Gardening in New Zealand
Do I Really Have a Green Thumb or is That Just Another Tall Poppy?
Marlborough Principals Association Conference 2000
Tracy L. Riley, PhD
Paper presented at the Malborough Principals Association Conference 2000, 9 – 11 August
Good afternoon! It's a pleasure to be here with you today. I'd like to begin this afternoon by telling you a bit about myself. I grew up in a family of gardeners. Pictures from my childhood feature backdrops of magnolias in blossom, my grandmother's rose garden, my mother's brilliantly coloured spring blossoms, my great grandmother's daylilies. The genetic engineering of my family included green thumbs. Yet somewhere in my genetic structure there always seemed to be a flaw – for my thumb was definitely brown! While I love the lush green of thriving plants and vivid colours of flowers, when these gorgeous living beings entered my home death seemed inevitable. Nothing grew! I quickly became the brunt of many jokes and the "black sheep" of my gardening family.
Now you're probably wondering "am I at the right conference? I thought this was about education, not gardening." Well, worry no more this isn't a self-help group for brown thumbs! The parallels between my gardening experiences which, by the way, have improved dramatically over the last couple of years and gifted education in New Zealand are many. So this afternoon, using this analogy, I'd like to explore with you the notion of gifted students in today's schools. I'll discuss who these students are and the compelling reasons for providing appropriate educational opportunities – taking them from seedlings through to blossoms, cultivating their potential in a rich soil of educational experiences.
Any New Zealander understands the Tall Poppy Syndrome. Strong egalitarian principles are the roots of a weed-like belief that chokes the possibility of a poppy growing much stronger, more vibrant, taller than the rest. In striving towards sameness, if an individual appears to stand out or rather, above the crowd, we do all we can to ignore, diminish, destroy that uniqueness. Or so the Tall Poppy Syndrome proclaims. Do we as educators really do this? Do we strive so much for equity that we disallow excellence? And why?
Gifted education or providing "special" educational opportunities for children with special abilities has long been labelled elitist. The myths surrounding gifted children, such as "they'll make it anyway", "all children are gifted", "the cream always rises to the top", "they're gifted!" have perpetuated an ongoing battle of equity versus excellence. Yet, anyone who's ever had poppies growing in their garden knows that they're hard to get rid of, yet can be quite pretty. What's unfair about allowing each individual child to come into full bloom? They might make it anyway, true poppies will flower without much tending to but imagine the results if we fertilise them! Wow! Splendid colour and magnificent growth.
In today's inclusive educational environment, there exists an overwhelming rationale for identifying and nurturing gifted students. If inclusion is all about celebrating individual abilities and differences, shouldn't we be developing our top academics, musical prodigies, budding young artists, creative characters, future leaders, winning sports people? If inclusion is about making children feel valued, accepted, special and yet one group of students are being virtually ignored and neglected, are we really creating the educational climate intended?
Let's look for a minute at the past and current status of gifted education in New Zealand. Roger Moltzen (1996) discusses a history of educational provisions for the gifted which has been characterised as "patchy, inconsistent, uneven and weak" (p. 1). Other writers throughout the world have described this as a waxing and waning effect, ebbs and flows, a love-hate relationship with the gifted. I'll describe it as the roses in my garden right now there's not much happening in fact knowing little about roses I'd say I've possibly pruned them to death! However, with luck, come summer they'll be in full blossom again. These seasons of pruning and flowering mirror international trends in gifted education.
Gifted education was launched, so to speak, in the mid-1950s with Sputnik Americans experienced a "crisis" and in a panic reaction, schools were expected to identify and cater for their future mathematicians and scientists. About the same time, here in New Zealand, George Parkyn was beginning to explore broader notions of giftedness, study was being undertaken by J. F. Johnson into provisions for gifted children, the Department of Education issued a report on gifted children, and the first course for teachers was held in Masterton. While the focus upon what constituted giftedness and how schools might approach provisions was admittedly quite narrow, there was "increased interest in gifted children and their education" (Moltzen, 1996a, p. 2).
Yet, momentum seemed to be lost and until the 1970s gifted education took a backseat to other priorities. During the 1960s, however, conceptions of intelligence were being challenged and evolving from single-category notions to multi-categorical ones. Intelligence shifted to a multifaceted phenomenon, with recognition that to be intelligent meant more than the possession of high verbal or mathematical skills. These shifts in thinking influenced gifted education to the extent that in the early 1970s the conception of giftedness expanded to include all areas of academics, creativity, leadership, fine and performing arts, and psychomotor skills (Marland, 1972). There was also growing awareness that a child could be gifted in one or more areas, that potential was as important as performance, and that students demanded educational opportunities qualitatively different from their peers.
