gifted adults, gifted kids, gifted adult
personality, gifted adult information, psychology of giftedness, high
aptitude personality
~
~
|
Discovering the Gifted Ex-Child
By
Stephanie S. Tolan
The
first act of honoring the self is the assertion of consciousness: the
choice to think, to be aware, to send the searchlight of consciousness
outward toward the world and inward toward our own being.
To default on this effort is to default on the self at the most basic
level. To honor the self is
to be willing to think independently, to live by our own mind, and to
have the courage of our own perceptions and judgments (Brandon, 1983).
The experience of the gifted adult is the experience of an unusual
consciousness, an extraordinary mind whose perceptions and judgments
may be different enough to require an extraordinary courage.
Large
numbers of gifted adults, aware not only of their mental capacities but
of the degree to which those capacities set them apart, understand this.
For many, however, a complete honoring of the self must begin with
discovering what sort of consciousness, what sort of mind they possess.
That
their own perceptions and judgments are unusual may have been
obvious since childhood, but they may have spent their lives assuming
that this difference was a deficit, a fault, even a defect of character
or a sign of mental illness (Lovecky, 1986; Alvarado, 1989).
Thinking
independently may seem foolhardy or antisocial.
Who am I? is a question they may need to ask themselves all over again
because the answers devised in childhood and adolescence were
inaccurate or incomplete (Silverman & Kearney, 1989; Tolan, 1992;
Wallach, 1994).
Where Have the Gifted Children Gone?
Since the 1920's thousands of books and articles have been written
about gifted children, (see for example, Burks, Jensen, & Terman,
1930; Carroll, 1940; DeHaan & Havighurst, 1957; Gross, 1992; Hirt,
1922; Hollingworth, 1926; Piirto, 1994; Stedman, 1924; Terman, 1925;
Webb, Meckstroth, & Tolan, 1982; Witty & Jenkins, 1935;
Zorbaugh & Boardman, 1936).
Organizations
of educators, parents and others have been formed to protect, preserve
and develop their potential. (Hall & Skinner, 1980; Krueger, 1978).
Factions have argued about definitions and terms, about whether it is
nature or nurture or both that creates unusual intelligence, whether
gifted children need or deserve special programs and educational
resources (Burks et al., 1930; Galton, 1869; Margolin, 1994; Renzulli,
1978; Sapon-Shevin, 1987; Sternberg & Davidson, 1986; Witty, 1951;
Yoder, 1894).
Meanwhile, generations of gifted children have come and gone, moving
through and beyond the educational institutions where they have or have
not been identified, have or have not been appropriately served.
These gifted children have disappeared into the vast territory of
adulthood. Have they disappeared in the same way prodigies do? No
matter how powerful the adult talent of a grownup child prodigy, he is
no longer a prodigy, because the term is linked not solely to ability,
but also to age. The adult, even if continuing to excel in his earlier
domain, is forever an ex-prodigy.
Does
the gifted child, grown up, similarly become an ex-gifted child? Having
left childhood and school behind, has she also left behind the
differences that were recognized in the "gifted" label? Or could she
more accurately be described as a gifted ex-child?
What is Giftedness?
If giftedness is merely an artifact of rapid progress through normal
developmental stages, it could be destined to fade when others "catch
up" or even move beyond.
If, on
the other hand, it is a quality of mind that creates a genuinely
unusual developmental trajectory, it would be a stable attribute,
remaining with the individual throughout life whether outwardly evident
or not.
Not everyone perceives giftedness in the same way. Some see it as the
achievement of something out of the ordinary, essentially external
(Gardner, 1993; OERI 1993; Tannenbaum, 1983). Others see it as an
internal set of out-of-the-ordinary mental processes that may or may
not lead to achievement (Columbus Group, 1991; Hollingworth, 1942,
1937; Shurkin, 1992).
Traditionally,
our culture's perception has depended to some extent on the age of the
individual under consideration.
Because childhood is inevitably and biologically a
develop°©mental period, giftedness in childhood traditionally
has been seen in terms of unusual, measurable qualities of the
developing mind. We recognize that it is something internal to the
child that we are labeling.
