifted students as having something extra, something Zeta cannot teach. Epsilon’s focus is on academic skill in his discussion, but not exclusively. He talks about gifted students and giftedness in the context of academic skill but also mentions music. Epsilon is aware of giftedness in more than one field but is still mostly concerned with traditionally academic gifts. He thinks gifted students should be encouraged to live up to their potential. Epsilon believes it is a societal problem in Sweden when this is not done. Beta and Gamma both talk about giftedness only in the sense of academic skill, i.e. intelligence. Beta discusses giftedness only within the academic fields of language and mathematics. He feels gifted students are mostly well adjusted and pleasant. Beta describes gifted students as generally well behaved in the classroom. The one exception is cheeky and defiant, none of which is good. Beta says it is probably a cultural phenomenon in Sweden that makes gifted students keep such a low profile. He indirectly expresses regret for this but at the same time Beta is a part of that cultural climate. Gamma talks about giftedness only in an academic context and as skills in logic. He is concerned about the democratic aspects of teaching, and points out that gifted students should not be helped at the expense of other students. Delta expresses the view that no student is really better than another. This effectively disables the discussion about giftedness. It also means that Delta is not aware of gifted students. From the interviews examples of attitudes toward gifted students can be read. These are summarised in Table 1 below. Table 1. Attitudes 1 Beta Gifted students are well behaved 2 Zeta Gifted students are almost always lazy. 3 Gamma Gifted students should not be helped at the expense of other students 4 Alpha,

Epsilon Teachers should be supportive and encouraging toward gifted students

5 Delta No student is better than another.

21

7.2 Awareness of the needs of gifted students 7.2.1 How gifted students function in school Alpha and Gamma are aware that gifted students may be gifted and have learning difficulties at the same time. The boy Alpha describes cannot adapt to the school situation, but he has a handicap which makes it hard for him to adapt and to communicate, two key ingredients to success in school. Zeta has noted that gifted students often underachieve but has not figured out why. Epsilon is aware that some gifted students have difficulties in school and that they may become depressed, which means they do not function well at school. Beta describes gifted students as well adjusted, as ‘good’ students, but has noted, just as has Epsilon, that gifted students keep a low profile. Delta appears not to be aware of gifted students at all. All the informants except Delta have comments which in some way indicate that they are aware that gifted students often do not use their full potential in school. However it should be noted that this is not the same as being aware of gifted underachievers in general. Only Alpha describes a student who is a gifted underachiever. 7.2.2 Special solutions for gifted students All the informants are somewhat unsure about special solutions for gifted students. Beta and Gamma point out that the steering documents require teachers to individualise their teaching. Alpha and Delta have students who were given extra help because of difficulties which got in the way of learning. In Alpha’s case these students were gifted, but that is not why they received extra help. Delta only mentions special solutions for students with dyslexia or other handicaps but he does not describe them as gifted. Epsilon, Gamma and Zeta help gifted students as much as they can but are not aware of any policy for gifted students in the school where they work. This also applies to Beta, but he remembers younger students still in compulsory school who have attended his classes in upper secondary school. If the school where the teachers work has a policy for helping gifted students they are not aware of it. 7.3 Awareness of conditions for gifted students The interview with Alpha indicates that she is sensitive to the needs of the students, but since she only describes two students who both have handicaps it is not possible to judge whether Alpha is aware of the gifted student’s needs in general, but she is accepting and supportive which may well be the most important factor in school for gifted students. Beta and Gamma show an awareness of the gifted student’s needs for peer groups with others like themselves. They also mention accelerated learning groups for these students. Both state they feel there is not much space to give extra attention to gifted students. Zeta on the other hand feels the problem somehow is with the students. Gifted students often do not apply themselves according to Zeta, which places the responsibility on the student and not the school system. Delta is simply not aware of the gifted students, and their need and situation, or chooses not to be.