Most research in the area was taking place overseas however, some impact was felt in New Zealand. This country's interpretation of the theories being developed was seemingly misguided with the Department of Education releasing a handbook for schools which, once again, focused primarily upon providing for gifted students within an integrated environment the regular classroom with the standard curriculum. Obviously no one read Johnson's report of 1959 in which he concluded "programmes for the gifted would not succeed without special provisions, and that perhaps teachers in New Zealand were too often being asked to do the impossible" (Moltzen, 1996a, p. 3). Since the Department's publication in 1972, I'd have to say the Ministry has been rather quiet about gifted students in New Zealand schools.
However, over the last 20 or so years advocates have continued to work creating support groups for families and teachers, developing some educational programmes, providing pre- and in-service opportunities for teachers, and continuously pushing for a national policy for gifted students. In the mid-1980s the Department of Education drafted a national policy which reflected international principles and practices in gifted education; however, the policy never came to fruition. Explicitly, the Ministry of Education's position on gifted children wasn't clear. However, the "dramatic changes in educational administration" (Moltzen, 1996, p. 9) introduced in the late 1980s and early 1990s seemed to have potential for impact upon the education of gifted and talented students, culminating in a rather implicit commitment to gifted students, and in some cases a competitive marketplace approach to cultivating talent.
As New Zealand Curriculum Framework documents were released, a sporadic recognition of giftedness and appropriate provision began to appear. Additionally, the National Education Goals, again rather implicit, clearly placed an expectation upon schools to identify and serve their gifted and talented students. A new millennium brought New Zealand a commitment by the Ministry of Education to see those implicit aims given some mechanism for transformation into 'real' practice in "real" time. Gifted and Talented Students: Meeting Their Needs in New Zealand Schools (Ministry of Education, 2000) was published and distributed to all schools earlier this year, with the intention of providing educational leaders like yourselves with some guidance in the development of policies and programmes for gifted and talented students. Professional development initiatives have been undertaken throughout the country and, just last week, a web site was launched. Both the professional development and web site are envisioned as the bridge between "theory" and "practice" to further assist schools in the development and implementation of policies and programmes.
If gifted education has had bursts of action, we're right in the middle of one in New Zealand today and it's exciting. At the same time, I could easily paint you a rather dismal picture of gifted education, portraying a lack of pre- and in-service teacher education, a minimal number of schools with policies and programmes in place, the ever-present issue of inadequate funding and support. These are indeed hurdles we must somehow leap; however, I believe the momentum is building to enable educators in this country to do just that. It will take hard work, determination, creativity and commitment but it's time for gifted students to be a priority.
Taking you back into my garden for a moment springtime is perhaps as quickly approaching gifted education as it is my little patch in Palmerston North. Longer days, more sunshine, warmer weather, no more frost the seeds begin sprouting and flowers blooming. And why can I be so optimistic? Though Moltzen warns us that "there is no real reason to believe that any improvements will be more enduring than the short-lived gains of the past" (1996, p. 1) you must remember you're dealing with someone who used to kill plants and now lives in what you might call a "garden centre"! The educational climate in New Zealand, as determined by factors such as the present government and the Ministry of Education, is rich in nutrients that allow for growth in the field. Take a look, for example, at the Ministry's mission statement: "Raise achievement and reduce disparity. Quality education enables individuals to achieve their full potential. Expectations rise each year. Educational achievement levels of all students must continue to increase" (http://www.minedu.govt.nz).
Now some might argue that statements such as these are aimed at "the other end of the continuum." But they're not! All students have a fundamental right to an education which is challenging and allows them to grow – to come one step closer to meeting their real potential. As Howard Fancy, Secretary of Education states, "enabling our gifted and talented students to reach their full potential will make an important contribution to the Ministry of Education's mission" (Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 5). Going back to gardening, we as educators must figure out some way to remove the glass ceiling created by greenhouses, determine the factors which contribute to positive and continuous growth, stop lopping our tall poppies, and simply take in the glorious beauty of each individual "seedling."
