VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 MARCH 2012 http://www.nagc.org/ Counseling and Guidance N E W S L E T T E R Giftedness is not a matter of degree but of a different quality of experiencing: vivid, absorbing, penetrating, encompassing, complex, commanding – a way of being quiveringly alive. - Michael Piechowski A TRIANNUAL NEWSLETTER Welcome to the NAGC IN THIS ISSUE: Counseling and Guidance Network Newsletter Welcome Message from the Editors 1 Quiet Heroes 2 Dabrowski’s  Greeting 2 Theoretical Overview of Overexcitabilities and Emotional Intensity 3 The  “Rocket  Science”  of   Raising a Gifted Child 8 Parenting a Sensitive and Intense Child Our network is dedicated to addressing the social and emotional growth of the gifted and talented with an emphasis on planning and implementing a variety of systems and services for meeting affective needs. The range of these concerns is vast. In an effort to give due attention to the various issues, this newsletter will focus on a particular domain each year. This year, we are directing our attention to meeting the non-intellective needs of gifted children who are highly sensitive, intense, and/or have characteristics of overexcitabilities. In this edition, we provide an overview of the research on the highly sensitive and intense students as well as the perspective from two parents, one of whom is also a practitioner. Two more editions, one in May and one in August, will focus on the same domain. 12 Recommended Name Change 13 Mission of the NAGC Counseling Network Officers 14 NAGC Counseling and Guidance Network Officers 14 Call for Articles 14 Our hope is that these articles add to your knowledge, inspire insight, establish confirmation, and/or pose new questions. We welcome your response to the articles and any comments you may want to share with us. Your comments can help spur us to improving upcoming issues. Please consider submitting an article for our May edition of this newsletter if you are a researcher, a practitioner who works with these students, or the parent of a child with overexcitabilities. Details for submission can be found on page 13. VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 2 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 2 QUIET HEROES Many of the people working with the social and emotional needs of gifted students have limited exposure because much of what they do is confidential. Their efforts are usually carried out inconspicuously at an individual or small group level. Many of us know people whose commitment to meeting the social and affective needs of children shows remarkable dedication, enormous energy, impressive competence, and persistent compassion. If you know of such a person, consider nominating him or her for recognition as a Quiet Hero. Send us a short biography along with how the person exudes the qualities of commitment, energy, competence, and compassion. Stories or anecdotes allowed by confidentiality and respect for privacy that support how your nominee excels in working with gifted children will also be helpful. Send your submissions to nagc.cg.newsletter@gmail.com. We will recognize Quiet Heroes in our August newsletter. We look forward to sharing their stories. Be greeted psychoneurotics! For you see sensitivity in the insensitivity of the world, uncertainty among the world's certainties. For you often feel others as you feel yourselves. For you feel the anxiety of the world, and its bottomless narrowness and self-assurance. For your phobia of washing your hands from the dirt of the world, for your fear of being locked in the world’s limitations. for your fear of the absurdity of existence. For your subtlety in not telling others what you see in them. Poem by Kazimierz Dabrowski Dabrowski, K. (1972). Psychoneurosis is not an illness, London: GRYF Publications. For your awkwardness in dealing with practical things, and for your practicalness in dealing with unknown things, for your transcendental realism and lack of everyday realism, for your exclusiveness and fear of losing close friends, for your creativity and ecstasy, for your maladjustment to that "which is" and adjustment to that which "ought to be", for your great but unutilized abilities. For the belated appreciation of the real value of your greatness which never allows the appreciation of the greatness of those who will come after you. For your being treated instead of treating others, for your heavenly power being forever pushed down by brutal force; for that which is prescient, unsaid, infinite in you. For the loneliness and strangeness of your ways. Be greeted! VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 3 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 3 Theoretical Overview of Overexcitabilities and Emotional Intensity by Merzili Villanueva PhD Student, University of Connecticut Doctoral Research Assistant, Neag Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development The  lasting  purpose  of  the  Counseling  and  Guidance  Network’s  newsletter  is  to  build  advocacy for the psychosocial needs of gifted individuals. This year, we have chosen to focus on the role of Dabrowski’s   Theory   of   Positive   Disintegration   (TPD) and overexcitabilities (OEs) in understanding and nurturing the emotional intensities and sensitivities of gifted individuals along the developmental lifespan. The following article serves as an introduction to the theory for those unfamiliar  with  Dabrowski’s  work  and  the  research  that  has  followed. Researchers and practitioners in the field of