Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | R | Roeper Review

An interview with Abraham J. Tannenbaum: innovative programs for the gifted and talented.

Article Excerpt
Dr. Abraham Tannenbaum is Professor Emeritus of Education and Psychology at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York where he taught for more than 20 years. Dr. Tannenbaum earned his bachelor's degree in English literature from Brooklyn College (1946), a master's degree in guidance and educational administration from Columbia University(1948), and a doctoral degree in social and educational psychology, also from Columbia University (1960). Early in his professional life, he was a teacher in the Brooklyn, New York public school system. He has led numerous research projects concerning gifted and talented students and has served as a consultant to many programs, including the influential Head Start Program.

Dr. Tannenbaum was awarded a Fulbright-Hays Professorship in 1968 to serve as a visiting professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel. Among his many awards, he was the 1981 recipient of the Hollingworth Award for research on the gilled and talented. He also received the 1985 Distinguished Scholar Award of the National Association for Gifted Children.

In reviewing Dr. Tannenbaum's past publications, a passion for improving the lives of gifted students in all settings is readily apparent. He has published numerous articles and book chapters on underachievement, the gifted/learning disabled, and the economically disadvantaged. Many consider his 1983 book Gifted Children: Psychological and Educational Perspectives one of the most important works in the field.

Kay: Homeschooling has always been an option for parents of Gifted/Talented (G/T) students. In your opinion, why has there been a dramatic increase in the numbers of G/T parents opting out of traditional schools and educating their children at home?

Tannenbaum: Even though I haven't eyeballed the supportive data as yet, it is true that home instruction has existed in this country throughout its history. Its "dramatic increase" may be partially connected to a growing general perception that conventional schools are failing in their avowed mission for all children. In fact, the push toward legalizing alternative schooling has become so strong that the Supreme Court may rule on its constitutionality before this interview sees the light of day.

Parents of the gifted may also choose tutoring at home over attendance at school for their children as a way of revealing a deep disappointment in the quality of current school-based education, but the rationale for this decision is probably fitted to what they regard as the unique needs of the gifted. If I could read the minds of these parents, I would probably learn that, rightly or wrongly, they resort to home-based instruction for reasons that are strong, sincere, and familiar, as follows:

First, they seem to be convinced that conventional classrooms are geared to lock-step pacing for students who need and can benefit from it, but not for exceptional children at both ends of the ability continuum or for those who march to different drumbeats of instruction and learning. At least some of these parents reject the conventional practice of grouping children homogeneously by age but heterogeneously by ability and pace of achievement. Why not reverse both practices simultaneously, as so many parents and teachers would prefer? Second, classroom instruction is seen as administered by teachers who are themselves ill-equipped to teach what bright and highly inventive children are capable of mastering or creating. There are still many believers in the acerbic notion that those who can, do; those who can't do, teach (and those who can't teach, teach others how to teach). Third, parents appreciate how difficult it is to fit an occasional rapidly advancing or imaginative student into classroom life even if the teacher is knowledgeable and capable enough to meet the challenge. There is rarely enough time and hardly enough strategies to meet the needs of standout students without shortchanging their classmates who, by definition, constitute a majority of the school population. Fourth, classrooms are not always welcome environments for children who "think out of the box." Teachers are often suspected of being threatened by nonconformity and by offbeat creative inspiration. It is not only difficult to teach the few who show signs of such "way out" thinking; it is sometimes difficult to live with them in a school setting. Hence, the frequently heard parental complaints about classroom teachers' hostility toward children with extraordinarily creative minds. Finally, parents may reason that if it is socially acceptable for musical prodigies to study and practice on their instruments at home under private tutelage, why not provide similar services to budding mathematicians, poets, and playwrights?

There must be other parental sentiments about the advantages of home instruction for their gifted children, but I imagine that my suggested list provides some flavor of their thinking.

Kay: Private tutelage has been standard fare for the economically advantaged throughout history. I was under the impression that gifted education was established in public schools so that our economically challenged gifted students were provided the requisite materials to develop as well--a way of providing the soil of democracy to all. Is this a misperception on my part?

Tannenbaum: In my opinion, one of the events in American public education that has had a long-lasting impact on special school services for gifted students was a report titled "Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education," issued in 1918 by an NEA-appointed Commission on Reorganization of Secondary Education. The document emphasized the need to spread compulsory high school attendance nationwide and to offer students differentiated programs designed as terminal education for some and...