Page 56 - Kukanja Gabrijelčič, Mojca, and Maruška Seničar Željeznov, eds. 2018. Teaching Gifted and Talented Children in A New Educational Era. Koper: University of Primorska Press.
P. 56
aterini D. Gari et al.
motivation to achieve goals under the influence of sociocultural factors as
they emerge through the critical influence of family, school and peers (Gari,
Kalanzi-Azizi, & Mylonas, 2000; Gari & Tsigri, 2009; Mönks, Van Boxtel, Roelefs,
& Sanders, 1986; Renzulli, Reis & Smith, 1981). However, multidimensional
models for giftedness show that excellent achievement in various fields is
based on some physical abilities and a combination of several interpersonal
characteristics such as motivation, prior knowledge and specific skills (Heller,
1992; Heller, Perleth, & Lim, 2005; Vogl, & Preckel, 2014). Their identification
by parents is usually the first step towards the establishment of giftedness.
Parental approval and mainly parental attitudes and behaviours seem to be
crucial for the child and the realization of its own potential and afterwards
for the development of gifted characteristics.
In the past, research for gifted children’s families was predominately made
to address two main needs: To determine how family life creates talents and
to investigate how the identification of giftedness affects siblings (Silverman
& Kearney, 1989). Later, other researchers on an attempt to shed light on the
particularities of these families, offered a large number of studies aiming to
point out the main concerns of parents of talented children and highlighting
some key areas as sources of concern: Roles in the family and adaptability, re-
lationships with siblings, parents’ self-concept, issues relating to neighbour-
hood and community, educational issues, and child development (Keirouz,
1990; Windecker-Nelson, Melson & Moon, 1997). Moreover, identification of
the gifted students seem to affect particular regions of sibling relationship,
as competition seems to affect positively identified siblings, but negatively
an unidentified sibling (Grenier, 1985). In addition, the relationship between
the non-gifted children and their gifted brothers is less closed, as mentioned
by the children themselves, compared to those between non-gifted siblings.
They dislike the arrogance of their gifted brothers and wish they had similar
cognitive skills. Brothers in ‘normal’ families express the same antipathy to a
much lesser extent (Lapidot-Berman & Oshrat, 2009).
Another set of studies was designed to investigate giftedness as it is per-
ceived and expressed within the family. Freeman (1995) stressed that parents
may face emotional difficulties or feeling inadequate, or even trying to get
social benefit from their child’s exceptional skills. She concluded that some-
times parents may be greedy, raising excessive expectations for their child.
When in fact parents realize that a child or one of their children may has ex-
ceptional capabilities, a fear of failure and frustration ultimately brings often
harmful repercussions on the child’s emotional adjustment. To put it in an-
other way parents may fall into the trap of the stereotypes related to high
54
motivation to achieve goals under the influence of sociocultural factors as
they emerge through the critical influence of family, school and peers (Gari,
Kalanzi-Azizi, & Mylonas, 2000; Gari & Tsigri, 2009; Mönks, Van Boxtel, Roelefs,
& Sanders, 1986; Renzulli, Reis & Smith, 1981). However, multidimensional
models for giftedness show that excellent achievement in various fields is
based on some physical abilities and a combination of several interpersonal
characteristics such as motivation, prior knowledge and specific skills (Heller,
1992; Heller, Perleth, & Lim, 2005; Vogl, & Preckel, 2014). Their identification
by parents is usually the first step towards the establishment of giftedness.
Parental approval and mainly parental attitudes and behaviours seem to be
crucial for the child and the realization of its own potential and afterwards
for the development of gifted characteristics.
In the past, research for gifted children’s families was predominately made
to address two main needs: To determine how family life creates talents and
to investigate how the identification of giftedness affects siblings (Silverman
& Kearney, 1989). Later, other researchers on an attempt to shed light on the
particularities of these families, offered a large number of studies aiming to
point out the main concerns of parents of talented children and highlighting
some key areas as sources of concern: Roles in the family and adaptability, re-
lationships with siblings, parents’ self-concept, issues relating to neighbour-
hood and community, educational issues, and child development (Keirouz,
1990; Windecker-Nelson, Melson & Moon, 1997). Moreover, identification of
the gifted students seem to affect particular regions of sibling relationship,
as competition seems to affect positively identified siblings, but negatively
an unidentified sibling (Grenier, 1985). In addition, the relationship between
the non-gifted children and their gifted brothers is less closed, as mentioned
by the children themselves, compared to those between non-gifted siblings.
They dislike the arrogance of their gifted brothers and wish they had similar
cognitive skills. Brothers in ‘normal’ families express the same antipathy to a
much lesser extent (Lapidot-Berman & Oshrat, 2009).
Another set of studies was designed to investigate giftedness as it is per-
ceived and expressed within the family. Freeman (1995) stressed that parents
may face emotional difficulties or feeling inadequate, or even trying to get
social benefit from their child’s exceptional skills. She concluded that some-
times parents may be greedy, raising excessive expectations for their child.
When in fact parents realize that a child or one of their children may has ex-
ceptional capabilities, a fear of failure and frustration ultimately brings often
harmful repercussions on the child’s emotional adjustment. To put it in an-
other way parents may fall into the trap of the stereotypes related to high
54