gifted education and counseling have used Kazimierz Dabrowski’s   (1902-1980) Theory of Positive Disintegration (TPD) and concept of overexcitabilities (OEs) to inform parents, educators, counselors, and the general public about how the intensities and sensitivities of gifted individuals manifest and can be nurtured for emotional growth (e.g., Daniels & Piechowski, 2009; Mendaglio, Tillier, Finlay, Michelle-Pentelburry, & Dodd, 2002). Dabrowski—a Polish psychiatrist, psychologist, and professor—developed the concepts in TPD from research data and observations in his clinical and everyday experiences. Although Dabrowski (1964, 1972) has described TPD as a theory of psychological personality development, he and other researchers have also maintained that it is one of emotional development (e.g., Gross, Rinn, & Jamieson, 2007; Miller, Silverman, & Falk, 1994; Mróz, 2009; Silverman, 1992). Researchers and counselors have emphasized the critical need to attend to the affective concerns of gifted individuals and have advocated for the practical application of TPD (e.g., Silverman, 1992, 1993; Sisk, 2008). Some have proposed using OEs and Dabrowskian levels of development to supplement common identification methods for giftedness (e.g., Ackerman, 1997; Bouchard, 2004; Lee & Olszewski-Kubilius, 2006; Piechowski, 1979), and providing differentiated educational services to support self-actualization (Sisk, 2008). Others have proposed using OEs and developmental potential (DP), as a means of broadening the conception of giftedness (Piechowski, 1986; Yakmaci-Guzel & Bogazici, 2006). Counselors and psychologists have applied OEs and Dabrowski’s  TPD  in  their  work  with  gifted  children,  their  parents,  and  schools  to  provide  appropriate   interventions and accommodations (Daniels, 2009; Jackson & Moyle, 2009; Mahoney, 1997; Peterson, 2003). Some have addressed misdiagnosis of pathological conditions such as  Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), and Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) (e.g., Mika, 2002, 2006; Webb, Amend, Webb, Goerss, Beljan, & Olenchak, 2005);  perfectionism, (Schuler, 2001, 2002; Silverman, 2009);  depression (Neihart, 2002); and,  suicide (Gust-Brey & Cross, 1999). Dabrowski and The Gifted Overexcitabilities Dabrowski introduced the concept of overexcitability to  describe  five forms of “heightened ways of processing experiences and percieving the world (Mendaglio & Tillier, 2006, p. 69). VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 4 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 4 Translated from Polish, OE means superstimulated (Piechowski, 1999). As noted in the following descriptions, individuals can express OEs in both positive and negative ways, which can be considered both potential benefits and challenges (adapted from Piechowski, 1979).      psychomotor- surplus of energy; enthusiasm; restlessness for organizing and taking action; delinquent behavior; compulsive talking; impulsive actions; workaholism; competitiveness; nervous physical habits (nail biting, toe tapping, leg shaking). sensual- heightened awareness and reactions to seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, hearing; overeating; expression of emotional tension through sexual arousal and behaviors; buying sprees. intellectual- burning curiosity; rage to know and master; urge to ask probing questions; tendency for introspection and deep analysis; ability to remain intellectually engaged with a task for an extended period of time; facility with synthesis and understanding generalizations. imaginational- animistic and magical thinking; tendency to daydream and fantasize, and create rich inner worlds and have imaginary friends; likeness for image and metaphor; elaborate daydreams and fantasies; strong ability to visualize; fear of future events. emotional- able  to  easily  gauge  and  identify  with  others’  feelings;;  has  deep-felt and complex range of emotions, including extremes of positive and negative emotions (e.g., anxiety, depression, nervousness, guilt, shame, pride, love, empathy, compassion); physiological expressions of emotional tension; strong attachment to people, places, and things; difficulty adjusting to new environments. All individuals experience OEs, but the gifted experience them in a quantitatively and qualitatively different way than the non-gifted. Dabrowski contended that OEs were biological and that their intensity, frequency, and duration in the individual could be used as measures of developmental potential (DP), or the highest level of development an individual could achieve given the optimal conditions (Miller & Silverman, 1987; Piechowski, 1975; Piechowski & Colangelo, 1982; Piechowski & Cunningham, 1985; Piechowski & Miller, 1995). He used this concept to refer to a constellation of psychological features, associated with advanced personality development: special abilities and talents; intelligence; psychomotor, sensual, intellectual, imaginational, and emotional overexcitabilities;;   and   a   strong   will   to   realize   one’s   potential   and   personality   ideal   (Mendaglio & Tillier, 2006; Piechowski & Miller, 1995). Dabrowski found emotional, intellectual, and imaginational to be the most pronounced, and necessary for advanced development, although other studies have found emotional, imaginational, and psychomotor to be the dominant OEs for some gifted individuals (e.g., Ackerman, 1997; Gallagher, 1986; Schiever, 1985). Dabrowskians have argued that DP is an indicator of giftedness (Ackerman, 