And why? Let's look at our National Administration Guidelines, which clearly allude to meeting the needs of gifted students. Catch phrases which indicate a necessity to develop policies and programmes for gifted children include "all students achieving success" .... "breadth and depth of learning related to needs, abilities and interests"... "identify students who are not achieving or who are at risk of achieving or who have special needs"... "provide a safe physical and emotional environment for students." These are goals for every child in every classroom in every school in New Zealand – that includes our gifted and they are parallel to the goals of gifted education. For in my mind, gifted education in its simplest terms is about discovering the "passions" of individual students and allowing them to develop those. It is about creating an educational environment that is "safe" enough for children to achieve success within their areas of special abilities and interests.
So our goals for all students are "spot on." But my challenge to you is: are we adequately meeting those goals for our gifted and talented students in New Zealand? As the Ministry of Education handbook states in its introduction "The research in this area is conclusive and irrefutable: failure to recognise and meet the needs of the gifted and talented can result in their boredom, frustration, mediocrity, and even hostility" (Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 6). Yes, admittedly some gifted students will make it – they'll almost defy a system that fails to support their development. Others might find outlets for their talent development outside of school, through community activities and opportunities. Some of our gifted students will disguise or mask their abilities in order to fit in and still others might give up on "playing the school game," leaving school and never developing their areas of promise.
If we take these gifted students into my garden, we can compare profiles of the gifted as outlined by Betts and Neihart (1988) with my flowers. There are the successful gifted those hardy busy lizzies or impatiens students who achieve highly, conform, seek approval. Like my flowers they do grow and thrive, but they don't take over the garden for they often lack autonomy and avoid risk-taking. Our next group of gifted students are the challenging these students may be highly creative but frustrated, bored, questionning, even rebellious. They remind me of this gorgeous purple flower that has taken over my front fence. Passerbys ask for cuttings little do they know it's a weed! The underground gifted are those that deny their abilities in order to fit in. Often these students are never identified as gifted because they might be insecure, shy, quiet, and resistant to challenges. I guess these would be my seeds that just never bloomed! The dropout gifted are resentful, angry, and perceived as rebellious loners who disrupt or withdraw. Though quite capable, their inability to complete assignments, meet deadlines, finish schoolwork leads to achievement levels below expectations. I'm not sure which flowers those might be in my garden perhaps all those that never thrive like the pictures on the seed packet! There are the double-labelled gifted who almost seem like a contradiction in terms, for they often are gifted but also have physical, sensory, learning, or behavioural difficulties. Their disability masks their true abilities and the focus is on remediating or fixing what they can't do, with little recognition for what they can do. The autonomous gifted are, ideally, what we want all of our students to become confident, independent, self-directed. These students are intrinsically motivated and willing to take risks, resulting in students who can set goals and take both initiative and responsibility in their learning. These are my poppies which self-seed and literally take over the garden with little encouragement from me!
Think about the students in your school. Are there any that are beyond your top group? Are there students whose school reports read "has so much potential.. should work harder" term after term? Are there students whose parents insist that their child is bored, unhappy, disappointed in school? Are there students who ask you questions you've never thought of, much less attempted to answer? When you examine PAT scores who are the students in the top percentile and do you offer off-level testing to get a true assessment of their abilities? Are there students who you just have a "hunch" about who you'd quickly say "yea, that's a bright kid"? Now think back to our educational goals.. if you answered yes to any of my questions and are not acting on this recognition that gifted students are in your school... can you claim to be meeting those goals?
Can a child achieve success in a one-size-fits-all education system? Sarason (1993, cited in Tomlinson, 1999, p. 1) perhaps answers my question best with "A different way of learning is what kids are calling for. All of them are talking about how our one-size-fits-all delivery system which mandates that everyone learn the same thing at the same time, no matter what their individual learning needs are has failed them." Can a child be in a safe physical and emotional environment when his or her abilities are basically denied, ignored, or labelled as something else? Can we justify the decisions we make in fairness to "all" students which in reality disadvantage our gifted students? For example, I've had many a teacher tell me how gifted students enjoy peer tutoring and helping others ... well do they? Have you ever asked a gifted child that question? I have – and it's just not true! Talk to a gifted student and here's some of what you might be told, as written in a poem by a 9-year-old:
Oh what a bore to sit and listen
To stuff we already know.
Do everything we've done and done again
But we still must sit and listen.
Over and over read one more page.
Oh bore,
Oh bore,
Oh bore.
Sometimes I feel if we do one more page
My head will explode with boreness rage.
