EBSCOhost

Site Menu

Sign=20 In=20

Folder =20

Preferences=20

New=20 Features!=20

Ask-A-Librarian=20

Help=20

= 13=20 of=20 2= 3=20 = =20 Result=20 List |=20 Refine=20 Search=20

Delivery Options:

Print=20 E-mail=20 Save=20 Export=20 Add=20 to folder

View:

Citation= =20
HTML=20 Full Text

Translate Full=20 Text:

&n= bsp;

Title:=20: An overview of resilience in gifted = children. By: Bland, Lori C., Sowa, Claudia J., = Roeper=20 Review, 02783193, Dec94, Vol. 17, Issue 2
Database:=20: Academic Search Premier

AN OVERVIEW OF RESILIENCE = IN=20 GIFTED CHILDREN =

Theory about and research into=20 resilience is based on the study of = individuals who=20 have experienced risk or trauma. Typically, when risk or trauma has been = present, individuals have exhibited behavioral, emotional, intellectual, = academic, or social problems (for example, see Wolfe & Mosk, 1983). = Despite=20 the experience of risk or trauma, some individuals have not exhibited=20 difficulties, but have been able to thrive in their environments = (Beardslee,=20 1989). The ability to thrive or bounce back from adverse experiences is=20 described as resilience. Rutter (1987) defined = resilience as "protective factors" which = "modify,=20 ameliorate, or alter a person's response to some environmental hazard = that=20 predisposes to a maladaptive outcome". Mrazek and Mrazek (1987) = explained=20 constitutional and environmental factors interact to help=20 children develop = resilience.=20

Individuals who are considered resilient share = many=20 common characteristics with gifted=20 children. Although it is not our contention = that all=20 gifted children are=20 resilient or that all resilient individuals are=20 gifted, these similarities have implications = for=20 understanding the social and emotional adjustment of=20 gifted children. =

A=20 Look at Characteristics

Characteristics of Resilience

Resilience = in adults.=20 Personality characteristics associated with resiliency in = adults=20 include those which may buffer the effects of stress, such as = self-efficacy,=20 learner resourcefulness, optimism, and constructive thinking (Lazarus, = 1993).=20 Kobasa (1979) identified hardiness as a personality trait that buffers = the=20 effects of stress in adults. Druss and Douglass (1988) defined hardiness = as a=20 cognitive component of resilience. Kobasa = (1979) found=20 three factors of social and emotional evaluations integral in successful = coping=20 for hardy adults: the control one has over a situation, the commitment = one has=20 made to the situation, and the degree of challenge which the situation = poses.=20 For example, a hardy adult may evaluate a stressful work situation by = asking=20 questions such as: what are my choices in this situation? (control); if = I am not=20 pleased with any of these choices, how much do I want to keep this job?=20 (commitment); and since I want to keep my job, how can I use this task = as an=20 opportunity to improve my skills? (challenge). Whereas the task was = initially=20 stressful, the hardy adult appraised the situation, realized that = choices were=20 available, decided the task was important to job performance, and = refrained the=20 task as a challenge. For adolescents, Morrisey and Hannah (1987) found = that=20 personality hardiness has four components: control, challenge, = commitment to=20 school, and commitment to self.

Resilience = in=20 children. Resilient=20 children, like adolescents and adults, exhibit = particular personality traits. Werner (1984) described resilient=20 children as more likely to seek out new = situations, to=20 play hard, to lack fear, and to be self-reliant. In other studies, = resilient=20 children demonstrated a strong sense of = independence=20 and created a sense of normalcy even in chaotic situations (Block & = Block,=20 1980; Anthony, 1987). They also developed a source of refuge from = stressful=20 environments through creative interests, hobbies, extra-curricular = activities,=20 or school (Kauffman, Grunebaum, Cohler, & Gamer, 1979; Werner & = Smith,=20 1982).

