![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
philobibliusThing 1:
Early in their opinion piece, the authors have a footnote with regard to the linking of giftedness and eminence:
Linking giftedness with eminence by no means implies that
eminence must or should be the ultimate educational goal for
each gifted person. However, it is—by definition of the very
term of giftedness—always an option, and society should provide
for the proper support, that a gifted person is able—provided
she or he so wishes—to attain this goal.
In Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education, Subotnik, et al, state rather bluntly:
outstanding achievement or eminence ought to be the chief goal of gifted education.
If the chief goal of the program is eminence and the students fail to achieve eminence, then the students have failed and so has the program.
In fact, is that not one of the complaints concerning the current programs? They FAILED to predictably produce eminence when that was not even their primary goal!
And it turns out that eminence is not enough... Subotnik's team wants every student to aspire to "fulfill one’s talents and abilities in the form of transcendent creative contributions."
If these are not values shared by Dr. Ziegler and co., should they not have addressed that?
*******
Thing 2:
Dr. Ziegler has been working in this field for more than 15 years.
Given his critique of research on the gifted as relying on "major variables or concepts" that are more than 30 years old, should he not have done something about it?
Early in their opinion piece, the authors have a footnote with regard to the linking of giftedness and eminence:
Linking giftedness with eminence by no means implies that
eminence must or should be the ultimate educational goal for
each gifted person. However, it is—by definition of the very
term of giftedness—always an option, and society should provide
for the proper support, that a gifted person is able—provided
she or he so wishes—to attain this goal.
In Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education, Subotnik, et al, state rather bluntly:
outstanding achievement or eminence ought to be the chief goal of gifted education.
If the chief goal of the program is eminence and the students fail to achieve eminence, then the students have failed and so has the program.
In fact, is that not one of the complaints concerning the current programs? They FAILED to predictably produce eminence when that was not even their primary goal!
And it turns out that eminence is not enough... Subotnik's team wants every student to aspire to "fulfill one’s talents and abilities in the form of transcendent creative contributions."
If these are not values shared by Dr. Ziegler and co., should they not have addressed that?
*******
Thing 2:
Dr. Ziegler has been working in this field for more than 15 years.
Given his critique of research on the gifted as relying on "major variables or concepts" that are more than 30 years old, should he not have done something about it?