22

8. Discussion 8.1 Discussion of Method The interviews were recorded with a small portable recorder placed on the table between the informant and the interviewer. The sound quality of the recordings was not good and in some cases it was difficult to hear what was said on the tapes. For further study better equipment should be used. A coordinator’s help with recruiting informants was a matter of convenience (Trost 1993: 71). Although in retrospect it was maybe not all good because the coordinator knows who has been asked to participate in the study, which may threaten the anonymity of the informants. However the coordinator only knows the identity of some of the informants, and should not be able to identify who has said what. It would have been better if the informants did not know each other. Interviewing informants from different schools and different parts of Sweden would have made it possible to use more background information and direct utterances for analysis, without revealing the identity of the informants. A note of interest is that there were negative reactions to the query to participate in the study, something which was learned purely by chance. The opinion surfaced in a context outside the school. It may be that the subject of the study is seen as controversial by some for political or ideological reasons. Those who feel strongly and negatively about the issue of giftedness in teaching are probably not represented in this material, which means the selection of informants is skewed. 8.2 Discussion of results and previous research Although the informants were given a definition of giftedness encompassing much more than the academic domain, they still focused on academic skill and intelligence. This focus on academic skills and intelligence is at odds with research in the field of giftedness. Today, a majority of researchers agree that intelligence is only part of the concept of giftedness (Persson 1996: 57). The results are however completely in accord with a previous study (Thulin & Johannesson 1996) of Swedish teachers, which shows that teachers in general only recognise academic skills when they are asked to identify gifted students. Academic skills are closely associated with intelligence, but intelligence, regardless of how it is defined, is not just about learning in school (Cooper 2001: 16). It does however seem to carry strong associations to the classroom, and academic skills are, and have been, more important than practical skills in the Western school tradition (Persson 1996). The association of giftedness to intelligence and good classroom accommodation is obviously so strong with the teachers interviewed in this study, that it overrides the definition of giftedness used, a definition which includes all human activities and functions. The gifted students described in this study are mostly defined as well behaved and pleasant, i.e. students who show good classroom accommodation. Once again this confirms the results in Thulin and Johannesson’s study (1996), where teachers identified students as gifted when they did well in school and adapted well to the school situation. Other studies show teachers attribute traits to gifted children which fit the working methods of school (Westby & Dawsson 1995, Nordin & Billing 2001), while research shows gifted children can have problem adapting to school (Carlsson 2004). Personality traits which can be attributed to the gifted include being prone to take risks and confront opposition, as well as being curious, unconventional, emotional and intuitive. There is one student mentioned in this study who is

23

described as displaying several of these personality traits, and she is labelled as being cheeky and defiant. Not a positive description, otherwise students identified as gifted mostly conform to the stereotype of a pleasant student doing well in school. Gifted individuals appear to be more sensitive than the average person (Persson 1996: 272). Combine this with the fact that gifted individuals may trigger feelings of dislike and hostility (Albert and Runcos 1989), and you have a situation for gifted students which is not enviable. Some individuals turn inwards and may become depressed (Persson 1996: 272). Awareness of the emotional and psychological effects of school on gifted students appears to be limited with the teachers in this study, although one of the teachers is aware that gifted students may become depressed by their school situation and gives examples of gifted students who have turned their back on a painful world. The teachers rely on their feelings when asked about gifted students and their situation in school, but their actual knowledge about giftedness appears to be tacit and/or fragmentary. The well behaved academically gifted student is not difficult to identify, as this is a student who fits the academic ideal and tradition of education in the Western world. Several of the teachers are aware that gifted students may keep a low profile or not do as well in school as they could. However the teachers do not in general appear to be aware of gifted students who behave very badly or disruptively. This confirms studies which show that teachers often judge the compliant or accommodating student as gifted, i.e. those students who adhere to the ideal classroom behaviour (Persson 1996: 269). Gifted underachievers do not show an ideal classroom behaviour. The students discussed in the interviews, who may be classed as gifted underachievers, have identified handicaps. Disruptive students are not mentioned at all. Such students may do badly just to conform better to their classmates or misbehave to get attention (Persson 1996: 270). Disruptive students are a problem in school. If some of them could be identified as gifted and their school situation adjusted in a positive way, they might very well stop their disruptive behaviour. The discourse on education and schooling often focuses on problems, but seldom mentions giftedness as a possible cause for these problems. For teachers to be able to identify gifted underachievers tools are needed in the form of information and knowledge. But first of all teachers need to know that gifted underachievers exist, and not just as good students who keep a low profile but as students who misbehave and are disruptive. It is not to be taken for granted that a gifted student shows the real extent of his ability in a normal classroom, or that a teacher is successful in identifying gifted behaviour on his own (Persson 1996: 52). The teachers in this study have many years of experience and remember several gifted students. That only two of the students described fit into the definition of gifted underachievers leads to the conclusion that the teachers have difficulties, or are unable to identify these students. Teachers without enough knowledge and information about gifted students will find it difficult to identify them, and according to Webb (1992) this in itself makes a teacher less suited to teach the gifted. School staff in general need to be aware of the problems gifted students may have in school. If gifted children are referred to the school psychologist, therapeutic sessions seem not to be effective unless something is done about the school situation and the teaching environment (Persson 1996: 272). For a teacher to have any success in this, knowledge and information is needed. I believe there is a tendency to make psychological problems of teaching problems. If this is done it places the problem with the child and not the teacher. Teachers do face children and students with psychological problems but, being able to distinguish teaching problems from other problems the student may be experiencing is a measure of professionalism. Professionalism (Mårdqvist & Welin-Andersson (1993) has been defined by Swedish teachers as being skilled in teaching, the subject(s), curricula and as having a general capacity as a human being. Being skilled in