I wish I could get up right there
And march right out the door (Delisle, 1987)
Let's talk about gifted kids some more. Who are they? That's the $64 million question! I've already shared with you some of the contemporary views of giftedness. It is multicategorical, to the degree that some writers claim giftedness exists in "any area of human endeavour" (Renzulli, 1977). Students may be gifted in one or more areas. In relation to their same-age peers, gifted students, in their area of ability, are developmentally beyond the "norm". Giftedness cuts across cultures, socioeconomic groups, gender, ethnicity. Don McAlpine perhaps says it best when he states "The concept of giftedness is dynamic" (1996, p. 23). So it's hard for me to concretely define for you who the gifted are, for the concept is sensitive to time and place.
I can, however, shed some light on this mystery. Just as I may not know the scientific name of each flower in my garden, I can describe for you their colour, size, shape, and so on. The concept of giftedness is important, but what brings that concept to life, what makes it real, are the characteristics or behaviours we see in gifted children. Renzulli (1977) argues that giftedness is a behaviour, with New Zealand's Professor Clem Hill's dictum "gifted is as gifted does" supporting that notion. How each of you as principals define giftedness must reflect what you see happening in your school. Concepts must be contextualised, mirroring each school's individual culture and community. As McAlpine puts it "What do we mean by gifted and talented and who are our gifted children are questions which will continue to be asked. The answers will continue to be different" (1996, p. 39).
So giftedness is dynamic and current trends are liberal and inclusive. Additionally we must recognise that the gifted are not a homogeneous group and there may be degrees of giftedness (Moltzen, 1996b). The interrelationship among all these factors dictates that I can't give you a single set of behaviours based upon a definition set in stone. However, what I can share with you are some thought-provokers – a wake-up call to help you better recognise gifted students in your schools.
Gifted students learn easily and quickly and they retain much of what they learn. They "get it" grasping underlying principles and concepts readily. While it may take most of us 8–10 repetitions to master a new idea or concept, our gifted students demonstrate understanding after 2–3 repetitions. They don't just know the answers, they're often asking the questions or better yet, questionnning the answers. This leads to advanced knowledge characteristically marked by high verbal ability and understanding "beyond their peers." They have an insatiable curiosity and often pursue their interests be they academic, creative, athletic with a thirst for more. Gifted students, when switched on, like an intellectual challenge and often independently pursue the answers to their many questions. Learning for gifted students often takes place outside of school their "education" stretches beyond the school gate.
Like what I call "absent-minded professors" these children are quick to see patterns and make connections between seemingly abstract ideas. Their grasp of "big ideas" and underlying principles allows them to almost leap frog between unusual and diverse concepts. They are analytical, logical thinkers problem-finders and problem-solvers. Sometimes they may "jump stages in learning" (Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 18). Many gifted students seem to "play around," and yet, still perform well on assessment and tests of achievement. They're good guessers who often already know the answers.
I could go on and on an advanced sense of humour, a preference for older peers and adults, advanced and diverse interests, creativity, strong feelings and opinions. They are mentally and physically involved in learning, highly motivated and self-directed. It's important to recognise that our gifted students are not simply quantitatively different from their peers, but qualitatively different. As Moltzen states "... the gifted are not just more than their peers, they are considered different from their peers" (1996, p. 48).
The social and emotional differences are also deserving of recognition. They are characterised by intensity, emotional sensitivity, empathy, idealism, perfectionism, advanced moral reasoning, social maturity, risk-taking, a sense of justice and fairness. Linda Silverman (1999) describes these intensities in relation to their asynchronous development for often these clash with the cognitive behaviours previously discussed. A 6-year-old gifted child may read like a 12-year-old, argue like a lawyer, discuss ideas as if a politician, kick a soccer ball like a 5-year-old, compute like a secondary age student, and write like a 6-year-old. This uneven development, however, does not mean the child isn't gifted.
Recognising giftedness also calls for a realisation that while many of these behaviours are positive at first glance, they can clash with teacher expectations and perceptions. For example, a child with advanced knowledge may dominate class discussions, talk "above the heads" of his or her peers, or even correct or challenge the teacher. Boredom may manifest itself as off-task behaviour. Gifted students, when frustrated, may act out, not complete work, or seek attention in negative ways. One of my students recently described a 7-year-old as 'bright, but a major behavioural problem." Unfortunately the focus in this child's classroom was on the behavioural problem, not special abilities. Which makes me wonder, "well then, will there always be a behavioural problem?"
