In this rejoinder, the author reacts to five commentaries on his target article (Gagné, 1999) on the nature of abilities, gifts, and talents. He defends the worthiness of his quest to achieve some consensus among professionals in the field of gifted education over the definition of the core concepts of giftedness and talent and also, the validity and usefulness of his distinction between high natural abilities (gifts) and high systematically developed ones (talents) in comparison to alternative proposals. He finally reiterates, in the light of the criticisms received, the basic arguments supporting his conviction that his own differentiation between giftedness and talent is the most appropriate and defensible solution to gifted education's terminological conundrum.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
AytoJ. (1990). Dictionary of word origins.New York: Arcade.
4.
BélangerJ. (1997). Étude des déterminants de la prévalence multidimensionnelle de la douance et du talent [Study of the determinants of the multidimensional prevalence of giftedness and talent]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
5.
BorlandJ. H. (1989). Planning and implementing programs for the gifted.New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
BorlandJ. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance.Journal for the Education of the Gifted,19, 129–147.
7.
BorlandJ. (1997). The construct of giftedness.Peabody Journal of Education,72, 3/4, 6–20.
8.
BorlandJ. (1999). The limits of consilience: A reaction to Françoys Gagné's “My convictions about the nature of abilities.”journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 137–147
9.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CarrollJ. B. (1997). Psychometrics, intelligence, and public perception.Intelligence,24, 25–52.
11.
ChapmanR. L. (Ed.). (1992). Roget's international thesaurus (5th ed.). New York: Harper Collins.
12.
CsikszentmihalyiM., & RobinsonR. E. (1986). Culture, time, and the development of talent. In SternbergR. J., & DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 264–284). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13.
DettermanD., & RuthsatzJ. (1999). Toward a more comprehensive theory of exceptional abilities.Journal for the Education of the Gifted,22, 148–158.
14.
EricssonK. A., & CharnessN. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition.American Psychologist,49, 725–747.
15.
EricssonK. A., & SmithJ. (Eds.). (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise.New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
FeldhusenJ. F. (1992). Talent identification and development in education (TIDE).Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning.
17.
FeldhusenJ. F. (1993). Foundations of talent: A rejoinder to R. W. Ronvik.Understanding our gifted, November/December 1993, p. 14.
18.
FeldmanD. H. (1999). A developmental evolutionary perspective on gifts and talents,Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 159–167.
19.
GagnéF. (1983). Douance et talent: deux concepts à ne pas confondre. [Giftedness and talent: two concepts not to be confused.]Apprentissage et socialisation, 6, 146–159.
20.
GagnéF. (1985). Giftedness and talent: Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions.Gifted Child Quarterly,29, 103–112.
21.
GagnéF. (1995a). From giftedness to talent: A developmental model and its impact on the language of the field.Roeper Review,18, 103–111.
22.
GagnéF. (1995b). Hidden meanings of the “talent development” concept.The Educational Forum,59, 350–362.
23.
GagnéF. (1997). Critique of Morelock's (1996) definitions of giftedness and talent.Roeper Review,20, 76–85.
24.
GagnéF. (1998). A proposal for subcategories within the gifted or talented populations.Gifted Child Quarterly,42, 87–95.
25.
GagnéF. (1999). My convictions about the nature of abilities, gifts, and talents.Journal for the Education of the Gifted,22, 109–136.
26.
GagnéF., BélangerJ., & MotardD. (1993). Popular estimates of the prevalence of giftedness and talent.Roeper Review,16, 96–98.
27.
GagnéF., MotardD., & BélangerJ. (1991, August). Popular conceptions of the differential characteristics and prevalence of gifted and talented persons. Paper presented at the 9th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children, The Hague, Netherlands.
28.
GallagherJ. J. (1991). The gifted: A term with surplus meaning.Journal for the Education of the Gifted,14, 353–365.
29.
GallagherJ. J. (1996). A critique of critiques of gifted education.Journal for the Education of the Gifted,19, 234–249.
30.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.New York: Basic Books.
31.
GottfredsonL. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life.Intelligence,24, 79–132.
32.
HanyE. A. (1999). Do personal convictions promote scientific progress?Journal for the Education of the Gifted,22, 168–179.
33.
LubinskiD., BenbowC. P., & SandersC. E. (1993). Reconceptualizing gender differences in achievement among the gifted. In HellerK. A.MonksF. J., & PassowA. H. (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 693–707). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
34.
MarlandS. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
35.
MessickS. (1992). Multiple intelligences or multilevel intelligence? Selective emphasis on distinctive properties of hierarchy: On Gardner's Frames of Mind and Sternberg's Beyond IQ in the Context of Theory and Research on the Structure of Human Abilities.Psychological Inquiry, 3, 365–384.
36.
MönksF. J., & MasonE. J. (1993). Developmental theories of giftedness. In HellerK. A.MonksF. J., & PassowA. H. (Eds.), International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent (pp. 89–101). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
37.
MorelockM. (1996). On the nature of giftedness and talent: Imposing order on chaos.Roeper Review,19, 4–12.
38.
Office of Educational Research & Improvement (OERI). (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
39.
PlominR., & PetrillS. A. (1997). Genetics and intelligence: What's new?Intelligence,24, 53–77.
40.
RenzulliJ. S. (1979). What makes giftedness: A reexamination of the definition of the gifted and talented.Ventura, CA: Ventura County Superintendent of Schools Office.
41.
RobinsonN. (1999). Exchanging new hats for old: A response to Françoys Gagné's “My convictions about the nature of abilities, gifts, and talents.”Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 180–190.
42.
SaloveyP., & RodinJ. (1984). Some antecedents and consequences of social comparison jealousy.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,47, 780–792.
43.
Sapon-ShevinM. (1987). Giftedness as a social construct.Teachers College Record,89, 39–53.
44.
SadieS. (Ed.). (1988). The Norton/Grove concise encyclopedia of music.New York: W. W. Norton.
45.
SimontonD. K. (1996). Greatness: Who makes history and why.New York: The Guilford Press.
46.
StankowskiW. M. (1978). Definition. In CiasenR. E., & RobinsonB. (Eds.), Simple gifts.Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension.
47.
SternbergR. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence.Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
48.
SternbergR. J. (1986). A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness. In SternbergR. J., & DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 223–243). New York: Cambridge University Press.
49.
SternbergR. J., & DettermanD. K. (Eds.) (1986). What is intelligence? Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition.New York: Cambridge University Press.
50.
TannenbaumA. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives.New York: Macmillan.
51.
Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. (1983). (Deluxe 2nd edition). New York: Dorset & Baber.