24

teaching, in my opinion, includes a general knowledge of different categories of students including the gifted. The teachers in this study are well versed in the steering documents which dictate the teachers’ work. These say every student should be given individualised teaching. However the teachers all work in a classroom situation with many students and have to adapt to this. They suggest peer-groups and accelerated learning-groups for gifted students as a possible improvement to the school situation. Research shows these to be good solutions for gifted students. The need to meet others like themselves of approximately the same age appears to be extra important for this group of students (Feldhusen 1985). However no such peer-groups for gifted students exist at the school where this study was made. There is a concern expressed in this study that the gifted should not be allowed to develop at the expense of slower students. This verifies results from other studies of teachers in Swedish schools, which show that teachers can find democratic principles threatened when focus is on giftedness (Persson 1996: 172). The teachers in this study are well aware that the needs of every student should be given individual consideration. They want to do the best they can for their students. This includes a feeling that students who have learning difficulties are more vulnerable than gifted students. When gifted students are weighed against students with learning problems, the weaker students are found more in need of help and available resources. 8.3 Conclusion In the classroom the structural power resides with the teacher. It is the teacher who decides how to split the teaching resources. When the school system or individual teacher lets gifted children fend for themselves, the gifted children are in effect abandoned. These children and adolescents need adults who are not afraid to stand up for them. They have to rely on adults to protect them from abuse of power, whether societal or individual in nature (Miller 1987: ix). Gifted students need to be recognised and to have their needs met, even though it may mean that teachers have to go against the prevalent ideological climate in Swedish society. It is all too easy to equate gifted or intelligent with strong and resilient in nature, and then draw the conclusion that these children will do well anyway, which research shows is not the case (Persson 1996: 273). If teachers without reflecting feel that gifted children can fend for themselves and that teaching efforts should always be focused on students with learning difficulties, then the gifted students are made victim of an ideological standpoint, and I believe children should not be made responsible for political and ideological issues. When it comes to gifted underachievers there is a definite need for action to make these students’ educational and socio-emotional situation in school better. Every student in the Swedish school system has the right to have his or her individual needs met in education (Lpo-94, Lpf-94). To make this a reality for all children, gifted or not, teachers need to know about the different needs of students. For gifted students teachers need first to be able to recognise them and second to be aware of how these individuals may react in the school situation, what problems they may have and then how to provide a good learning environment. Although the teachers in this study are aware that gifted students often do not do as well as they could, they seem not to be aware of the group of students defined as gifted underachievers. Making teachers aware that this group exists is very important, because how can a teacher help a student when the teacher is not aware of the students scholastic needs? The social and cultural climate in Sweden, in society at large and in school, is given as an explanation for gifted students keeping a low profile or not applying themselves. But it must not be forgotten that teachers themselves are part of this cultural climate which perpetrates an attitude toward the gifted that makes them ‘hide’. To stand out is not good. This is not done

25

consciously but society is perpetrated by its members and we are all part of it. To do something to ameliorate this tendency teachers need to be aware of gifted students, who they are, what their needs are and how to identify them. The logical place to start is at the teacher colleges where new teachers are trained. In my own teacher training at Högskolan Dalarna (2003-2005) the issue of the situation for gifted students has not come up. This combined with that teachers in this study appear to have only fragmentary knowledge of giftedness and its consequences lead to the conclusion that there is a real need to educate and inform teachers about gifted children and students. How a teacher feels about the concept of giftedness will inevitably influence how he behaves toward the gifted student. Therefore it is important for teachers (as for us all) to be aware of attitudes and prejudices. Only a teacher who is aware of his ideological and ontological positions can truly practice democracy in the classroom, and the fundamental democratic values in Swedish education should always be in focus (National Agency for Education 2005). This study confirms that teachers do not know enough about gifted students. To make the situation better for gifted student’s research is required in the field. I feel a change of attitude toward these students is needed and a broadened understanding. This can only be achieved by valid information based on research. 8.4 Further research A further and more extensive study on Swedish teachers’ attitudes regarding giftedness, and gifted students and children is needed. The study should cover comprehensive school as well as upper secondary school and if possible, preschool. If teachers’ and school leaders’ perspectives could be balanced against the experiences of gifted students this would add another valuable dimension to the study. This type of research is very important to supply information which can then be used in nation-wide guidelines for how to care for gifted students in school. I believe there is a tendency to make psychological problems of teaching problems. This too would be an interesting topic for further research, and so would looking at the mechanisms at work when teachers try to identify gifted students.