Resilience in=20 children is related to their interpersonal = skills. For=20 example, resilient children elicited positive=20 responses from adults and asked for assistance from adults (Garmezy = &=20 Rutter, 1983; Werner, 1984). Werner and Smith (1982) described resilient = children as active, affectionate, and = good-natured.=20 They developed a social network that provided support, were well-liked = by their=20 peers, had several close friends, relied on neighbors or other adults = for=20 advice, and modeled themselves after a favorite teacher (Garmezy & = Rutter,=20 1983; Kauffman et al., 1979; Werner & Smith, 1982).

Environmental factors may affect the = development of=20 resilience in = children.=20 Miller (1990) contended that resilience is = influenced=20 by the emotional support a child receives = during a=20 traumatic event. Taylor (1991) asserted development of=20 resilience in African-American=20 children is enhanced by socialization in = preschool,=20 parent involvement in the school, good early peer relations, a positive = school=20 environment, and a goodness of fit between the classroom and the=20 child. The kind of stressor may not affect the = development of resilience in=20 children if children = and=20 families have opportunities available to them such as community support, = a less=20 stressful environment, and access to medical, educational, and social = services=20 (Hauser, Vieyra, Jacobson, & Wertlieb, 1985; Mrazek & Mrazek, = 1987).=20

Comparison= s=20 of Characteristics of Giftedness and Resilience

Individual Characteristics Common to=20 Resilience and Giftedness. = Characteristics=20 used to describe resilient individuals may also be used to describe=20 gifted children. For = example, resiliency researchers described task commitment, academic = achievement,=20 verbal ability, reflectiveness, intelligence, the ability to dream, the = desire=20 to learn, maturity, an internal locus-of-control, risk-taking, and=20 self-understanding as traits in resilient individuals (Beardslee, 1989; = Hauser=20 et al., 1985; Mrazek & Mrazek, 1987; Rutter, 1987). Similar traits = have been=20 discussed as characteristics of gifted = students by=20 Baldwin (1987), Levine and Tucker (1986), Maker (1982), Olszewski, = Kulieke,=20 & Buescher (1987), Renzulli and Smith (1978) and Scott (1988).

Characteristics of Families Fostering=20 Resilience and Giftedness. Academic=20 achievement and cultural activities are encouraged in families of both=20 gifted and resilient=20 children (Mrazek & Mrazek, 1987; Olszewski = et al.,=20 1987; Scott, 1988). In addition, parents from both groups of families = modeled=20 such behaviors for success as task commitment, the ability to dream, to = set=20 goals, and to adapt (Beardslee, 1989; Hauser et al., 1985; Mrazek & = Mrazek,=20 1987; Rutter, 1987; Scott, 1988; Suarez-Orozco, 1987). Unconditional = acceptance=20 and regard for the child, time for positive=20 interaction, support, and communication with the=20 child, and positive relationships among other = family=20 members are described or identified as characteristics of families that = nurture=20 both giftedness and resilience (Cornell &=20 Grossberg, 1987; Hauser et al., 1985; Miller, 1990; Mrazek & Mrazek, = 1987;=20 Olszewski et al., 1987: Rutter, 1987).

Research on Characteristics of=20 Resilience in Gifted = Children Although many comparisons = may be=20 made between characteristics associated with giftedness and=20 resilience and characteristics of families = nurturing=20 both giftedness and resilience, there is a = dearth of=20 research about the relationship between the two constructs. Two studies = by Kline=20 and Short (1991a, 1991b) examined developmental changes in emotional=20 resilience in gifted = preadolescents and adolescents. Feelings of hopefulness and = encouragement=20 increased as gifted boys matured into = adolescents=20 (Kline & Short, 1991a). For gifted high = school=20 girls, feelings of self-confidence decreased. These girls had lower = self-esteem=20 than gifted junior high school girls. Feelings = of=20 hopefulness and encouragement also decreased as girls matured into = adolescents.=20 Furthermore, adolescent girls were more perfectionistic and vulnerable = than the=20 younger girls (Kline & Short, 1991b).