IQ
tests were created to assess a child's innate capacity to reason and to
learn, and to the extent that they achieved that goal, they have been
useful in locating children whose extraordinary potential requires
unusual educational methods.
The
phenomenon of the "underachieving gifted child" obviously depends on
our recognition that a child has unusual potential which is not showing
itself in equally unusual achievement.
In looking at adults, however, the focus changes. We recognize the
existence of gifted adults, of course. They are the people who achieve
spectacularly.
And
for those achievements we expect them to be rewarded -- with a Nobel
prize, great fame, wealth, or eminence in their own field.
We may
know that some gifted adults are unlucky enough not to achieve the
rewards their ideas or their products deserve (there are many examples,
like Van Gogh, of people whose achievements went unrecognized during
their lifetimes) but it is nevertheless the achievements or products
that are the basis for our recognition of giftedness in adults.
This
focus is essentially external. Though we acknowledge that there must be
some unusual mental capacity (an internal reality) that allows a
Stephen Hawking to work out ideas that affect the field of physics, if
we did not have those ideas (the external evidence), we would not
recognize Hawking as a gifted adult.
There is no readily accepted concept of "underachieving gifted adult"
because the number of adults who have test scores or other standardized
means of showing unusual mental processing other than through products,
is relatively small.
To society, then, the changing definition of giftedness from childhood
to adulthood would make it appear that of the many gifted children who
have been identified only a few have gone on to become gifted adults
(Shurkin, 1992; Subotnik, 1993).
The
change in criteria from different internal processing to unusual
external production was recognized by a frustrated Sophie, one of the
female subjects in Lewis Terman's famous longitudinal study of gifted
individuals while the study was in progress.
She
wrote to Terman, "You assessed youngsters on the basis of learning
ability and personality, but you assess adults by a more worldly
measure of financial standing and recognition by a public which has
never shown any great ability in distinguishing between knaves and
fools and good public servants" (Shurkin, p. 269).
To confound the issue further, it would also appear that there are
gifted adults who seem to have sprung into the world full-grown, never
having been identified or perceived as gifted when they were children
(e.g. Darwin, Edison, Einstein).
It is
no wonder that there is some controversy and confusion on the subject
for our culture in general and for individuals as well.
Giftedness as Developmental Difference
Recently a definition of childhood giftedness as "asynchronous
development" (Columbus Group, 1991) was advanced to look at giftedness
from a phenomenological viewpoint, considering what it is like from the
inside.
Throughout
childhood asynchronous individuals reach noticeable and clearly defined
developmental milestones and acquire various skills earlier than other
children. But the difference is not mere precocity, not just "getting
there sooner."
The
child who deals with abstract concepts early brings those concepts to
bear on all later experience. This different, more complex way of
processing experience creates essentially different experience. The
result is that the differences, far from shrinking as the child
develops, are likely to grow larger.
A
child whose cognitive development is within the normal rather than the
gifted range will not "catch up" with the gifted child any more than a
younger sibling will catch up in age with an older sibling. The
developmental trajectory diverges early and does not come back to norms.
"Asynchronous development" may not be as relevant in adulthood, because
adult development is not as time dependent. It stretches over a far
larger time span and is not so closely tied to physiological
development. It is not necessarily a steady, upward progression which
all adults experience at different rates, but far more than in
childhood is a matter of personal growth and choice.
We
expect adults to be able to use abstract reasoning; we are not as
likely to notice one whose reasoning takes him into complex realms
where most other adults could not follow, as we are to notice a child
who uses abstract reasoning long before other children can.
If an
adult decided to learn every single written human language, she would
not likely be thought of as learning them earlier than other adults, as
few other adults would choose to pursue this goal at all.
In adulthood we might refer to "differentiated development," rather
than asynchronous development, as the direction any individual chooses
for his or her continued growth is likely to be idiosyncratic. This
makes the difference between the gifted adult mind and others harder to
recognize, harder to measure.
However,
the reality of giftedness remains a different experience of life,
whether or not the individual is able to use that different experience
to drive continued growth and learning, or to create products or
perform in ways that the larger culture recognizes and rewards.