26

List of sources Albert, R. S. & Runco, M.A. (1986). The Achievement of Eminence: A model based on

longitudinal study of exceptionally gifted boys and their families. In R.J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (ed.). Conceptions of Giftedness. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Bartley K. (2001). FN:s konvention om barnets rättigheter. Om perspektiv och innehåll med

relevans för skolan. Utbildning och demokrati. Tidskrift för didaktik och utrikespolitik. 10(2).

Bell, A., Garrett, P. (1998). Approaches to Media Discourse. Blackwell Publishers. Oxford. Bergström, M. (1995). Neuropedagogik- en skola för hela hjärnan. Wahlström & Widstrand.

Stockholm. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline on Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge University Press.

Cambridge. Burton, N. (2002). Det som muser viskat. Brutus Östlings bokförlag Symposion. Stockholm. Butler-Por, N. (1993). Underachieving gifted students. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, & A. H.,

Passow (ed.). International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Pergamon Press. Oxford.

Carlgren I., Marton F. (2003). Lärare av i morgon. Lärarförbundets förlag. Stockholm. Carlsson, I. (2004). Kreativitet i skolans värld – klimat, ledarskap och det kreativa barnet.

Arbetslivsinstitutet. Nära gränsen? Perspektiv på skolans arbetsliv. Arbetslivsinstitutets Förlag. Katrineholm.

Ceci, S. J. (1996). On Intelligence: a Bioecological Treatise on Intellectual Development.

Harvard University Press. London. Chomsky, N. (2000). On MisEducation. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Oxford. Cohler, B. J., & Galazer-levy, R. M. (1992). Psychoanalysis and the classroom: intent and

meaning in learning and teaching. In N.M. Szajnberg (ed.) Educating the Emotions. Plenum Press. New York.

Cooper, C. (2002). Intelligens och andra förmågor. Studentlitteratur. Lund. Cropley, A. J. (1994). Creative intelligence: a concept of ‘true’ giftedness. European Journal

for High Ability, 5(1), 6-23. Ericson, G. ( 2005). Ofta låga betyg trots hög IQ. Skolvärlden 3. p. 18-19.

27

Ericson, K. A. & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: an introduction. In K. A. Ericson & J. Smith (ed.). Toward a General Theory of Expertise. Prospects and limits. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge

Fairclough, N. (1995). Media Discourse. Arnold. London. Feldhusen, J. F. (1985). A conception of giftedness. In K. A. Heller & J. F. Feldhusen (ed.).

Identifying and Nurturing the Gifted. An international perspective. Hans Huber Publishers. Stuttgart.

Foucault, M. (1972). The Archeology of Knowledge. Tavistock Publications. Freeman, J. (1979). Gifted Children: Their identification and development in a social context.

MPT Press Limited. Lancaster. Gardner, H. (1998). De sju intelligenserna. Brain Books. Jönköping. Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: the Amazing Science of the Unpredictable. Vintage. London. Hartman S. G., (1995). Lärares kunskap. Traditioner och idéer i svensk undervisnings-

historia. Linköpings Universitet Skapande Vetande. Linköping. Johansson, E. (2001). Barns integritet - en rättighet på nåder. In Nordenfalk, Katta. 2001.

Etik i princip & praktik. Lärarnas Riksförbund och Lärarförbundet. Stockholm. Kearney, C. A. (2001). School Refusal Behavior in Youth: a Functional Approach to

Assessment and Treatment. American Psychological Association. Washington DC. Lpf 94. (2002). Curriculum for the Non-compulsory School System (Lpf 94).

http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/493. 2005-05-04. Lpo 94 (2002). Curriculum for the Compulsory School System, the Preschool Class and the

Leisure-time Centre (Lpo 94). http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/493. 2005-05-04. Yrkesetiska principer för lärare (2002), Lärarens Handbok. Lärarförbundet. Solna. Miller, A. (1987). Prisoners of Childhood: The Drama of the Gifted Child and the Search for

the True Self. Basic Books Inc. Mårdqvist, M. & Welin- Andersson, A. (1993). Lärarprofessionalism: en kvalitativ studie av

uppfattningar av fenomenet lärarprofessionalism. Trebetygsuppsats I pedagogik vid institutionen för pedagogik och psykologi, Linköpings universitet.

The National Agency for Education. (2005). The Democratic Assignment.

http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/354/a/1257. 2005-05-05 The National Agency for Education. (2005). Education in the Swedish Education System.

http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/190. 2005-05-04.