1997; Piechowski, 1979), and have chosen OEs to be the concept of TPD most applied to giftedness and gifted education (Mendaglio & Tillier, 2006). Where   Piaget’s   and  Erikson’s  theories  of  human  development  are  suitable   for   the   general   population,   Dabrowski’s   TPD   is more relevant for understanding giftedness from a developmental perspective (Aronson, 1964; Mendaglio et al., 2002). Theory of Positive Disintegration Dabrowski’s  theory  emerged  from  his  studies  of  gifted and non-gifted individuals, particularly clinical patients, school children, artists, writers, and religious exemplars. He found that these individuals VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 5 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 5 experienced similar developmental patterns and characteristics, which he believed to be positive tenets of personality growth. Among these patterns are periods of disintegration, which Dabrowski has defined as "disharmony within the individual and in his adaptation to the external environment" (Aronson, 1964, p. 139). He believed that individuals are instinctually drawn toward autonomous functioning as an ideal and moral being. Higher levels of development are attained when the individual experiences dissatisfaction of oneself, and a subsequent unavoidable collapse of the existing personality structure, which is accompanied by conflict, anxiety, psychoneurosis, and psychosis—a period of positive disintegration. Although these seem to be negative experiences, they usually work in favor  of the individual’s development as the   disintegrative process   reverses towards integration, which includes evolution, mental well-being, and ability to function effectively independently and within surrounding environments. This secondary integration occurs at a higher level of development than the one previous. Negative disintegration can also occur if the environmental situations are unfavorable. Levels of Personality Development Dabrowski outlined five levels of development, which an individual can vacillate in between depending   on   one’s   current   disintegrative   or   integrative period. At Level I: Primary Integration, the individual experiences little inner conflict, and lack of a stable value system and realization of goals. Occurrence of external conflicts exists. At Level II: Unilevel Disintegration, internal conflicts appear, but are not resolved by deliberate choice. Behavior conforms to external standards with little reflection. Level III and IV: Organized Multilevel Disintegration is called the inner psychic milieu (Piechowski, 1974). The individual experiences feelings of shame, guilt, discouragement, and great dissatisfaction with oneself, recognizing   “what   is”   and   envisioning   “what   ought   to   be”. Dabrowski noted this experience to be positive maladjustment—experiencing great pain while simultaneously growing into   one’s   ideal   self. Although unilevel functioning is still present, the individual makes a conscious effort to progress toward his or her personality ideal. Finally, at Level V: Secondary Integration occurs. The individual is free from internal conflicts, and   “what   is”   is  replaced  with  “what  ought  to  be”  (Piechowski, 1975, pp. 260-262). Dabrowski believed certain conditions must be present at each level of development, and that these conditions would influence behavior. The first group of factors represents hereditary influences (Level I), the second group represents environmental influences (Level II, III, and IV), and the third group represents autonomous inner processes (Level V) (Piechowski, 1975). Dabrowski (1964) emphasized the important role of the third factor— the autonomous inner processes—in multilevel disintegration. The individual selects transformation over hereditary and environmental forces. He noted that the third factor arises in certain individuals during periods of stress and transition, such as puberty and adolescence. Dabrowski’s   concepts   of   OEs   and   DP   have   been   outlined   within   the   context   of   his   theory   for   the   purpose of understanding the proceeding discussions regarding OEs in gifted individuals. Though researchers have indicated that OEs are markers of DP, they warn against isolating OEs from TPD, and rather advocate for holistic application of TPD (Miller & Silverman, 1987; Piechowski, 1975; Piechowski & Colangelo, 1984; Piechowski & Cunningham, 1985; Piechowski & Miller, 1995). VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 6 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 6 References Ackerman, C. M. (1997). Identifying gifted adolescents using personality characteristics: Dabrowski's overexcitabilities, Roeper Review, 19, 229-236. Aronson, J. (1964). In J. Aronson (Ed.), Positive disintegration (p. 139). Boston, MA: Little Brown. Bouchard, L. L. (2004). Instrument for the measure of Dabrowskian overexcitabilities to identify gifted elementary students, Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 339-350. Dabrowski, K. (1964). Positive disintegration. Boston, MA: Little, Brown. Dabrowski, K. (1972). Psychoneurosis is not an illness. London, England: Gryf. Dabrowski, K., & Piechowski, M. M. (1977). Theory of levels of emotional development: From primary integration to self- actualization (Vol. 2). Oceanside, NY: Dabor Science. Daniels, S., & Piechowski, M. M. (2009). Living with intensity. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Gallagher, S. A. (1986). A comparison of the concept of overexcitabilities with measures of creativity and school achievement in sixth grade students. Roeper Review, 8, 115-119. Gross, C. M., Rinn, A. N., & Jamieson, K. M. (2007). The relationship between gifted adolescents’ overexcitabilities and self-concepts: An analysis of gender and grade level. Roeper Review, 29, 240-248. Gust-Brey, K., & Cross, T. (1999). An examination of the literature base on the suicidal behaviors of gifted students. Roeper Review, 22, 28-35. Jackson, P. S., & Moyle, V. F. (2009). Integrating the intense experience: counseling and clinical applications. In S. Daniels & M. Piechowski (Eds.), Living with intensity (pp. 57-71). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Lee, S., & Olszewski-Kubulius, P. (2006). Comparisons between talent search students qualifying via scores on standardized tests and via parent nomination. Roeper Review, 28, 157-166. Mahoney, A. S. (1998). In search of the gifted identity: From abstract concept to workable counseling constructs. Roeper Review, 20, 222-226. Mendaglio, S. (Ed.). (2008). Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Mendaglio, S., & Tillier, W. (2006). Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration and giftedness: Overexcitability research findings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 68-87. Mendaglio, S., Tillier, W., Finlay, L., Michelle-Pentelbury, R., & Dodd, A. (2002). Special issue: Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration and gifted education. Journal of the Gifted and Talented Education Council of the Alberta Teachers’ Association—AGATE, 15(2), 2-46. Mika, E. (2002). Gifted children and overexcitabilities and a preliminary clinical study. In N. Duda, Ed.), Positive disintegration: The theory of the future. 100th Dabrowski anniversary program on the man, the theory, the application and the future (pp. 323-336). Fort Lauderdale, FL: Fidlar Doubleday. Mika. E. (2006). Giftedness, ADHD, and overexcitabilities: The possibilities of misinformation. Roeper Review, 28, 237-242. Miller, N. B., & Silverman, L. K. (1987). Levels of personality development. Roeper Review, 9, 221. Miller, N. B., Silverman, L. K., & Falk, R. E. (1994). Emotional development, intellectual ability, and gender. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 20-38. Mróz, A. (2009). Theory of positive disintegration as a basis for research on assisting development. Roeper Review, 31, 96-102. Neihart, M. (2002). Gifted children and depression. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon, (Eds.) The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 93-101). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Peterson, J. S. (2003). An Argument for proactive attention to affective concerns of gifted VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 7 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 7 adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 62-70. Piechowski, M. M. (1974). Two developmental concepts: Multilevelness and developmental potential. Counseling and Values, 18, 86-93. Piechowski, M. M. (1975). A theoretical and empirical approach to the study of development. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 92, 231-297. Piechowski, M. M. (1979). Developmental potential. In N. Colangelo, & R. T. Zaffran (Eds.), New voices in counseling the gifted (pp.25-57). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Piechowski, M. M. (1986). The concept of developmental potential. Roeper Review, 8, 190-197. Piechowski, M. M. (1999). Overexcitabilities. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 325-334). New York, NY: Academic Press. Piechowski, M. M., Colangelo, N. (1984). Developmental potential of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28, 80-88. Piechowski, M. M., & Cunningham, K. (1985). Patterns of overexcitability in a group of artists. Journal of Creative Behavior, 19, 153-174. Piechowski, M. M., & Miller, N. B. (1995). Assessing developmental potential in gifted children: A comparison of methods. Roeper Review, 17, 176-188. Schiever, S. W. (1985). Creative personality characteristics and dimensions of mental functioning in gifted adolescents. Roeper Review, 7, 223-226. Schuler, P. A. (2001). Perfectionism and the gifted adolescent. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education,11, 183-196. Schuler, P. A. (2002). Perfectionism in gifted children and adolescents. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon, (Eds.) The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 81-91). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Silverman, L. K. (1992). Counseling the gifted individual. Counseling and Human Development, 25, 1-16. Silverman, L. K. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love. Silverman, L. K. (2009). Petunias, perfectionism, and levels of development. In S. Daniels & M. Piechowski (Eds.), Living with intensity (pp. 145-164). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Sisk, D.(2008). Engaging the spiritual intelligence of gifted students to build awareness in the classroom. Roeper Review, 30, 24-30. Webb, J. T., Amend, E. R., Webb, N. E., Goerss, J., Belijan, P., & Olenchak, F. R. (2005). Misdiagnosis and dual diagnosis of gifted children and adults. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Yakmaci-Guzel, B., & Akarsu, F. (2006). Comparing overexcitabilities of gifted and non-gifted 10th grade students in Turkey. High Ability Studies, 17, 43–56. There is a goldmine of hidden creativity in each one of these children, which can blossom into spiritual, emotional, creative and scientific growth. We need to build bridges theofinner world of the individual andofthe outer world of society, There is between a goldmine hidden creativity in each one these children, which can so that knowledge, thoughts and creative emotionsand canscientific flow freely between blossom into spiritual, emotional, growth. We them. need to build bridges between the inner world of the individual and the outer world of society, so that knowledge, thoughts and emotions can flow freely between them. Annemarie Roeper – Annemarie Roeper 7 VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 8 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 8 The “Rocket Science” of Raising a Gifted Child by Christine Turo-Shields, ACSW, LCSW, LCAC T-ball starts when children are about 3 or 4 years old. Parents of a t-ball players look forward to watching their children fumble and frolic on the field, throwing and catching their mitts into the air as the game is going on, spinning or sitting in on the field out of sheer excitement or boredom for the game of t-ball. Focus is nonexistent, save their focus on the butterfly flitting around or the clover patch that they just discovered as they look for the lucky one with four leaves. Now, introduce the ball   into   play   and   you   will   have   outtakes   funny   enough   to   submit   to   America’s   Funniest   Videos   – players   who   don’t   even   notice   that   the   ball   is   in   play,   let   alone   right   in   front   of   their   mitt. In those cases, they charge the ball, overrun it, but have the good fortune to get to it, only to overthrow it to the wrong base. We  parents  don’t  care,  we  still  cheer  in  a  wild  frenzy,  making  our  children  think  they are the next great A-Rod, all the while cringing and laughing at their obvious developmental inadequacies of their age. Not  Joshua’s  parents. When my daughter played t-ball, there was this little boy named Joshua on her team. You could easily pick out Joshua because he was always in the ready stance position, alert to only the ball as the batter painfully missed the coach-pitches . . . so out comes the t-ball stand,  but  still  another  “swing  &  a  miss.” That  didn’t  distract  Joshua  whose  eyes  were  glued  to  the   ball. From the moment that the bat hit the ball, Joshua responded on instinct, getting to the ball first nearly each and every time, even though he was playing third base and the ball was dribbled down the first base line. Game after game he played with such natural ability that it created some ire among his fellow players, including my strong-willed Sarah. Sarah had the desire and will to get to the ball first, but not the ability, not like Joshua. Joshua always got to it first – one day, Sarah got so mad she burst into tears. Couldn’t   everyone   see   the   injustice? Couldn’t   everyone   see   that   Joshua   was being a ball hog on the field? Couldn’t  somebody  do  something  to  stop  him  or  slow  him  down? Joshua’s  parents  would  make  feeble  attempts  to  temper  his  enthusiasm,  to  try  to  calm  his  gazellelike  moves  across  the  field,  but  he  wouldn’t  have  it. His body just responded to every aspect of the game, accurately. He was truly in a league of his own. Like Dash in The Incredibles, no one was going to slow him down. They watched every game cringing, but not out of laughter like us other parents, but out of struggle – the   struggle   of   watching   their   child   try   to   restrain   himself   and   “play   nice”   when   it   went   against   every   bone   in   his   body,   against   every   aspect   of   genetic   hardwiring   running through him. At   the   end   of   the   season,   I   talked   to   Joshua’s   parents   about his obvious and amazing athletic giftedness. They apologized – they  knew  he  loved  the  sport  and  was  good  at  it,  just  didn’t  realize  he   was that far advanced from his peers. In total admiration of his ability, I encouraged them to consider a competitive league for their 4 year old son, playing with those whose talent and ability matched his. Watching Joshua on the field one could really envision the next A-Rod. Profound   athletic   talent   is   hard   to   miss,   and   catching   the   wave   of   excitement   at   a   child’s   success comes naturally to us – it’s   as  American   as  apple  pie. Michael  Phelps’  amazing   natural  talent  and   ability was so obvious that he started training with a top swim coach at 11 years old and he began training for the Olympics when he was 12 years old. Imagine  his  mother’s  joy and  excitement; think VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 9 U O I A MARCH 2012 C L U B 9 to your own experiences of what it was like for you as a child . . . rocket science and assorted Brainiac concepts may also have been the norm for you as well. In third grade, it seemed natural for me to know how to spell antidisestablishmentarianism, which, at that time, was the longest word in the English dictionary. At 2 years of age, our son developed a fascination with mechanical things – he loved the merry-go-round best because he could study the rotations of the gear mechanisms that made it move. He threw fits if I did not take him downstairs to do laundry . . . not because he wanted to help, but because he was mesmerized by the rotation of the washer and resulting spill of water into the sump pump. When he went to visit friends and family, his   greeting   was   an   inquiry,   “Do   you   have   a   pedestal   or   submersible   sump   pump?”   