The gifted and the extraordinary

By Martin E.P. Seligman, PhD
APA President

Before World War II high talent was a focal mission of psychology. As our field became increasingly focussed on clinical populations genius was all but forgotten. But central to the presidential theme of Positive Psychology?psychology dedicated to building the best things in life as well as healing the worst?is the search for and building of the full expression of high talent.

It is not just psychology that has neglected gifted and talented children. It is found throughout society?even up to the top policy makers in the government. I had a striking encounter with a high official of the U.S. Department of Education at a meeting of the Council of Science Society Presidents recently. He had given a speech on the Clinton administration?s uphill, but laudable policy of attempting to raise the average science and math scores of all American children.

'The future of American science and math depends not only on a scientifically literate citizenry but more crucially on the very talented young people who will become our future scientists and mathematicians,' I commented. 'What are you doing to help these children?'

'Gifted children take care of themselves,' he replied.

Taking up the cause

This widespread belief is both mistaken and dangerous. It consigns a very large number of gifted children to fall by the wayside in despair and frustration. Intellectual giftedness comes in many guises, and parents, peers and schools all too often fail to recognize or support high talents?and worse, reject them into mediocrity. This neglect is not benign; it squanders a precious, irreplaceable national resource under the banner of 'anti-elitism.'

Psychology must take up their cause again.

APA and the American Psychological Foundation displayed our concern at the San Francisco convention by creating a Teachers of Psychology in the Secondary Schools national award and by honoring the three high school winners.

Also, an APA presidential task force on gifted and talented youth, headed by Camilla Benbow and Nancy Robinson, has crafted two proposals: one to create the beginnings of a Virtual University for gifted teenagers and the other for studying truly extraordinary people.

The Virtual University has two phases. In the first, we are applying for funds to provide a clearinghouse and advising service to gifted secondary school students who are seeking advanced online instruction. At present there is no way for students and their parents to assess the academic value and suitability for gifted students of most distance learning courses. Many gifted students are ready for more advanced instruction than their schools have to offer, but do not know how to proceed. We will provide a reliable avenue of information individually tailored to provide an optimal match for their readiness and aspirations as well as a system of electronic advising. Advisors will be trained to assess academic needs, will recommend optimal online choices and will suggest other opportunities for enrichment.

In the second phase we will select those few students who do extraordinarily well in the first phase and provide them with electronic mentoring by world-class faculty. The idea here is to identify, for example, the most promising 15-year-old psychometricians and hook them up with Paul Meehl as their tutor.

The other project of the talent committee is the study of truly extraordinary people. This is an attempt to bring together the idiographic studies of genius with the more nomothetic studies of gifted children. The studies of gifted children go forward in time with systematic measurement and even control groups, but they almost never find what they are looking for: breathtaking adult achievement. Conversely, the studies of breathtaking accomplishments capture their target by definition, but must look backward without the benefit of systematic measurement. The talent committee will bring together some of the best representatives of both these arenas to try to launch a study that combines the best features of the two approaches.

Work that could benefit all children

Such a venture might identify high accomplishment in one domain, such as entrepreneurs or musicians, and have each person nominate two comparison people?individuals who were at least as talented and individuals who had the same good opportunities but who did not rise to the same remarkable heights. Members of all three groups would then be interviewed using the same structured protocol.

Our goal is to improve psychology?s understanding of how the potential of highly talented young people is either frustrated or brought to full fruition. Since it is likely that the same forces that bring talent to actuality for this group are at work for the rest of us, it is my hope that such knowledge can be used to benefit all children.