28

The National Agency for Education. (2005) Summary of content from articles 2, 3 and 12 of the UN Children’s Convention. http://www.skolverket.se/sb/d/354/a/1257#paragraphAnchor5. 2005-05-05.

Nordin, U., Billing, P.L. (2001). Kreativitet och självbild. En jämförelse mellan elevers

testresultat och lärares bedömning. C-uppsats. Departement of Psychology. Lunds Universitet.

Patel, R. & Davidsson, B. (1994). Forskningsmetodikens grunder. Studentlitteratur. Lund Persson, R. S. (1996). Annorlunda land: Särbegåvningens psykologi. Liber/Almqvist &

Wiksell. Plath, S. (1971). In Child. Baym, N. (ed.). 1999. The Norton Anthology of American

Literature. W. W. Norton & Company. New York. Renkema, J. (1993). Discourse Study: an Introductory Textbook. John Benjamin Publishing

Company. Amsterdam. Rowe, D.C. (1997). A Place at the policy Table? Behaviour Genetics and Estimates of Family

Environmental Effects on IQ. Intelligence 24(1), p. 133-158. Thurén, T. (1991). Vetenskapsteori för nybörjare. Tiger. Saltsjö-Boo. Tardiff, T.Z. & Sternberg, R.J. (1988). What do we know about creativity? R.J. Sternberg

(ed.). The Nature of creativity. Contemporary psychological issues. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Thompson, J. B. (1984). Studies in the Theory of Ideology. Polity Press. Thompson, J. B. (1990). Ideology and modern Culture. Polity Press. Thulin, M. & Johannesson, H. (1996). Särbegåvade elever i skolmiljö (Examensarbete på

grundskollärarlinjen 1-7 Tvåbetygsuppsats I pedagogik). Högskolan för lärarutbildning och kommunikation. Jönköping.

Trost, J. (1993). Kvalitativa intervjuer. Studentlitteratur. Lund. Webb, J. T., Macdroth, E. A. & Tholan, S.S. (1992). Guiding the gifted child. Ohio

Psychology Press. Dayton OH. Westby, E., Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or Burden in the Classroom? Creativity

Research Journal 8, p. 154-161. Wiedersheim-Paul, F. & Eriksson, L.T. (1991). Att utreda och rapportera. Malmö: Liber. Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. Yeats, W. B. (1926). Among School Children. In Abrams, M. H. (ed.). 1999. The Norton

Anthology of English Literature. W. W. Norton & Company. New York.

29

Appendix 1

Intervjuer om särbegåvade elever och deras situation i skolan.

Tack för att du ställer upp på att bli intervjuad och att delta i denna undersökning. All information kommer att avidentifieras i den slutliga uppsatsen. Du kan när som helst under undersökningens gång dra dig ur om du så skulle vilja! Undersökningen syftar till att ur ett lärarperspektiv få en uppfattning om de särbegåvade eleverna i skolan och deras situation. Undersökningen genomförs som en serie intervjuer med lärare som arbetar med olika ämnesområden och elevkategorier. Intervjuerna bandas och inspelningarna sparas endas till dess att examensarbetet är färdigt och slutfört. Definition av särbegåvning ”Den är särbegåvad som kontinuerligt förvånar både kunskapsmässigt och tillämpningsmässigt genom sin osedvanliga förmåga i ett eller flera beteenden. Ett beteende i detta samanhang förstås som en mänsklig prestation, aktivitet eller funktion” (Persson:1996, s.50). Undersökningen och uppsatsen görs som ett examensarbete inom kursen pedagogiskt lärarskap C på lärarutbildningen, Högskolan Dalarna våren 2005.

Henrika Florén, lärarstuderande Högskolan Dalarna

Tel. 023-30162, 070-642 58 85; flo-joh@home.se Handledare: Catharina Höög, Högskolan Dalarna

30

Appendix 2

intervju nr:

Datum: Frågor.

• När vi talar om särbegåvning finns det någon du särskilt kommer att tänka på? • Kan du beskriva någon eller några elever som du uppfattat som särbegåvade? • Hur fungerar särbegåvade elever i skolan? • Har det varit några särskilda lösningar för dessa elever i skolan, och i så fall vilka? • Hur har det fungerat? • Skulle det kunna fungera bättre, och i så fall hur? • Finns det något mer som du spontant vill tillägga?

Bakgrund: Man / kvinna Ungefärligt årtal för lärarexamen, samt i vilket land utbildningen är gjord. Antal tjänsteår. Vilka åldrar arbetar du med?