Implicatio= ns=20 for Resilience in Gifted Children

Several theorists postulated that=20 gifted children are = prone to=20 social and emotional difficulties or are likely to have specific=20 social/emotional concerns because they are = gifted (see=20 for example, Altman, 1983; Buescher, 1985; Delisle, 1992; Freeman, 1983; = Roedell, 1984). However, the review of the = resilience=20 literature indicated that gifted=20 children have resources that may enable them = to=20 develop social/emotional strengths. For example, verbally=20 gifted children = possess an=20 ability to discuss their difficulties with an adult which Miller (1990) = claimed=20 will help them to develop resilience. Kline = and Short=20 (1991a, 1991b) did not address the question of why emotional=20 resilience changes in = gifted=20 adolescents, nor did they examine the mechanism by which the changes = occur. An=20 examination of the adjustment literature indicated that cognitive = appraisal may=20 be a key mechanism used by gifted=20 children as they develop=20 resilience.

Cognitive Appraisal in Gifted=20 Children: A Mechanism for the Development of=20 Resilience in Gifted = Children

Lazarus and Folkman (1984) defined cognitive = appraisal=20 as the evaluations made by the mind or body to determine if stress is = harmful.=20 However, the cognitive appraisal paradigm is criticized by Ryan-Wenger = (1992)=20 and Compas (1987) as reflecting adults' cognitive development and = functioning=20 and, therefore, not applicable for children.=20 Ryan-Wenger (1992) pointed out that no theories have been specifically = designed=20 to explain children's stress and coping = processes.=20 Furthermore, Dise-Lewis (1988) found that = children's=20 stressors are different than those of adults. For=20 children, stress is related to interactions = and=20 experiences with parents, family members, teachers, and social = conditions that=20 are often out of the realm of the child's control (Compas, Malcarne, = &=20 Fondacaro, 1988).

Coping in children = is=20 influenced by the situation in which the stress occurs and the = developmental=20 level of the child (Blanchard-Fields, Suiskey, = &=20 Robinson-Whelen, 1991; Brotman-Band & Weisz, 1988). For=20 children, coping responses lie in the middle = of the=20 continuum between reflexes and purposeful responses to stress. = Therefore,=20 children's cognitive and social development = may affect=20 what children experience as stressful and = their=20 ability to cope with these experiences (Ryan-Wenger, 1992).

The cognitive appraisal paradigm, however, may = be=20 applicable to the gifted population given = their=20 cognitive development. Sowa, McIntire, May, and Bland (in press) found = that=20 gifted children as = young as=20 nine used cognitive appraisal to cope with various stressors. They used = a=20 cognitive appraisal mechanism that is similar to that used by adults to = cope and=20 to recover from or adjust easily to stressful life events (Sowa, et al., = in=20 press). The ability to use cognitive appraisal may be related to=20 gifted students' earlier development of formal = operations and abstract thinking (Carter & Ormrod, 1982). Indeed, = this early=20 development of abstract thinking and formal operations may be the = mechanism=20 which helps gifted = children=20 to develop resilience. For example, a=20 child who has been neglected by peers may = think, "I=20 really don't want to play tag - I want to read." The=20 child evaluated the situation and made a = decision=20 about how to cope rather than reacting reflexively. Cognitive appraisal = also may=20 foster gifted = children's=20 adjustment while hindering their adaptation to the environment. The=20 child from the previous example may be happy = reading=20 and consistently choose reading rather than learning how to make = friends. A=20 teacher or parent, however, may perceive this as a lack of the=20 child's ability to adapt.

Applicatio= ns=20 for Working with Gifted Students

Gifted = Students in the=20 Regular Classroom. Ross(1993) pointed to several symptoms = indicating=20 our nation is failing our bright students: students are unprepared for=20 challenging college courses; our highest achieving students compare = poorly with=20 the highest achieving students in other nations; and students going to = college=20 in other countries are expected to know more and to be able to use = higher level=20 thinking skills when they enter college. Ross indicated that low = expectations=20 for education, "a distrust of the intellect" (p. 13), mixed messages = about the=20 value of intellectual achievement, negative stereotypes, and peer = pressure=20 convey the message for students "to strive for academic adequacy, not = academic=20 excellence" (p. 14). Furthermore, teachers reported that they do little = to meet=20 the intellectual needs of gifted students in = the=20 regular classroom (Archambault, Westberg, Brown, Hallmark, Zhang, & = Emmons,=20 1993). In a follow-up observational study, less than 20% of observed = classroom=20 activities were geared toward the needs of the = gifted=20 students in the class (Westberg, Archambault, Dobyns, & Salvan, = 1993).

