Do young gifted children benefit from early academic intervention?
Sylvia
Zinser
The question if children generally benefit from early preschool intervention is frequently discussed. The high interest in this topic becomes obvious when one can even find articles discussing the matter in daily newspapers (Schmoll2004; Postal & Balona2005). Especially early interventions for minority children are considered important so that these children have good chances when they start first grade.
As for gifted children the discussion shows even more interesting arguments. McBride studies teacher’s perceptions about giftedness and identification at a young age. Her findings are that educators generally advocate early identification but differ in reasoning for it (McBride1992). One of the arguments is that children should not be labeled too early. Colangelo, Tannenbaum, and Freeman give explanations to that argument: While Colangelo and Tannenbaum state that it does not matter if children attend preschool at all, Freeman even warns of behavioral consequences of early labeling (Tannenbaum1992; Colangelo & Fleuridas1986; Freeman1995).
On the other hand Tannenbaum suggests that stimuli work best with children under five years of age. This would imply that an early intervention is beneficial for young children. Field finds a positive correlation between early entry to preschool and later academic performance (Field1991). Also Whitmore, cited by Barbour warns that waiting too long with formal schooling might discourage the children from early learning with the result of talents becoming obscured (Whitmore1986; Barbour1992). Sylva, cited by Freeman states that an early school entry might change the perception of students toward themselves positively. Students would benefit more the earlier they started school (Sylva1994; Freeman1995). In this the author is in agreement with Field who suggested such a change of perception as one possible explanation for her findings (Field1991).
Elkind is one of the most vigorous critics of early formal instruction. He warns not to hurry children, they would lose their childhood (Elkind1981). Facing the argument that the new media accelerate children he writes that children do need free time to work on their electronic input. Talking with caretakers he sees as important for that purpose (Elkind1988a). If the statistics claiming that the average time of parents talking to their children is 11 minutes a day (Unknown source) is true children will be hurried into fast acquisition of facts and knowledge without actually being able to understand and incorporate them. Whereas Elkind’s argumentation applies to all children he explicitly excepts gifted children from his warning (Elkind1988b).
Another consideration about early formal schooling comes from Meador who finds in her literature review that formal schooling can “quench” the creativity of young children (Meador1992). This is compatible with Stipek’s findings that if children start school early the program is serving the needs of young children more when it is child-centered or at least flexible (Stipek, Feiler, Daniels, & Milburn 1995).
Concluding the literature seems to point toward early intervention for gifted children with the caveat that the children’s instruction should not be formal, but rather flexible, allowing for play, and according to the interests and abilities of the gifted young children.
References
Barbour, N. B. (1992). Early Childhood Gifted Education: A Collaborative Perspective. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15(2), 145-162.
Colangelo, N., & Fleuridas, C. (1986). The Abdication of Childhood. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 561-563.
Elkind, D. (1981). The Hurried Child - Growing up too Fast too Soon. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing.
Elkind, D. (1988a). Our President: Acceleration. Young Children, 43(4).
Elkind, D. (1988b). The “Miseducation” of Young Children. Education Digest.
Field, T. (1991). Quality Infant Day Care and Grade School Behavior and Performance. Child Development, 62, 863-870.
Freeman, J. (1995). Annotation: Recent Studies of Giftedness in Children. Journal of Child Psychology Psychiatry, 36(4), 531-547.
McBride, N. (1992). Early Identification of the Gifted and Talented Students: Where Do Teachers Stand? Gifted Education International, 8, 19-22.
Meador, K. S. (1992). Emerging Rainbows: A Review of the Literature on Creativity in Preschoolers. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15(2).
Postal, L., & Balona, D.-M. (2005). Little Down time for Toady’s Kids. Chicago Tribune.
Schmoll, H. (2004). Ausländische Schüler sind die Verlierer. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
Stipek, D., Feiler, R., Daniels, D., & Milburn, S. (1995). Effects of Different Instructional Approaches on Young Children’s Achievement and Motivation. Child Development, 66(1), 209-223.
Sylva, K. (1994). School influences on Children’s Development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 36, 135-170.
Tannenbaum, A. (1992). Early Signs of Giftedness. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Whitmore. (1986). Intellectual Giftedness in Young Children. New York: Waworth.
Ziegler, A. (2004). Stabilität von Intelligenz und Hochbegabung im Vorschulalter. LVH aktuell, 13.
© by Sylvia Zinser