Childhood Characteristics
Some of the cognitive characteristics of gifted children that are
differences in kind rather than in precocious acquisition are:
extraordinary quantity of information, unusual retentiveness; advanced
comprehension; unusually varied interests; curiosity; unusual capacity
for processing information; accelerated pace of thought processes;
comprehensive synthesis; heightened capacity for seeing unusual and
diverse relationships; ability to generate original ideas and
solutions; evaluation of self and others; persistent, goal-directed
behavior (Clark, 1988).
These
characteristics not only persist into adulthood, but interact through
time to create a geometric progression of significant differences from
the norm (Wallach, 1994; Roeper, 1991).
In addition to these cognitive characteristics, many researchers have
found in gifted children heightened emotional sensitivity and intensity
(Morelock, 1992), (a characteristic that is likely to go underground in
adulthood, especially in males) (Kline & Meckstroth, 1985; Roeper,
1991), a keen sense of humor (that may be gentle or hostile,
sophisticated or bizarre) (Webb, Meckstroth & Tolan, 1982), an
early and heightened concern for justice and morality (Roeper, 1991)
and the desire to make certain that actions are consistent with values
(Hollingworth, 1942).
Socially, gifted children may have difficulty placing themselves with
chronological peers, as their interests are likely to be different. In
addition, their emotional sensitivity and intensity may make social
interactions, particularly in settings where emotions are distrusted,
devalued or directly censured, especially complicated (Kline &
Meckstroth, 1985).
Where
their abilities cause jealousy in others there may be a powerful
incentive to hide or disguise those abilities in order to "get along"
more successfully. Sometimes this effort becomes powerful and long term
denial of their differences. This is particularly true for girls during
adolescence (Kerr, 1985; Noble, 1989; Silverman, 1993).
Effects in Adulthood
All of these characteristics, continuing into adulthood, create a
different experience of life for the gifted adult, just as they do for
the gifted child, whether or not the individual is achieving and being
recognized as gifted, whether or not the individual understands and
accepts his differences, (Lovecky, 1986).
Sometimes
the different life experience is a positive, but not always. Sometimes
it is painful or even destructive (Alvarado, 1989).
The cognitive differences can lead to high levels of career success in
many fields. These are the specific abilities that so often produce the
recognized gifted adult, the ground-breaking physicist, the great
philosopher, the peace-making diplomat, the successful entrepreneur.
But
for the adult whose life circumstances do not readily provide an arena
for the positive use of these abilities the result may be a feeling of
frustration, lack of fulfillment, a nagging sense of being tied down,
imprisoned, thwarted (Roeper, 1991; Smith, 1992).
The middle management employee who has the ability to see and devise
solutions to various company problems may be seriously frustrated in
his job because a boss who lacks that ability does not allow the
expression, much less the implementation of those solutions.
The suburban housewife, who has raised several children and worked as a
volunteer for innumerable civic associations, may find herself
restless, bored and frustrated when the children have left home. Social
activities do not fill the void, nor does the sort of routine job she
may be tempted to pursue to get herself out of the house.
The worker stuck in a dead end, menial job because she lacked the
opportunity for an education appropriate to her unusual cognitive
abilities, has no way to use those abilities in her intellectually
undemanding work.
None of these individuals may fully understand the reasons for their
dissatisfactions. They may not see a way or even a need to give
themselves an outlet for their abilities, because they do not recognize
the source of the problem.
Having
bought into society's achievement-bound definition of giftedness, they
are unlikely to think of themselves as gifted adults.
Few
adults today were identified as gifted in childhood and they may never
have understood their own differences from the norm. Because it is hard
to be different, those who were identified may have protected
themselves with denial.
The gifted frequently take their own capacities for granted, believing
that it is people with different abilities who are the really bright
ones (Alvarado, 1989; Tolan, 1992).
Not
understanding the source of their frustration or ways to alleviate it,
they may opt to relieve the pain through the use of alcohol, drugs,
food or other addictive substances or behaviors. Or they may simply
hunker down and live their lives in survival mode.