Sowa et al. (in press) found that=20 gifted students created stimulation and = challenge in=20 order to cope with their environments. An educational system that fails=20 gifted students intellectual needs contributes = to the=20 popular stereotype that gifted=20 children are not adjusted because they are = acting out=20 when they are not challenged. these children = adjusted=20 to their environment though they may not be choosing to adapt to their=20 environment. Therefore, it is imperative that classroom teachers = recognize that=20 the need for stimulation is a characteristic of = gifted=20 students and that these needs are not being met in regular classrooms. = Thus, the=20 image of the gifted student as not adjusted = (see for=20 example, Gallagher, 1990) is perpetuated.

Gifted=20 Children with Special Needs. = Understanding=20 resilience is also important in working with=20 gifted children with = special=20 needs, whether the children are economically disadvantaged, have a = learning=20 disability or a physical limitation, speak English as a second language, = live in=20 troubled homes, or are underachievers. three implications from the=20 resilience literature for working with = populations of=20 gifted children with = special=20 needs are understanding development, counseling, and providing a safe=20 environment. For example, children who have = been=20 abused or live in homes where substances are being abused, who are poor = or=20 migrant, or who speak limited English, may be demonstrating levels of=20 achievement much higher than expected given their difficult life = circumstances.=20 Historically, these children are = underrepresented in=20 gifted programs. However, if teachers, = counselors, and=20 administrators can identify specific characteristics of=20 resilience in these=20 children, the = resilience=20 characteristics may serve as possible indicators of a=20 child's abilities.

Gifted=20 children's use of cognitive appraisal has = implications=20 for working with underachievers or children = with=20 learning disabilities or physical limitations. These=20 children can be taught how to effectively = evaluate a=20 situation and use an appropriate coping skill or how to continue to = develop the=20 skills which enabled past successes. Counselors may be able to teach=20 gifted children how = to use a=20 verbal ability, for example, to redirect a difficult situation. Our = review=20 indicated that teachers can model behaviors contributing to=20 resilience, such as, task commitment, setting = goals,=20 and adaptability. They can also provide unconditional acceptance and = regard for=20 the child, support and maintain effective=20 communication and positive relationships with the=20 child's family.

Kline and Short (1991 a; 1991 b) implied that=20 resilience in gifted = children may be related to gender issues. For=20 gifted females, it is important to determine = why=20 resilience declines in adolescence. It is also = important to determine if there is a relationship between achievement = and=20 resilience. Perhaps for=20 gifted girls encouraging the development of = resilient=20 behaviors may influence their achievement patterns in high school and = college.=20 Encouraging the development of resilient behaviors in childhood may be = important=20 for reversing underachievement in boys. Examining hardiness may provide = clues=20 for understanding underachievement. Thus, it is important to examine the = decisions underachievers make about control, commitment to school, and=20 challenge.

Future=20 Research

There are two bodies of literature in the = field of=20 gifted education that have attempted to answer = the=20 question, "How adjusted are gifted students in = comparison to the general population?" One body of literature is = theoretical and=20 proposed that giftedness interferes with = children's=20 social and emotional development, that gifted=20 children are more prone to specific adjustment = difficulties, or that individuals need to be taught how to survive a=20 child's giftedness (see for example, Altman, = 1983;=20 Buescher, 1985; Delisle, 1992; Freeman, 1983; Galbraith, 1983; = Gallagher, 1990;=20 Roedell, 1984).

The empirical literature in=20 gifted education compared=20 gifted students' adjustment with that of the = general=20 population. three sets of findings emerged from these studies: that=20 gifted students were less prone to feelings of = loneliness, anger, and anxiety than the general population (Kaiser & = Berndt,=20 1985; Reynolds & Bradley, 1983; Scholwinski & Reynolds, 1985); = that=20 gifted students were less likely to exhibit = somatic=20 problems such as depression, withdrawal, psychosis, or hyperactivity = (Cornell=20 & Grossberg, 1987; Grossberg & Cornell, 1988; Ludwig & = Cullinan,=20 1984); and that the incidence of severe adjustment difficulties were = similar to=20 that of the general population nine percent (Gallucci, 1988).