And   that   question was quickly followed up with   “Can   I   see   it?” He was so well-studied on the cycle of the sump pump that when 3 years old, he warned us that it was not cycling correctly – unfortunately, we did not heed his warning, and the night we had a babysitter so we could go on a date, our sump pump overflowed and flooded our basement. Lesson learned – the kid knew what he was talking about. Our son was the easily identified Brainiac child – just a brief conversation confirmed intelligence, highlighted by advanced vocabulary, abstract thinking   and   a   sarcastic   wit. Our   daughter’s   intelligence manifested much differently – my husband even questioned why IQ test her (the results quelled his doubts). Research shows that girls with older gifted brothers are IQ tested at significantly lower rates – sadly, we often miss the intelligence of our girls. My daughter has always been very relational in her thinking. As a preschooler, she would cluster everything in terms of relationships, even lining up quarters, nickels, pennies & dimes and giving them attributes of family members based on size (i.e. Daddy was the quarter, Mommy was the nickel, and so on). At a very young age, her deep empathy and supersensitivity was profound to witness as she would lament about the plight of animals and poor people when sensing any type of injustice. She was hysterically crying as she left me a voicemail one afternoon – I thought something tragic had happened. When I called her back and could eventually decipher what she was saying between sobs, her angst was due to watching one of those heart-wrenching commercials about puppy mills. That was tragic to her. She wailed during the movie, Eight Below, when one of the dogs died. At the end of the movie, I asked her what she thought. She  said  “It  was  a  great  movie,  but  I  never  want  to  see  it  again.” As a parent and professional working with gifted and profoundly gifted kids, my perspective is a unique one. Raising   my   children   has   been   both   “delightful   and   draining.” Gifted kids are special needs kids on the other end of the IQ spectrum. Asynchrony rules their lives, and challenges our lives as parents! Our precocious cherubs may have the vocabulary of a 16 year old, the passion for world peace like a 34 year old, and then meltdowns and outbursts like a 2 year old . . . all at a ripe young chronological age of maybe 6 or 7. It’s  hard  to  tell  them  to  “act  their  age”  because  their  age  is   so variable. They are often exhausting and frustrating. It is important to remember that genetics plays  a  big  part  in  this  (they  don’t  lick  it  off the lead in the paint) . . . likely you were as exhausting and frustrating to those who tried to parent and teach you as a child. Dabrowski identifies five "overexcitabilities," or "supersensitivities," which manifest in the gifted population: psychomotor, sensual, emotional, intellectual, and imaginational. Gifted children VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 10 U O I A C MARCH 2012 L U B 1 0 tend to have more than of these intensities, although one is usually dominant. Learning how to manage these OE's becomes the balancing act, and survival skill, for gifted kids and their parents. It's the blessing and the burden throughout life. So the rocket science of parenting becomes how to feed a gifted child, especially in a society that seeks  to  marginalize  intellectual  giftedness.  First  of  all,  don’t  apologize  for  your  child’s  giftedness. It’s  in  the  hardwiring  – it is what it is. Now, the question becomes what to do. I’ve  had  many  conversations   with  adults  who  judge  that  parents  of  gifted  children  push  their  kids. Anyone who has walked in our shoes knows better. We are just struggling to keep up with them, finding the right nourishment to satiate their insatiable hunger and thirst – their desire to learn more, absorb all they can intellectually, connect with others like them, express their deepest emotions, experience knowledge in a way we may never understand, and the list goes on. Attending   the   NAGC   Conference   in   Indianapolis   2003   was   the   entre’   into   the   gifted   world   for   my   husband and me. For the first time, we felt normal – there were other parents like us who simply wanted to feed their gifted kids. I have learned a lot both personally and professionally since that first conference, mostly that we parents of gifted are not unlike our gifted kids. We, too, want to learn, absorb, connect, express and experience. For parents just starting this journey, here are some of my top picks that I always professionally recommend:      Read Guiding the Gifted Child by James Webb & Stephanie Tolan – it’s   an   oldie,   but a goodie. It was the first book that I read which validated my journey and began to shed light on the path of what to do for my kids. Get your child IQ tested (request an IQ and an achievement test) – we know they are smart, but it is valuable to know how smart. Many schools do not typically have a favorable. Download the pdf, A Nation Deceived –a vital document for any parents of a gifted kid, as it highlights the acceleration options and dispels the myths surrounding acceleration. IQ testing also opens doors to resources such as Mensa (top 2% IQ), the Davidson Institute for Talent Development (top 1% IQ), talent searches, etc – explore these for your child. Traditional schools are the only place where kids are grouped by age rather than interest. Gifted