Even when the individual is able to use her gifts to achieve undeniable
career success, she may feel and appear seriously out of step. Barbra
Streisand, for instance, whose abilities are not only obvious and far
from norms but also wide-ranging, is criticized for perfectionism, for
demanding too much from those she works with.
Her
well-known discomfort with public performance may come in part from the
seemingly paradoxical self-esteem problems that often come with
extraordinary gifts.
Emotional Intensity
Though adults, having had years of experience dealing with a culture in
which emotionality is largely unaccepted, are usually more able than
gifted children to control the expression of their emotional
sensitivity and intensity, they must still deal in some way with the
experience of that emotion.
In
some fields, such as the arts, the unusual emotionality of the gifted
can be safely expressed and is, in fact, a powerful asset that can lead
to success and achievement (Piechowski & Cunningham, 1985;
Piechowski & Silverman, 1985).
In
most fields, however, emotions are suspect and expressing them may be
disallowed. Many men, having been trained to do so throughout
childhood, manage to suppress their emotionality and suffer the
psychological repercussion of that suppression.
Women,
used to greater freedom of emotional expression in childhood, may find
the suppression necessary to moving ahead along a chosen career path
difficult.
Moral Issues
The gifted adult's moral sensitivity and concern for justice can lead
him or her to a life of service, performance and/or achievement in
diplomacy, the law, medicine, philanthropy and other fields.
However,
it can also lead to depression and other psychological difficulties, as
the state of civilization and the condition of the planet can seem
overwhelming to one with unusual clarity of thought and depth of
perception combined with strong empathy and moral concern (Roeper,
1991).
In
addition, such a person may find the ethical corner-cutting, deception,
outright dishonesty, and competition of the workplace intolerable
(Hollingworth, 1937).
"A university professor who questions the basic assumptions of her
domain, is morally outraged by competition and the pecking order in her
department, and cannot express her ideas without becoming emotional,
will be considered an unprofessional fringe element" (Wallach, 1994).
Neither
she nor her colleagues is likely to perceive her work-related problems
as stemming from her giftedness.
Social Realities
Socially, the experience of gifted adults can be diverse. Those who
have chosen a career path that puts them into contact with other gifted
adults may regularly experience the joy and excitement of the
intellectual synergy that occurs in such a group.
In
person or on computer networks these people build on each other's
ideas, moving with great, exhilarating leaps through complex
intellectual realms. There can be a sense of almost magical connection
as the ideas flow from one to another, seeming to take on a life of
their own.
When
unusually capable minds are working together there is a powerful sense
of community and belonging.
For others, or for these people outside the work place or off the
networks, social interaction can be both problematic and difficult to
understand.
A
gifted adult may find herself in the workplace and/or outside
associating with many individuals who do not share the complexity and
depth of her perceptions.
She
may find it difficult to share important aspects of herself with
others. She may have to weigh her words, simplify her conceptions, hold
herself back in conversation. This experience is both tiring and
frustrating.
Particularly if she does not understand or accept her giftedness, she
(and others) may interpret her difficulty as social ineptitude. Even if
she is able to match her interactions to her companions' level of
interest or understanding, she may leave a social event feeling
isolated, "weird," dissatisfied, unhappy.
Others
may clearly enjoy activities that the gifted adult finds stultifying
and repetitious or prefer entertainment that lacks the depth and
intellectual nourishment she craves.
The
hunger for intellectual companionship is felt even when it is not
recognized or understood. Lacking companions with similar interests,
the gifted adult may withdraw from interaction with others and resign
herself to a solitary life.
Honoring the Self
There are many individual profiles of adult giftedness, some that
neatly fit our cultural expectations, many more that do not. The
experience of giftedness in adulthood is more likely to be problematic
and painful when the individual denies or does not understand his own
giftedness.
Not
understanding, he feels alienated, not only from others, but from
himself. Not understanding, he does not know how to solve the problems,
heal the wounds, fulfill or even cope with the powerful internal drive
(Rubin, 1990).
Our relentless focus on achievement rather than the unusual mental
processing that constitutes giftedness makes the necessary recognition
and understanding difficult if not impossible for many.
It is
critical both for the individual gifted adult and for the society that
may be able to benefit from abilities not yet fully utilized, that we
expand our perceptions and continue to pay attention to the gifted when
they have left the educational community and taken their place in the
adult world.