Think for a minute about the children in your school. Who are your gifted and talented students? And what are you providing for them? Is your school providing an education that will indeed "raise achievement and reduce disparity" in all of your students? Kermit the Frog once said "It's not easy being green" ...well, is it a joy, a celebration, a delight for a child to have special abilities in your school? Because it should be. Someone once said "Treat your friends as you do your pictures and place them in their best light." I'd challenge you to treat all of our students that way too.
Which takes me back to my garden. I'll leave you there with some valuable lessons I've learned.
- Water your plants! An essential and simple must which I admittedly overlooked. Provide all students with the "basics" of a good education – water, sunshine, even a bit of fertiliser
- Get your hands dirty! Find out what's happening for gifted kids by taking a hands-on approach. Talk to your students, visit classrooms, lead by doing. I always feel much more productive in my garden when there's a bit of dirt under my nails
- Remember, growth takes time and success breeds success. Take your time. Start small. I began gardening with "potted colour" the plants were healthy and in bloom, I wanted instant results and that's fine. But once I realised even I couldn't kill those, I moved to seedlings, then seed packets, and just last week cuttings. Find your "comfort zone" and build from there
- Read, talk, observe, listen, ask questions. Much of my garden 'success' of late can only be credited to my willingness to learn more about what I was doing
- Don't be fooled by others' gardens. A good friend recently confessed that he'd pulled out all the dead plants in his garden and replaced them with artificial ones. From a distance I'd have never known! Having a brilliant school policy for gifted and talented students does not constitute a good programme, just as curriculum statements and education guidelines don't guarantee appropriate provision
- Get the "formula" right. I'll confess, some plants still die in my garden – not enough sun or shade, too little water, an unexpected frost. Each plant has its own special requirements, just as each individual gifted student has his or her own needs. Individualise when you can, aiming to tap each child's strengths and interests.
- Invest in the tools of the trade. Sometimes we can get by with the minimum, but my 8-year-old son quickly discovered that planting pansies with a spade was much easier than using my cooking spoon! Resources, be they physical or human, are necessary to support gifted students.
- Weeds and pests are inevitable – but they don't have to destroy your garden. Advocating for the gifted will provoke a variety of reactions – and even possible roadblocks to meeting the goals you set. The myths will prevail for some educators, parents, community members. But I'd urge you to strive for a suitable education for gifted students – and if all else fails, try Round-Up!
- Sharing is the joy! Whether I'm giving a plant to a friend, walking my boys around to see the latest blossoms, sitting with a friend in my garden as the sun sets, or emailing my mother with my latest gardening project ideas, the delight in my gardening experiences must be the chance to share it with others. Talk with your teachers, your colleagues, your Board of Trustees and community members. Enthusiasm is contagious and a passion for giftedness is a disease we need to spread!
- And finally, gardening is fun. What began as a real challenge for me has grown into a near obsession! I'd have to say the same for gifted education. Don't let our tall poppies wither, or worse yet, be cut back. We must tend to all of our children, like we Kiwis tend our gardens. For I can assure you that when it comes to green thumbs, we've got all it takes – the genetic make-up is there. It's time we cultivate it. That's not a weed in your garden, it's a poppy – go fertilise it! Then watch it grow and stand in awe of its splendour.
References
Betts, G.T. & Neihart, M. (1988). Profiles of the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 248–253.
Delisle, J. R. (1987) Gifted kids speak out. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit.
McAlpine, D. (1996) Who are the gifted and talented? Concepts and definitions. In D. McAlpine & R. Moltzen (Eds.), Gifted and talented: New Zealand perspectives (pp. 23–42). Palmerston North: Massey University E.R.D.C. Press.
Ministry of Education. (2000) Gifted and talented students: Meeting their needs in New Zealand schools. Wellington: Learning Media.
Moltzen, R. (1996a). Historical Perspectives. In D. McAlpine & R. Moltzen (Eds.), Gifted and talented: New Zealand perspectives (pp. 1–22). Palmerston North: Massey University E.R.D.C. Press.
Moltzen, R. (1996b). Characteristics of gifted children. In D. McAlpine & R. Moltzen (Eds.), Gifted and talented: New Zealand perspectives (pp. 43–62). Palmerston North: Massey University E.R.D.C. Press.
Renzulli, J.S. (1977) The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Silverman, L. (1999) Supporting the gifted: Social and emotional needs. Conference proceedings, Inside-out: Understanding the needs of our gifted. Christchurch.
Tomlinson, C.A. (1999) The differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.