children need to be with intellectual peers, not just age-mates. Embrace   the   parental   mindset   “Advocate,   don’t   alienate.” This is critical with schools, programs,   and   adults   who   are   involved   in   your   child’s   life. We want to open doors for opportunities in their lives as we teach our kids to navigate life and create a meaningful life for themselves. Finding the people and places where intelligence is valued and appreciated becomes  our  life’s  journey. There are others who desperately long to find a place for their children to belong and thrive. We are out here –many of us have found the place where rocket science is the norm and not the exception! Welcome – it’s   a   delightful   and   draining   ride!   10 VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 11 U O I A C MARCH 2012 L U B 1 1 Christine Turo-Shields, ACSW, LCSW, LCAC personally & professionally knows the world of the gifted. . . raising 2 gifted children and working with hundreds more in her counseling practice. As a community expert in the GT/HA world, she has consulted with multiple Indianapolis school districts on case consultations regarding gifted students as well as conducted and coordinated numerous trainings and presentations for educators and parents. She has been an integral part in the development of the Gifted Family Program for Central Indiana Mensa – a program so successful that it won the American Mensa Gifted Children Program Award in July 2010. She is the co-owner of Kenosis Counseling Center, Inc in Greenwood, IN. She can be reached at christine@kenosiscenter.com or through the website at www.kenosiscenter.com "The truly creative mind in any field is no more than this: A human creature born abnormally, inhumanly sensitive. To him . . . a touch is a blow, a sound is a noise, a misfortune is a tragedy, a joy is an ecstasy, a friend is a lover, a lover is a god, and failure is death. Add to this cruelly delicate organism the overpowering necessity to create, create, create - - so that without the creating of music or poetry or books or buildings or something of meaning, his very breath is cut off from him. He must create, must pour out creation. By some strange, unknown, inward urgency he is not really alive unless he is creating." “I've always felt that a person's intelligence is directly reflected by the number of conflicting points of view he can entertain simultaneously on the same topic.” Abigail Adams Pearl Buck 11 VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 12 U O I A C MARCH 2012 L U B 1 2 Parenting a Sensitive and Intense Child by Wendy Beeching "Overachiever, mildly depressed, stressed, takes things too seriously." These things were told to my oldest daughter all of her life by school officials and friends. I had to ask myself, "Is it true?" It has been a journey to discover that she is highly sensitive and feels things intensely. It is who she is and how she processes life. She needs to talk about things in order to verbally process what she is experiencing. She is then able to move forward. Her perspective of the world was that it could be very cruel and unjust. This led her to find a way to help others in need as she began to choose her career. We live in a rural area of Western Pennsylvania so teachers and administrators who recognized and developed gifted children have been mostly non-existent. She was never the standardized test high achiever but was a straight A student. When she qualified for the Davidson Institute Young Scholars Program and the John Hopkins Talent Search we were amazed at what we learned about gifted learners. We were also amazed at how much the public school system in our area was not trained or even aware of this type of learner. The lists of myths that the advocating organizations put together were the first clue as to what we were dealing with. Life was magnified in her eyes and she needed someone to help her process all that she was experiencing. And, she needed support from those who understood her. We got this from the Davidson Institute list of resources. While she was growing up she had many of the same issues as other developing children who were becoming independent. She could argue, slam doors, and rebel with the best of them. Through this transitional period we learned that behavioral contracts were the best method for dealing with her. All of the rules were decided upon with their consequences worked out ahead of time. This helped de- escalate the emotions that ran so high in the house. It reduced reactivity to her behavior and attitude. We were able to disengage from the negotiation cycles she would start. While there were still many outbursts, we all survived this stage which lasted for about four or five years. In high school, she qualified for an early college program where she earned high school credit concurrently while attending her freshmen year. She was very shy and quiet in that environment but performed well academically. She decided on a major, got involved in leadership roles with many organizations on campus, traveled on care-breaks where she helped people in other states and other countries. She really blossomed from being shy to taking the lead. She then got accepted into physician assistant school where she has done very well. Her personality suits the helping profession. She is now studying hard to do well on the competency standardized tests required by the program. Being an intense person makes these high stakes tests high anxiety situations so extra study skills have been employed. When she works with the medical doctors during her medical rotations she realizes that her sensitivity is a strength to embrace. She is able to relay medical education to her patients so that they understand how to take better care of themselves. She has compassion for those patients when they share their stories with her. She is then able to refer them to the right place for further support to help them with their multiple needs. 