We must also look carefully at the perception of giftedness in the
field of education, for it is in childhood that the gifted individual
begins to form that critical sense of self, his initial understanding
of his own mental processing, his own mind.
Many
in gifted education now view giftedness even in childhood as definable
by achievement rather than potential (Dunn, Dunn & Treffinger,
1992). "The gifted person is the one who gives gifts to society," one
of the major voices in the field has said, following that statement
with the assertion that "I create giftedness" by offering students a
carefully chosen set of opportunities and resources (Renzulli, 1989).
The
new focus on "talent" rather than "giftedness," though it recognizes an
internal reality (a talent that one individual has while another does
not), in actuality expands the achievement/product orientation.
A
talent is a specific, limited ability, rather than a broadly based way
of mental processing. Talent development leads relentlessly to
performance in a "domain" rather than to the support, reinforcement and
enhancement of mind, consciousness, awareness, judgment.
The field of education now seems to be moving to a largely external,
achievement-based measure of giftedness even for children, giving
precedence to products over mental processes.
As it
does this, it devalues the individual and sets the scene for more
children (who may not be able to fit their mental gifts to the schools'
narrow range of achievements) to enter adulthood unaware of or denying
the needs of their unusual minds.
Gifted children do not disappear when they graduate from high school or
finish college or graduate degrees. They become gifted adults.
If
they enter adulthood blind to their unusual mental capabilities, they
may go through their lives fragmented, frustrated, unfulfilled and
alienated from their innermost beings.
What
is different about the gifted individual is his or her mind. Not
understanding that mind makes it virtually impossible to honor the self.
It is apparent that the 'self'...is our mind - our mind and its
characteristic manner of operation (Brandon, 1983).
Mind makes us human; mind makes us individuals. From childhood through
adulthood, to be themselves, to value and honor themselves and lead
fulfilled lives, gifted adults must understand and come to terms with
their own -- unusual -- minds.
References
Alvarado, N. (1989). Adjustment of gifted adults. Advanced Development,
1(1), 77-86.
Branden, N. (1983). Honoring the self, the psychology of confidence and
respect. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher, xiii, 22.
Burks, B. S.,Jensen, D. W., & Terman, L. M. (1930). Genetic studies
of genius: The promise of youth. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Carroll, H. A. (1940). Genius in the making. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Clark, B. (1988). Growing up gifted (3rd ed.). Columbus: Charles
Merrill.
Columbus Group (1991). Unpublished transcript. Columbus, Ohio.
DeHaan, R. F., & Havighurst, R. J. (1957). Educating gifted
children. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Dunn, R., Dunn, K. & Treffinger, D. (1992). Bringing out the
giftedness in your child: Nurturing every child's unique strengths,
talents and potential. New York: John Wiley Sons.
Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius. London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen
through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot,
Graham, and Ghandi. New York: Basic Books.
Gross, U. M. (1992). The early development of three profoundly gifted
children of IQ 200. In P. S. Klein & A. J. Tannenbaum (Eds.), To be
young and gifted (pp. 94-138). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
Hall, E. G., & Skinner, N. (1980). Somewhere to turn: Strategies
for parents of the gifted and talented. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Hirt, Z. I. (1922). A gifted child. Training School Bulletin, 19, 49-54.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted children: Their nature and nurture.
New York: The Macmillan Company.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1937, June). "Bright students take care of
themselves". North American Review, p. 261-273.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ (Stanford-Binet):
Origin and development. Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book Company.
Kline, B. E., & Meckstroth, E. A. (1985). Understanding and
encouraging the exceptionally gifted. Roeper Review, 8(1), 24-30.
Kerr, B. A. (1985). Smart girls, gifted women. Columbus, OH: Ohio
Psychology Publishing.
Krueger, M. L. (1978). On being gifted: National student symposium on
the education of the gifted and talented. New York: Walker.
Lovecky, D. V. (1986). Can you hear the flowers singing? Issues for
gifted adults. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 572-575.
Morelock, M. J. (in press). The child of extraordinarily high IQ from a
Vygotskian perspective. In F. D. Horowitz & R. C.