The resiliency literature provides empirical = evidence=20 that specific intrapersonal characteristics lead to the development of=20 resilience in individuals. If these = intrapersonal=20 characteristics are similar to characteristics of=20 gifted students, is=20 resilience a personality trait of=20 gifted individuals or an acquired skill?

Do the characteristics of=20 gifted children lead = to=20 specific patterns of coping responses which enable=20 children to develop resiliency, regardless of=20 adaptation? What is the effect of the ability to develop=20 resilience prior to adapting to one's = environment on=20 the social and emotional needs of gifted=20 children? Future studies should examine these = and=20 other questions which examine individual = gifted=20 children's social and emotional strengths. =

Studies are needed to discover the specific = factors=20 contributing to adjustment difficulties in the small percentage of the=20 population of gifted students to determine if = the=20 difficulties are related to the child's = giftedness or=20 to problems that all children experience (such = as=20 divorce, death, illness, or abuse). However, it is more important to = study the=20 much larger population of gifted students who = have no=20 reported adjustment difficulties to determine what factors contribute to = the=20 social and emotional health of gifted = students.=20 Examining gifted = children's=20 healthy adjustment may lead to indications for working with=20 gifted students with adjustment difficulties. = the=20 study of resilience may indicate coping skills = counselors can teach to students.

* Research for this paper was supported under = the Javits=20 Act Program (grant no. R206R00001) as administered by the Office of = Educational=20 Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Grantees = undertaking=20 such projects are encouraged to express freely their professional = judgment. This=20 paper, therefore, does not necessarily represent positions or policies = of the=20 Government, and no official endorsement should be inferred.

REFERENCES= =20

Altman, R. (1983). Social-emotional = development of=20 gifted children and=20 adolescents: A research model. Roeper Review, 6(2), 65-68.

Anthony, E. J. (1987). Risk, vulnerability, = and=20 resilience: An overview. In: E. J. Anthony = & B. J.=20 Cohler (Eds.), the invulnerable child (pp. = 3-48). New=20 York: the Guilford Press.

Archambault, F. X.. Westberg, K. L. Brown, S. = W.,=20 Hallmark, B. W., Zhang, W., & Emmons. C. L. (1993). Classroom = practices used=20 with gifted third and fourth grade students. = Journal=20 for the Education of the Gifted, 16. 103-119. =

Baldwin, A. Y. (1987). I'm black but look at = me, I am=20 also gifted. Gifted=20 Children Quarterly 31, 180-185.

Beardslee, W. R. (1989). The role of = self-understanding=20 in resilient individuals: The development of a perspective. American = Journal of=20 Orthopsychiatry, 59, 266-278.

Blanchard-Fields, F., Suisky, L., & = Robinson-Whelen,=20 S. (1991). Moderating effects of age and context on the relationships = between=20 gender, sex role differences, and coping. Sex Roles. 25, 645-660.

Block, J. H.. & Block. J. (1980). The role = of=20 ego-control and ego-resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. = Collins=20 (Ed.), Development of cognition, affect, and social relations (pp. = 39-101).=20 Hillsdale, N J: Erlbaum.

Brotman-Band, E., & Weisz, J. R. (1988). = How to feel=20 better when it feels bad: Children's = perspectives on=20 coping with everyday stress. Developmental Psychology, 24, 247-253.

Buescher, T. M. (1985). A framework for = understanding=20 the social and emotional development of gifted = and=20 talented adolescents. Roeper Review, 8. 10-15.

Carter, K. R., & Ormrod, J. E. (1982). = Acquisition=20 of formal operations by intellectually gifted=20 children. Gifted=20 Child Quarterly, 26, 110-115.

Compas, B. E. (1987). Coping with stress = during=20 childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 393-403.

Compas, B. E., Malcarne, V. L., & = Fondacaro, K. M.=20 (1988). Coping with stressful events in older = children=20 and young adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, = 56,=20 405-411.

