Ceilinged Out: Gifted Preschoolers in Early Childhood Services

Abstract

A relatively pervasive “silence” exists concerning giftedness in Australian preservice early childhood teacher courses. There is also a lack of research about educator attitudes to giftedness and programming in Australian early childhood services. This study, consisting of a survey and interviews, is intended to help to fill the research gap. A total of 184 early childhood educators were surveyed in relation to their knowledge and attitudes about giftedness, and 10 of those respondents were also interviewed. A purposive sample of eight parents whose gifted preschoolers had been recommended for early entry by a psychologist were also interviewed. Findings indicate that early childhood educators are at a loss in relation to gifted children’s intellectual, social, and emotional needs that are neither understood nor met according to their parents. Compulsory preservice coursework about giftedness is recommended.

Parenting with eyes wide open: Young gifted children, early entry and social isolation

“…The isolation can be exacerbated by having an intellectually gifted toddler, as one mother found when her toddler’s advanced development left her shunned, ruling out any kind of ‘clicking’ at her group (Wellisch, 2017). This mother was one of eight participants in a recent case study that compared parenting experiences with the attitudes and practices of early childhood educators in relation to giftedness (Wellisch, 2019). One aim of the case study was to explore the early school entry experiences and decisions of the parents, another was to gain insight into other challenges and issues facing parents of intellectually gifted preschoolers who learn very quickly, have excellent language skills, glue-like memories and sometimes have a penchant for perfectionism.…”

School readiness assessment: Study of early childhood educator experience

“…Since then, the assessment of this model has been criticized for a variety of limitations, including the use of inappropriate instruments (Meisels, 1998) and the lack of clarity like psychometrics to assess children under 4 years of age (Bracken, 1987). However, when used appropriately, this assessment will be useful in identifying children's readiness, the need for early intervention and providing information to educators in understanding children's readiness and school adjustments (Ackesjö, 2015;Amerijckx & Humblet, 2015;Sha & Li, 2019;Wellisch, 2019). There are two methods of assessment that are commonly used in pre-school assessments, namely assessment with standard instruments as a reference and authentic assessment.…”

“…This rule is important to underline the requirements for chronological age children who have not met 7 years of age to enter elementary school with special intelligence or talent and psychological readiness. Wellisch's (2019) research produced findings that show early childhood educators' confusion over the intellectual, social, and emotional needs of gifted children that are not understood or fulfilled according to their parents.…”

“…Other cognitive abilities that affect school readiness are understanding instruction and information, problem-solving (Setiawati et al, 2017;Nguyen et al, 2019), recognizing colors (Setiawati et al, 2017), while Nguyen et al (2019) adds memory and knowledge, Curiosity and initiative as well as engagement and persistence. Wellisch (2019) found that many educators forget about the social and emotional dimensions by only recommending giftedness to intellectual and academic abilities. The consideration of emotional social maturity is an important aspect of school readiness (An & Xie, 2018;Wellisch, 2019).…”

“…Wellisch (2019) found that many educators forget about the social and emotional dimensions by only recommending giftedness to intellectual and academic abilities. The consideration of emotional social maturity is an important aspect of school readiness (An & Xie, 2018;Wellisch, 2019). The social-emotional dimension includes self-regulation (An & Xie, 2018;Blair & Raver, 2015;Raikes, et al, 2019;Setiawati et al, 2017) interpersonal interactions with peers (Booth et al, 2019;Blair & Raver.…”