12 VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 13 U O I A C MARCH 2012 L U B 1 3 We have two younger children who are gifted as well. As a parent, I am now more confident in advocating in the public schools. I regularly seek outside assessments so that our children learn about themselves from more than one source. I have them tested so that standardized testing is not such an enormous hurdle. My husband and I now try to approach discipline by drawing up behavioral contracts immediately upon a hot topic where clarity in rules is necessary and allow our children to make their own mistakes within reason. It is always a balance between stepping in and watching from the sidelines as they discover who they are and how hard they need to apply themselves. I can say that while our oldest daughter challenged us to try different parenting techniques; she has helped raise our parenting skill level for her siblings. She also raised our awareness of the importance of identifying and getting specific help for gifted education. Words cannot express how rich this experience has been emotionally. It has taken much research and full focus to strategize through each developmental phase all the way to her becoming independent. We know that she will still need us from time to time but mostly just to listen as she makes decisions for herself based on her own awareness. Thank you to all of the groups who advocate for gifted learners. You are helping parents more effectively raise their children. And you are helping children understand who they are as they navigate through the measurements and standards that aren't always a match for the gifted student. Both of these supports are powerful life changers for the gifted learner. Now, our oldest daughter is getting ready to graduate and move on with her professional life. We hear from her less and less as she is able to cope with her personal and professional life. We are proud of her. At the same time, it is hard to let go because we were needed so intensely for many years. I know she will always experience life intensely. But, now, she has the life skills to do it without us. Recommended Name Change The Counseling and Guidance Network greatly appreciates the efforts of our school counselors in meeting the affective needs of gifted children. The network, though, has expanded beyond a focus on counseling and guidance. To better reflect the changes that have taken place and the current reality of the network and its membership, a name change has been recommended. The name “Social  and  Psychological  Network”  seemed most fitting to most of the network members. This name more accurately describes the work carried out and the mission of our multidimensional network. As past-chair of our network, Dr.  Susan  Jackson  stated,  “We  wanted   to be sure to honor the history and roots of our network–counseling and guidance–while being inclusive of essential stakeholders such as teachers, parents, researchers, educational and clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers and others—all of whom act on behalf of the social and psychological needs of gifted children as represented in our CG sessions, our academic work  and  in  the  field.” 13 VOLUME 8, ISSUE 1 S E Q 14 U O I A C MARCH 2012 L U B 1 4 Mission of the NAGC Counseling and Guidance Network The Counseling & Guidance Network recognizes the critical need for attention to the affective needs of the gifted individual. This Network is dedicated to addressing the social and emotional growth of the gifted and talented. In addition, emphasis is placed on planning and implementing a variety of systems and services for meeting these needs. If you are interested in joining you must first be a member of NAGC. To get details on how to join, go to: http://www.nagc.org/get-involved/join-nagc NAGC Counseling and Guidance Network Officers Jillian Gates, Doctoral Candidate Chair Bronwyn MacFarlane, PhD Chair Elect Angela Housand, PhD Program Chair Susan Jackson, MA, RCC Past Chair William Goff II, PhD and Merzili Villanueva, PhD Student Newsletter Editors Call for Articles The Counseling and Guidance Network of NAGC is seeking submissions for its May newsletter. While accepting research, clinical, and scholarly position papers, we also welcome experiential narratives from our parents or students that address our theme for the year: Meeting the nonintellective needs of gifted children who are highly sensitive, intense, and/or have characteristics of overexcitabilities. If your child fits this description, please consider submitting a piece that provides insights or ideas on how parents can support these children; how the experience of raising one of these children effects the rest of the family; what you have found to be effective parenting strategies; what you would like experts or researchers to do; and/or what you see as the most serious concerns and most remarkable delights in parenting such a child. If you want to submit an article or wish to learn more please send an email to nagc.cg.newsletter@gmail.com. Article submissions must be received by April 27 and should be no longer than 2,000 words. 14