Cornell, D.G., & Grossberg, [. N. (1987). = Family=20 environment and personality adjustment in = gifted=20 program children. = Gifted=20 Child Quarterly, 31, 59-64.

Delisle, J. R. (1992). Guiding the social and = emotional=20 development of gifted youth: A practical guide = for=20 educators and counselors. New York: Longman.

Dise-Lewis, J. E. (1988). The Life Events and = Coping=20 Inventory: An assessment of stress in = children.=20 Psychosomatic Medicine, 50 484-499.

Druss, R. G., & Douglas, C. J. (1988). = Adaptive=20 responses to illness and disability: Healthy denial, General Hospital=20 Psychiatry, 10, 163-168.

Freeman, J. (1983). Emotional problems of the=20 gifted child. = Journal of=20 Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 24, 481-485. =

Galbraith, J. (1983). The=20 gifted kids survival guide. Minneapolis: = Wetherall.=20

Gallagher. J. J. (1990). The public and = professional=20 perception of the emotional status of gifted=20 children. Journal for the Education of the=20 Gifted, 13. 202-211.

Gallucci, N. (1988). Emotional adjustment of=20 gifted children=20 Gifted Child = Quarterly, 32,=20 273-276.

Garmezy, N., & Rutter, M. (Eds.). (1983). = Stress,=20 coping, and development in children. New York: = McGraw-Hill.

Grossberg, I.N., & Cornell, D. G. (1988).=20 Relationship between personality adjustment and high intelligence: = Terman versus=20 Holling worth. Exceptional Children, 55, = 266-272.

Hauser, S. T., Vieyra, M. A., Jacobson, A. M., = &=20 Wertlieb, D. (1985). Vulnerability and resiliency in adolescence: Views = from the=20 family. Journal of Early Adolescence, 5, 81-100.

Kaiser, C. F., & Berndt, D. J. (1985), = Predictors of=20 loneliness in the gifted adolescent.=20 Gifted Child = Quarterly, 29,=20 74-77.

Kauffman, C., Grenebaum, H., Cohler, B., & = Gamer, E.=20 (1979). Superkids: Competent children of = psychotic=20 mothers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 136, 1398-1402.

Kline. B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991a). = Changes in=20 emotional resilience: = Gifted=20 adolescent boys. Roeper Review, 13, 184-187.

Kline, B. E., & Short, E. B. (1991b). = Changes in=20 emotional resilience: = Gifted=20 adolescent females. Roeper Review, 13, 118-121.

Kobasa. S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, = personality=20 and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal of Personality and Social = Psychology, 37, 1-11.

Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological = stress to the=20 emotions: A history of changing outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology, = 44, 1-21.=20

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984), = Stress=20 appraisal and coping. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Levine, E. S.. & Tucker, S. (1986). = Emotional needs=20 of gifted children: = A=20 preliminary, phenomenalogical view. Creative = Child and=20 Adult Quarterly, 11, 156-165.

Ludwig, G., & Cullinan, D. (1984). = Behavior problems=20 of gifted and nongifted elementary school = girls and=20 boys. Gifted Child = Quaterly,=20 28, 37-39.

Maccoby, E. E. (1983.) Social-emotional = development and=20 response to stressors. In N. Garmezy & M. Rutter (Eds.), Stress, = coping, and=20 development in children (pp. 217-234). New = York:=20 McGraw-Hill.

Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development = for the=20 gifted, Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Miller, A. (1990). The untouched key: Tracing = childhood=20 trauma in creativity and destructiveness. New York: Doubleday. (Original = work=20 published in 1988).

Morrissey, C., & Hannah, T. E. (1987). = Measurement=20 of psychological hardiness in adolescents. Journal of Genetic = Psychology, 148,=20 393-397.

Mrazek, P. J.. & Mrazek, D. A. (1987).=20 Resilience in child=20 maltreatment victims: A conceptual exploration. = Child=20 Abuse and Neglect, 11, 357-366.

Olszewski. P.M., Kulieke. M. J., & = Buerscher, T.=20 (1987). the influence of family environment on the development of = talent: A=20 literature review. Journal for the Education of the=20 Gifted, II, 6-28.