Friedman (Eds.), Proceedings from the Esther Katz Rosen Symposium
on the Psychological Development of Gifted Children: Vol. 2: The gifted
and talented: Empirical studies. Washington, D.C.: American
Psychological Association.
Morelock, M. J. & Feldman, D. H. (1993). Prodigies and savants:
What they have to tell us about giftedness and human cognition. In K.
A. Heller, F. J. Monks & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International
Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 161-181). NY: Pergamon Press.
Noble, K. D. (1989). Living out the promise of high potential:
Perceptions of 100 gifted women. Advanced Development, 1(1), 57-75
Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National
excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Piechowski, M. M. & Cunningham, K. (1985). Patterns of
overexcitability in a group of artists. The Journal of Creative
Behavior, 19(3), 153-174.
Piechowski, M. M., Silverman, L. K., & Falk, R. F. (1985).
Comparison of intellectually and artistically gifted on five dimensions
of mental functioning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 539-549.
Piirto, J. (1994). Talented children and adults: Their
development and education. New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a
definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184, 261.
Renzulli, J. (1989). Speech delivered at the New York state AGATE
Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY.
Roeper, A. (1991). Gifted adults: Their characteristics and emotions.
Advanced Development, 3, 85-98.
Rubin, T. I. (1990). Child potential: Fulfilling your child's
intellectual, emotional and creative promise. New York: Continuum.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (1987). Giftedness as a social construct. Teachers
College Record, 89 (1), 39-53.
Shurkin, J. N. (1992). Terman's kids: The groundbreaking study of how
the gifted grow up. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company.
Silverman, L. K. (1993). Social development, leadership and gender
issues. In L. K. Silverman (Ed.). Counseling the gifted and talented
(pp. 291-327). Denver, Colorado: Love Publishing Co.
Silverman, L. K., & Kearney, K. (1989). Parents of the
extraordinarily gifted. Advanced Development Journal, 1(1), 41-56.
Smith, M. (1992, January 19). Out of step. Sunday Journal Magazine, p.
6-13.
Stedman, L. M. (1924). The education of gifted children. Yonkers on
Hudson, NY: World Book Company
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Ed.). (1986). Conceptions of
giftedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Subotnik, R. (1993). Genius revisited: High IQ children grown up.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tannenbaum, A. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and
educational perspectives. New York: Macmillan.
Terman, L. M. (1925). Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted
children. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Terman, L. M., Oden, M. H. (1947). Genetic studies of genius: The
gifted child grows up. Twenty five years' followup of a superior group.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Tolan, S. S. (1992). Only a parent: Three true stories. Understanding
Our Gifted, 4(3), 1, 8-10.
Wallach, M. (1994). The courage to network. Understanding Our Gifted,
6(3), 1, 11-14.
Webb, J. T., Meckstroth, E. A., & Tolan, S. S. (1982). Guiding the Gifted Child. Columbus, OH: Ohio Psychology Publishing
Company.
White, W. L. (1990). Interviews with Child I, Child J, and Child L.
Roeper Review, 12(3), 222-227.
Willings, D. (1980). The creatively gifted: Recognizing and developing
the creative personality. Cambridge: Woodhead-Faulkner.
Witty, P. A. (Ed.). (1951). The gifted child. Lexington, MA: D. C.
Heath & Company.
Witty, P. A., Jenkins, M. D. (1935). The case of “B” - A gifted Negro
girl. Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 117-124.
Yoder, A. H. (1894). The study of the boyhood of great men. Pedagogical
Seminary, 3, 134-156.
Zorbaugh, H. W., & Boardman, R. (1936). Salvaging our gifted
children. Journal of Educational Sociology, 10, 100-108.
~ ~
Originally
appeared in Roeper Review, August 1994. Please do not
duplicate.
Article
published here with kind permission of the author.
Mail
to author [at] stephanietolan.com.
Copyright
© 2000-2005 Stephanie S. Tolan stephanietolan.com
~ ~ ~
High Ability
Highly
Sensitive
High
Ability - gifted/talented articles
~ ~ ~
|
|