Renzulli, J. R., & Smith. L. S.=20 (1978,November-December). An alternative approach tn identifying and = programming=20 for gifted and talented students. G-C-T, (15), = 4-11.=20

Reynolds, C. R., & Bradley, M. (1983). = Emotional=20 ability of intellectually superior children = versus=20 nongifted peers as estimated by chronic anxiety levels. School = Psychology=20 Review, 12, 190-194.

Reedell, W. C. (1984). Vulnerabilities of = highly=20 gifted children. = Roeper=20 Review, 6. 127-130.

Ross. P.O. (1993). National excellence: A case = for=20 developing America's talent. Washington, DC: Office of Educational = Research and=20 Improvement.

Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial=20 resilience and protective mechanisms. American = Journal=20 of Orthopsychiatry, 57. 316-331.

Ryan-Wenger. N. M. (1992). A taxonomy of=20 children's coping strategies: A step toward = theory=20 development. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 62, 256-263.

Scholwinski. E., & Reynolds, C. R. (1985). = Dimensions of anxiety among high IQ children.=20 Gifted Child = Quarterly, 29,=20 125-130.

Scott, M. (1988).=20 Gifted-talented-creative (G/T/C)=20 children's development: Four parenting keys to = help=20 develop potential. Creative Child and Adult = Quarterly,=20 13(1), 7-9.

Sowa, C. J., McIntire, J., May, K., & = Bland, L. C.=20 (in press). Social and emotional adjustment issues in=20 gifted children. = Roeper=20 Review.

Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (1987). "Becoming = somebody":=20 Central American immigrants in U.S. inner-city schools. Anthropology = &=20 Education Quarterly. 18 287-299.

Taylor, A. R. (1991). Social competence and = the early=20 school transition: Risk and protective factors for African-American=20 children. Education and Urban Society, 24, = 15-25.

Werner, E. E. (1984). Resilient=20 children. Young = Children,=20 40. 68-72.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1982). = Vulnerable but=20 invincible: A longitudinal study of resilient = children=20 and youth. NY: McGraw-Hill.

Westberg, K. L.. Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, = S. M.,=20 & Salvan, T. J. (1993). the classroom practices observation study. = Journal=20 for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 120-146. =

Wolfe, D. A.. & Mosk, M.D. (1983). = Behavioral=20 comparisons of children from abusive and = distressed=20 families. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 702-708. =

~~~~~~~~

By Lori C. Bland, Claudia J. Sowa and Carolyn = M.=20 Callahan

Lori Bland is a Research and Program = Evaluation=20 Specialist for the Fairfax County Public Schools. Claudia Sowa is = Associate=20 Professor, Educational Studies at the University of Virginia, and = Carolyn=20 Callahan is Professor and Site Director of the National Research Center = on=20 Gifted Education at the University of = Virginia.

Copyright of Roeper Review is the property of Roeper Review and its = content may=20 not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv = without the=20 copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, = download, or email articles for individual use.

View:

Citat= ion=20
HTML=20 Full Text

=20 13 of=20 23=20 =20 Result=20 List |=20 Refine=20 Search=20

Delivery Options:

Print = E-mail= =20 Save=20 Export=20 Add=20 to folder

Top of Page

EBSCO Support = Site

Privacy=20 Policy=20
Terms=20 of Use=20
Copyright=20

Site Menu

Main Toolbar

Delivery Options:

View:

AN OVERVIEW OF RESILIENCE = IN=20 GIFTED CHILDREN =

Contents

Characteristics of Resilience

Cognitive Appraisal in Gifted=20 Children: A Mechanism for the Development of=20 Resilience in Gifted = Children

View:

Delivery Options:

Site Menu

Main Toolbar

Sub-toolbar = Links

Delivery Options:

View:

AN OVERVIEW OF RESILIENCE = IN=20 GIFTED CHILDREN =

Contents

Characteristics of Resilience

Cognitive Appraisal in Gifted=20 Children: A Mechanism for the Development of=20 Resilience in Gifted = Children

View:

Delivery Options: