Guiding the Talent and Career Development of ... - Wiley Online Library

Received 08/31/13 Revised 03/07/14 Accepted 05/30/14 DOI: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.2015.00193.x

Guiding the Talent and Career Development of the Gifted Individual Michelle C. Muratori and Carol Klose Smith The authors highlight challenges that gifted individuals may encounter in their career development and propose a theoryinformed career counseling framework to help guide them through the process. Special consideration is given to issues that may be salient for gifted individuals in career counseling sessions. Uncontrollable factors that might influence their career decision making, including socioeconomic status, race, gender, and sexual orientation, are also addressed. Keywords: gifted, talented, career development, career decision making

The lost potential of academic talent can have far-reaching implications for society; thus, one might assume that there would be great interest in developing the talents of the brightest students in the United States and a stronger commitment to attending to their career development needs. Because increasing the pipeline of students entering the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a priority among U.S. educators and policy makers (National Science Board, 2014), it may seem puzzling that the education and research and policy communities have been generally resistant to addressing academic giftedness in research, policy, and practice. The resistance is derived from the assumption that academically gifted children will be successful no matter what educational environment they are placed in, and because their families are believed to be more highly educated and hold above-average access to human capital wealth. (Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011, p. 3)

Although some educators are attuned to the needs of their most advanced learners, many teachers view the gifted students in their classrooms “as nothing more than peertutoring candidates who are ahead of the game. . . not . . . as children being handicapped by an unchallenging educational environment or [their own] lack of awareness” (Berman, Schultz, & Weber, 2012, p. 24). One reason that educators may be reluctant to expose gifted learners to more challenging course work is the belief that individual educational need is less important than equal opportunity for all students. They may fail to recognize the distinction between equity and

sameness and may believe that all students should “have the same curriculum at the same time. This is a violation of equal opportunity” (Colangelo, Assouline, & Gross, 2004, p. 9). According to Benbow, “all kids deserve to learn something new every day—including the gifted” (as cited in Colangelo et al., 2004, p. 39). The widely held belief that gifted individuals require (or merit) little or no guidance with educational and career planning is a myth noted in the gifted education literature (e.g., Greene, 2006; Maxwell, 2007). In essence, this belief implies that gifted students intuitively understand the process of career development and can pursue any career pathway(s) they wish and achieve a fulfilling work life because of their high-level abilities and interests. On the contrary, the academically gifted individual requires long-term academic and career planning that should be approached systematically. Educators need to incorporate academic and career planning activities into the curriculum for every school-age child (Schenk, Anctil, Smith, & Dahir, 2012), including the academically gifted student. Researchers acknowledge that an individual’s abilities are a necessary condition for career achievement; however, occupational and career decisions are also influenced by a whole range of additional factors, including one’s interests, values, social influences, and cultural considerations, and therefore require the skillful and knowledgeable approach of a counselor trained in career counseling (Jung & McCormick, 2011; Lubinski & Benbow, 2006). Effective career interventions with gifted individuals need to be proactive and intentional (Greene, 2006; Sampson & Chason, 2008). Although these interventions clearly fall within the purview of the school counselor to assist gifted children, career development is an

Michelle C. Muratori, Center for Talented Youth, Johns Hopkins University; Carol Klose Smith, Department of Rehabilitation and Counselor Education, University of Iowa. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michelle C. Muratori, Center for Talented Youth, Johns Hopkins University, 5801 Smith Avenue, Suite 400, Baltimore, MD 21209 (e-mail: mmuratori@ jhu.edu). © 2015 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Journal of Counseling & Development ■ April 2015 ■ Volume 93

173

Muratori & Smith ongoing and continuous process throughout one’s lifetime. Thus, counselors employed in community mental health centers, private practices, and other clinical settings may also encounter highly intelligent clients of various ages struggling with career-related concerns. This article examines the unique challenges and barriers gifted individuals may face in their academic and career development and proposes a theory-informed career counseling framework for providing guidance to this population. Several existing theoretical models appear to have merit in addressing specific aspects of the career development of gifted individuals, such as Marcia’s (1993) theory of identity formation and his formulation of an identity status continuum (Hébert & Kelly, 2006) or Savickas’s (2005) theory of career construction, which emphasizes the importance of how one interprets and imposes meaning on a vocational choice. Although the gifted education field has not identified a definitive or unifying career counseling theory that addresses all of the career-related concerns of gifted students, one well-established developmental theory that appears especially well suited for this population is Gottfredson’s (1981) theory of circumscription and compromise. Because this approach places a strong emphasis on factors that are salient to many gifted individuals, such as cognitive ability, occupational prestige, and the influence of sex roles and gender stereotypes on career development (C. P. Chen & Wong, 2013), especially in the case of gifted girls and women, the career counseling framework proposed in this article is organized around tenets of Gottfredson’s (1981, 2002, 2005) theory.

An Overview of Gottfredson’s Theory Gottfredson’s (1981, 2002, 2005) theory of circumscription and compromise suggests that four developmental processes are important in career development. The first process is cognitive growth. Gottfredson (2005) assumed that career choice requires a high level of cognitive proficiency and conceptualized career development as a process that evolves over time as an individual develops his or her cognitive abilities. Cognitive growth is regarded as essential to understand occupations and evaluate the wide range of available career options. The second process is self-creation. Gottfredson (2005), whose most recent writings included the notion that genetics and environment are involved in a complicated and dynamic process that helps shape a person’s interests, skills, values, and goals, stated that “we are not passive products of either nature or nurture, but active agents in our own creation” (p. 74). Expanding on this idea, Leung (2008) suggested that “career development [be] viewed as a process of self-creation in which individuals look for ways to express their talents within the boundaries of their cultural environment” (p. 123). Career decision making involves both circumscription and compromise, which constitute the third and fourth developmen-

174

tal processes described by Gottfredson (2005). Circumscription entails the elimination of occupational choices that conflict with one’s conception of self, that is, an individual’s perception of his or her individuated self (the self reflecting a stable set of behaviors, beliefs, and feelings) and what the individual wants or fears it to be (Gottfredson, 2005). This process involves progressing through four age-related stages in which one eliminates occupational options based on factors such as gender type; prestige and social status; and, eventually, his or her internal or unique self or personal interests. Gottfredson (2005) noted that some children move faster or slower through the stages depending on their cognitive abilities, and this could have implications for gifted children who may proceed through these stages more quickly because of their advanced reasoning abilities. The process of compromise involves eliminating one’s most preferred career alternatives for more accessible options. This weighting of career alternatives often involves personal examination of the barriers to one’s potential paths. These barriers might include a lack of financial assets for college, a lack of parental support for one’s preferred vocational choice, and cultural or societal expectations about “appropriate” or “acceptable” educational and vocational paths to pursue. As noted, Gottfredson’s (1981, 2002, 2005) theory of circumscription and compromise has much to offer the gifted population, because gifted students tend to orient their career development around gender stereotypes and also aspire toward careers high in prestige (C. P. Chen & Wong, 2013). Before outlining a framework that can be used to guide the career development of this population, we highlight issues and challenges unique to gifted individuals that may influence their career decision making.

Issues and Concerns That Affect Career Decision Making Among the Gifted A number of researchers have explored the career development needs of gifted and talented students and have described factors that are unique to this population that may affect their career decision-making process (Achter & Lubinski, 2005; Greene, 2003; Schoffner & Newsome, 2001). As Sampson and Chason (2008) pointed out, although some of the challenges that academically gifted adolescents and young adults encounter in career decision making are similar to those experienced by their nongifted peers, “enough differences exist to warrant specialized career interventions for gifted and talented students. Being gifted and talented can make career choice easier or more difficult” (p. 332). These challenges center on the concepts of early emergence of career interests, career choice and career indecision, personality factors, underachievement, and diversity issues. Counselors providing academic and career counseling to the gifted and talented need to understand how these issues can further complicate career decision making.


Guiding the Talent and Career Development of the Gifted Individual Early Emergence of Career Interests Some gifted students begin thinking about career options at a younger age than most of their peers. This pattern of early emergence of career interests may begin very early in a gifted child’s life and is often reflected in the child’s passion for learning about a single topic (Matthews & Foster, 2005). This early emergence is consistent with early emergence of academic talents as well. Considered within the context of Gottfredson’s (1981, 2002, 2005) theory, perhaps this should come as no surprise. Because of their high abilities, gifted children may be likely to move through the stages of circumscription at a faster pace than their average-ability counterparts. For some children, these early interests will change as they mature and grow, whereas other children may foreclose upon a single area of interest. Foreclosure is defined as “commitment with an absence of exploration” (Hébert & Kelly, 2006, p. 40). In some cases, this may stymie one’s career options. Some researchers suggested that early foreclosure should be approached with caution because some children have limited exposure to the range of available options (Rysiew, Shore, & Leeb, 1999), whereas other researchers believed that many individuals who have experienced eminence in their careers focused early in life on their field of study (Ferriman, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2009). Although much needs to be learned about early emergence, foreclosure, and career eminence, these concerns point to the importance of providing career guidance far earlier than traditionally emphasized in the K–12 educational system, with curriculum designed specifically to address the needs of the young gifted learner. In addition, it is important to provide opportunities to broaden a child’s perspective in order to refine and develop early conceptualizations of work and career (Watters, 2010). Career Indecision As a gifted child matures, selecting and focusing on an area of study for future occupational development is a milestone. For some gifted and talented students, this milestone can be a challenge because these students may have the potential to achieve in a variety of occupations. This has been referred to in the gifted education literature as multipotentiality, overchoice syndrome, or career indecision (Greene, 2003; Rysiew, Shore, & Carson, 1994; Rysiew et al., 1999). Various interpretations of the meaning of multipotentiality exist (e.g., multiple abilities, multiple interests, the ability to develop several competencies to a high level); essentially, the idea is that a gifted individual is adrift with choices (Greene, 2003). Multipotentiality has been defined as occurring when an individual has uniformly high scores on ability tests and interest inventories (Achter & Lubinski, 2005). This high-flat profile in both ability and interests leads some to the conclusion that a gifted individual may exhibit difficulties with career choice. In their review of empirical literature, Achter

and Lubinski (2005) argued that multipotentiality affects only a little more than 5% of the population of gifted students when above-level assessments are used for the examination of ability. However, when grade-level assessments are used with this population, the percentages of high-flat profiles appear to be between 20% and 23% (Milgram & Hong, 1999). To avoid this ceiling effect, above-level assessments are highly recommended to be used with gifted and talented youth to gain a more accurate picture of a student’s ability profile. Despite differences of opinion about the prevalence of multipotentiality in the gifted population, clinical and anecdotal reports persist in linking academically talented individuals and career indecision. Further refining the construct of career indecision as it relates to the gifted population, Rysiew et al. (1994) delineated a concept called overchoice syndrome that may account for the discrepancy between the use of the term multipotentiality among clinicians and researchers. Overchoice syndrome refers to an abundance of abilities, motivation, interests, and opportunities, and, although this may seem to be a “good problem” to have, being presented with too many choices can also be confusing and anxiety producing (Rysiew et al., 1999). In essence, it has been suggested that the largest challenge to career development among the gifted may not be multipotentiality but rather a basic lack of decision-making skills (Greene, 2003). Gifted individuals who are experiencing career indecision may experience delays in achieving at their full potential (Jung, 2012), especially if this delay persists into adulthood. Thus, Gottfredson (2005) believed that it is essential to provide opportunities for these individuals to discuss, consider, and create a plan to sort through their various options. Counselors can assist gifted and talented students through the process of compromise through an examination of their interests, abilities, and skills. Perfectionism and Other Personal Characteristics That May Influence Career Development Certain personal traits and characteristics often associated with giftedness are also likely to affect the career development process and career trajectories of highly able individuals. The impact can prove to be either positive or negative, as in the case of perfectionism, which affects many gifted individuals and is also related to career indecision. On one hand, perfectionism can lead to striving for excellence and mastery, and on the other hand, it can render one unable to experience satisfaction with oneself or one’s work and can have a paralyzing effect (Greene, 2006). One consequence of holding unrealistically high standards for oneself is perceived failure, or perhaps even the fear of anticipated failure, which can thwart a gifted person from developing the requisite skills for particular career paths and engaging in activities to cultivate his or her career interests. Unfortunately, anxiety resulting from the perfectionist’s failure to meet unreasonably high goals can have an adverse impact on his or her capacity to


175

Muratori & Smith learn, which may intensify anxiety and ultimately compromise performance (Sampson & Chason, 2008). In line with this view, Park, Choi, Nam, and Lee (2011) noted that maladaptive perfectionists, who experience more failure than success because of their unrealistic standards that lead to their fear of making mistakes, have automatic negative thoughts that lead to problematic cognitive, affective, and behavioral reactions. Sampson and Chason (2008) suggested that some gifted and talented students use hypervigilance as a strategy to cope with the anxiety resulting from perfectionism in career choice, which can lead to frenetic and ineffective career exploration rather than motivated and diligent career exploration. Perhaps it is not surprising that the authors discussed the link between perfectionism and commitment anxiety among gifted persons, pointing out that “procrastination becomes a de facto career choice strategy. By delaying a decision long enough, only one option remains which eliminates the need to choose. However, since procrastination is an intentional behavior, a choice has still been made” (Sampson & Chason, 2008, p. 337). In addition to perfectionism, extreme sensitivity or intensity, heightened empathy and compassion (moral sensitivity), a desire for social justice/fairness, and high levels of creativity and energy are qualities commonly associated with giftedness that certainly may affect the vocational choices and career paths of gifted individuals (Greene, 2006). Although a gifted person may have the intellectual abilities to excel in a lucrative career field, if he or she feels passionate about fulfilling a personal mission, “financially rewarding jobs considered high in status or prestige may not be the ones that provide the emotional connection, social action, or life satisfaction” (Greene, 2006, p. 37). A prime example of a career path that is not widely regarded as high in status or prestige yet may satisfy one’s need for personal fulfillment is teaching. Unfortunately, although there “is little question that our society desperately needs teachers who are gifted . . . the message to many gifted young people is that teaching is a waste of their gifts” (Willard-Holt, 2008, p. 313). Motivational Issues and Underachievement Gifted and talented students are not immune to difficulties related to achievement motivation; the underachieving gifted child may earn average or below-average grades and remain hidden under a cloak of mediocrity. Underachievement, defined as the phenomenon that occurs when a gifted student experiences a severe discrepancy between his or her expected and actual achievement (Figg, Rogers, McCormick, & Low, 2012), is a source of frustration for parents and teachers alike (Colangelo, 2003). Many gifted students may experience episodic patterns of lower academic performance; however, it is the consistency of the pattern that causes the greatest concern. Persistent underachievement may have a negative impact on grades, college success, and occupational choices (McCall, Evahn, & Kratzer, 1992), potentially hampering the

176

opportunities available to the individual both in the short and the long term. For instance, gifted students who are perceived by teachers and later by professors as chronic underachievers understandably may be less likely to receive positive letters of recommendation (if any at all) from them, which may reduce or eliminate their chances of being selected for competitive opportunities such as internships or mentorships that could open doors for them. Persistent underachievement can also impede a student’s admission to college and graduate school. One must not assume that underachievement is always persistent or consistent across all subject areas. Another pattern of underachievement is exhibited by selective consumers who learn at an optimum level only when they are engaged in the material (Figg et al., 2012). These students have a high academic self-concept and believe that they can do the work, they just refuse to “play the game.” Conversely, other gifted underachievers may doubt their ability to be successful in school or have significant interpersonal and environmental challenges that keep them from engaging in schoolwork. From a developmental perspective, just when gifted and talented students should be exploring their career direction and taking exploratory and advanced courses in areas of interest, underachieving gifted students may be hiding their potential in poor performance. Gottfredson’s (2005) theory may be especially important for those working with gifted underachievers. Because these students may lack academic confidence or feel disenfranchised by education, they may be at the greatest risk for underutilizing their talents and settling for a convenient and accessible opportunity simply because of negative perceptions of themselves and the societal context. Emerich (1992), who conducted research on combating underachievement among gifted students, identified outside interests, parental approval, more challenging and interesting classes, self-directed goals, and caring teachers as factors that contributed to change. Similarly, Rubenstein, Siegle, Reis, McCoach, and Burton (2012) found that having one adult care about the gifted student and his or her academic work was an important factor in reversal of underachievement. Providing a message of hope for gifted underachievers, Peterson (2001, 2002) found in her research on gifted young adults that some students were able to reverse patterns of underachievement after leaving home and gaining maturity. Many underachieving adolescents improved academically while in college (Peterson, 2001), whereas others found their career direction after college (Peterson, 2002). As Rubenstein et al. (2012) pointed out, it is essential that underachieving gifted students are provided with interventions that target their needs and assist them in learning the skills and knowledge necessary to ensure opportunities for their future. This research points to the vital role that counselors can play in assisting students and young adults in their academic and career planning efforts by remaining hopeful that individuals can reverse underachievement and change patterns of behavior that may be sabotaging success.


Guiding the Talent and Career Development of the Gifted Individual Under Pressure: Dealing With the Expectations of Others Without question, gifted and talented students may feel pressure from their parents, teachers, counselors, and others to achieve a high level of academic and career success. These students may feel compelled “to select careers and colleges that others deem sufficiently challenging or esteemed, rather than ones based on their own personal strengths and interests” (Greene, 2006, p. 38). They may receive the implicit (if not explicit) message that because they have the ability or skills to excel in a particular career field, they should pursue that career even if their interests lie elsewhere. Examining this issue through the lens of Gottfredson’s (2005) theory and noting the complexity of the compromise process, Leung (2008) pointed out that compatibility with one’s interest is often compromised first in order to maintain a greater degree of correspondence with one’s preferences for prestige. According to Gottfredson (2002), norms that gifted individuals learn about socially valued, high-status careers develop from an early age, which can make modifying their ideals a challenge. Some gifted individuals may wrestle internally with the burden of feeling obligated to contribute their gifts to society. Some may also feel pressured to make career decisions at an early age before they are aware of their options and are truly ready to commit to a path. Whereas some parents provide their gifted and talented children with emotional support, the opportunity to discuss career options, and dependable assistance in making career decisions, other parents develop a pattern of overfunctioning in their children’s lives and make career decisions for them, which ultimately can result in compromising the children’s development (Sampson & Chason, 2008). Many well-intentioned parents may stress certain careers that are financially stable or that are expected to be in high demand. Although this high level of parental involvement and influence may be construed as enmeshed and unhealthy by some, counselors need to consider the cultural context and be sensitive to cultural norms and expectations. Consider the case of some Asian parents, for example, who, according to S. J. Chen (2006), “have a strong influence on their children’s career choices and usually prefer the well-paid professions” (p. 20). Echoing this point, Dundes, Cho, and Kwak (2009) found through their research on Asian (primarily Korean) and White college students in the United States that Asian parents generally emphasized the importance of financial independence in career selection, whereas White parents often emphasized career enjoyment. Dundes and colleagues also discovered that certain parenting practices were much more prevalent among Asians, including “reminding children of parental sacrifices made for the next generation, teaching them that academic performance is a matter of family honor and prodding academic success by comparing their accomplish-

ments with those of children of family and friends” (Dundes et al., 2009, p. 135). Career counselors with individualistic orientations may unwittingly regard the interdependence they observe between Asian American children and their parents who hold collectivist values as problematic (Grier-Reed, Arcinue, & Chahla, 2012). However, Dundes et al. suggested that “acknowledgement of pressure to honor parental expectations of narrowly defined acceptable academic and career achievement should be a part of counseling sessions” (p. 135). The Role of Uncontrollable Factors in Career Decision Making According to Greene (2006), in addition to the “variables of ability and personality, uncontrollable factors such as socioeconomic status, race, gender, and sexual orientation also can affect the career decision making of gifted students” (p. 38). It is essential to understand the social, political, and economic conditions affecting today’s youth in order to provide access to career opportunities that may be perceived as available to only restricted groups of people (Parris, Owens, Johnson, Grbevski, & Holbert-Quince, 2010). Perceived or actual barriers to certain career options may result in the elimination of potentially promising and fulfilling career pathways (Gottfredson, 2005), and individuals vary greatly in the manner in which they deal with issues of oppression and defeat. In working with gifted African American students as well as students from other ethnic minority populations, for example, counselors need to understand how experiences with racism, discrimination, and stereotyping may negatively affect career development (Parris et al., 2010). Moreover, because gifted students from low-income and low-education backgrounds often encounter barriers to educational and career success (Gibbons, Pelchar, & Cochran, 2012), counselors need to be sensitized to the obstacles these students face and play a proactive role in ensuring that the students receive the kind of support and challenge they need to help them to move forward in their educational and career development. According to Greene (2006), “when combined with a lack of direct experience with higher education, discouragement from peers, and mixed messages about the value of college, gifted students may not be able to persevere through the career planning process” (p. 38). The career development needs of gifted students who are sexual minorities also deserve special consideration. For example, gifted students who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) may have safety concerns related to their career choices (Greene, 2006) and may worry about the effect of their sexual orientation on their career (Peterson & Rischar, 2000). Although Fisher, Gushue, and Cerrone’s (2011) research focused on sexual minority women rather than a student population, they discovered that the respondents who received more career support from family and friends had higher career aspirations for themselves.


177

Muratori & Smith In fact, family career support proved to be an especially powerful influence on the career aspirations of those who had more negative beliefs about their sexual identity. Thus, when helping LGBT students develop their career aspirations, counselors may need to consider the relationship between students’ sexual identity and vocational identity development processes, as well as the importance of career support from family and friends (Fisher et al., 2011). This external support may be particularly vital to those who are preoccupied with their sexual identity development and have less emotional energy to invest in considering or pursuing their career aspirations (Fisher et al., 2011). Gender has also received attention in the gifted education literature over the years, with much focus aimed at the talent and career development of gifted girls and women and the unique challenges they face (e.g., Arnold, Noble, & Subotnik, 1996; Lee & Sriraman, 2012; Maxwell, 2007; Willard-Holt, 2008). A topic that is currently of great interest and concern to academics is the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields. Although it is important to consider the influence of gender role socialization on gifted females’ career development (Maxwell, 2007), one must also keep in mind that progress has been made over the past 2 decades in narrowing the gender achievement gap in math, a subject once dominated by males (Williams & Ceci, 2012). Despite the strides that have been made, considerably fewer females than males pursue careers in the math-intensive fields, even when mathematical abilities are deemed equivalent, lending credence to Gottfredson’s (2005) view that “person–job match is . . . perceived in terms of sex role” (pp. 77–78). During the second stage of the circumscription process, children tend to view particular behaviors and roles, including jobs, as either masculine or feminine and tend “to perceive their own sex as superior and to treat sex-appropriate behavior as imperative” (Gottfredson, 2005, p. 77). As Williams and Ceci (2012) suggested, “surveys have documented that females, starting at a young age, are more interested in careers that involve living things—such as medicine, biology, animal science and psychology—than fields such as computer science, mathematics, physics and engineering” (p. 140). In addition to differences in career preferences, men and women differ in their lifestyle preferences and orientation toward life, as reflected in the priorities they establish with regard to work–family balance, community involvement, and relationships with others (Ferriman et al., 2009). Williams and Ceci believed that the single most important factor in explaining women’s underrepresentation in math-intensive fields is not discriminatory practices in hiring, publishing, and funding or ability differences as some may assert; rather, it is a desire for children and family life. When helping gifted male and female clients work through career-related issues, counselors must consider how the clients view their careers as fitting into the context of their lives. Although abilities are certainly

178

an important factor in the career decision-making process, career and lifestyle preferences, including personal priorities that may be influenced by gender and sex roles, must also be given serious consideration.

A Theory-Informed Career Counseling Framework for Precollege Gifted Students Gottfredson (2005) outlined four intervention categories that are aligned with her theory’s four developmental processes, which can assist in reducing the risks associated with each developmental process and in enhancing academic and career development. As she explained, “cognitive growth points to effective learning; self-creation, to adequate experience; circumscription, to self-insight; and compromise, to wise self-investment” (Gottfredson, 2005, p. 86). The framework that we propose draws from these broad intervention categories but is tailored to meet the career development needs of gifted individuals.

Optimize Learning Optimizing learning through academic challenge must be a key part of the career development process. As Gottfredson (2005) suggested, one-size-fits-all instruction works no better in career education than in academic, health, or other kinds of education. . . . More cognitively able individuals . . . learn best when material is more theoretical, not so atomized and prestructured, and allows them to reorganize and assimilate information in their own way. (p. 90)

High-ability students who do not face a significant academic challenge early in their education may internalize the message that being gifted means learning should come easily. This may potentially create difficulty for these students when they are finally provided with an academic challenge (i.e., college course work) and are required to adapt. From the students’ perspective, does this mean that they are not talented or that they are now disappointing to others? Learning to deal with setbacks is an important skill for every student to master. Ideally, this occurs earlier for students rather than after they have left home for college, when they may no longer be surrounded by a strong support system that will help them persist in their talent development during challenging times. Academic intervention strategies that have proved to be effective in engaging precollege gifted students in the learning process include emphasizing above-grade testing to assess a student’s reasoning abilities and readiness for advanced content (e.g., Muratori & Brody, 2012), promoting flexibility in curricular programming (e.g., encouraging both enrichment and academic acceleration in its numerous


Guiding the Talent and Career Development of the Gifted Individual forms), and individualizing a student’s educational program (e.g., Watters, 2010). Optimize Experience According to Gottfredson (2005), career interventions can expose students to a broad menu of potential experiences and encourage students to sample ones that are not familiar to them. These experiences, which can but are not required to be school based, help to broaden the horizons of gifted youth and can help them discover whether they have the foundational resources for particular interests and occupational paths. Optimizing experience can be facilitated in a number of ways, including (a) assisting students in exploring their interests through extracurricular opportunities available after school or within the community, such as clubs/activities, as well as other challenging supplemental opportunities outside of school, such as academic summer programs (e.g., Campbell & Walberg, 2011; Olszewski-Kubilius, 2010); (b) helping students find appropriate role models and mentors who can provide them with insight into real-world applications of learning (e.g., Little, Kearney, & Britner, 2010; Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, & Ross, 2010; Watters, 2010); and (c) encouraging students to pursue independent study projects in their areas of interest, as well as internships and community service projects. In addition, counselors should encourage students to learn about career fields by engaging in job shadowing, talking to adults about their careers, and reading about careers online and in journals, books, and magazines. Two examples of excellent resources designed specifically to expose academically talented middle school and high school students to career profiles are Imagine: Big Ideas for Bright Minds, a magazine published through the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth (CTY), and Cogito.org, a website that is also affiliated with CTY. A student’s interest, readiness, and commitment to engage in a particular activity or experience are prime considerations. Counselors must remember to aim their interventions and strategies at promoting self-agency in shaping a student’s own experience (Gottfredson, 2005). Optimize Self-Insight According to Gottfredson (2005), experience does not automatically result in insight, so the practical challenge for counselors is: How can we help counselees to gain insight from their previous behavior and experience and then conceptualize a future career life that is both fitting and feasible for them? (p. 94)

Maxwell (2007) suggested creating opportunities for gifted and talented youth to engage in career development activities at a younger than typical age because grade-level interven-

tions may fall short of meeting their needs. This makes perfect sense because students with more advanced cognitive abilities are likely to move more rapidly through the circumscription process. Optimizing self-insight involves the individual’s exploration of self (Gottfredson, 2005). Self-insight can be fostered through one’s examination of one’s abilities, interests, personal goals, and values. Counselors should use a broad array of vocational assessments to facilitate the exploration of values, personality preferences, and interests, which are aimed at increasing self-understanding. They should also eliminate the use of instruments such as traditional traitfactor interest inventories that fail to differentiate among the gifted population and thus offer little guidance. Interest inventories can be advantageous in the career development of gifted students; however, the results must be processed in small groups or individually with the student, allowing for ample reflection and discussion. The use of interest inventories without sufficient discussion or reflection time afterward may limit self-awareness and the utility of the results. Optimizing self-insight might also entail evaluating gifted students’ perceptions of what it means to be gifted and the impact of this label on their lives, especially as it pertains to their expectations of self and others’ expectations of them in the career decision-making process Optimize Self-Investment Some gifted students, like their average-ability peers, may make unnecessary or unwise compromises in their career development because they are unaware of or fail to embrace opportunities to improve the accessibility of the careers to which they aspire. As Gottfredson (2005) stated, “just as with any other investment, it requires committing time, effort, and material resources to locate good investment opportunities” (p. 97). Counselors can assist gifted learners in realistically appraising the accessibility of their preferred career life and identifying their constraints. In doing so, they may be able to generate ideas regarding how to mitigate or bypass these constraints. Throughout this process, counselors must continue to promote self-agency as they assist gifted students in devising strategies to overcome any real or perceived barriers or challenges. For instance, their interventions might include assisting students in writing more effective résumés or preparing for college or job interviews. Optimizing self-investment might also entail providing social skills training to students who exhibit behaviors such as arrogance or impulsivity.

Career Guidance in College and Beyond Because career development is an ongoing process, counselors employed in university settings and private practices are likely to encounter academically talented college and graduate students who are wrestling with career-related issues. One must not presume that the issues and challenges that gifted


179

Muratori & Smith students experience earlier in life are resolved by the time they set foot on a college campus. In fact, as these students navigate the college transition and are faced with adjusting to new academic and social expectations, autonomy and independence, and potentially homesickness and loneliness, these factors can complicate career decision making. Career indecision may persist throughout the college years, as evidenced by the number of times many college students change majors. Whereas Gottfredson’s (2005) theory of circumscription and compromise focuses on the career decision-making process of children and adolescents, we posit that this process is likely to extend beyond high school for some, if not many, students. The tendency to shift direction and explore new paths may be a natural consequence of being exposed to so many new academic disciplines and career fields in college; thus, career indecision does not need to be viewed as problematic as long as productive exploration is occurring and the process does not go on indefinitely. Counselors can play a vital role in assisting able college students in working through career indecision by expanding the scope of services to address mental health issues, such as depression and anxiety, that may be linked to career indecision (Walker & Peterson, 2012) and helping them find meaning in work and life (Adams, 2012). Counselors should promote the use of career development services in college and graduate school and recommend the use of vocational assessments, job shadowing, research experiences, internships, and networking to aid in the career exploration and development process. Furthermore, once a career pathway is selected, assisting the student in the process of gaining mentorship from a member of his or her chosen field is important. Mentorship can provide valuable benefits to the mentee, such as helping him or her gain salient tacit knowledge, understand patterns of success and failure within the profession, and prepare for challenges within the field of study (Subotnik et al., 2010). Gifted adults who are already established in the workforce may also seek counseling at various junctures in their lives to deal with career-related stressors and issues. Counselors may need to assist gifted adults in navigating expected or unexpected career changes. In today’s world of work, it is not uncommon for people to change careers a number of times because of choice or circumstances. Sometimes new career opportunities present themselves, or priorities need to shift for positive or negative reasons. As an example of the latter, because of the faltering economy, gifted adults may experience job loss, have difficulty securing employment, or even have to delay retirement. Counselors can support these individuals by equipping them with the skills to be adaptable to change and to switch careers as needed.

Conclusion Counselors can play an integral role in the talent and career development of gifted individuals by adopting a theoryinformed career counseling framework and paying attention to developmental needs and circumstances that change

180

across the life span. In addition to serving gifted individuals directly, counselors are encouraged to function as advocates in helping others (e.g., educators, policy makers, the public) understand the needs of gifted individuals and be instrumental in removing barriers that prevent them from being appropriately challenged and moving forward in their talent and career development. To develop counseling students’ competence in this area, counselor education programs are advised to incorporate course work into their curricula that addresses the needs of this often overlooked population. In addition, because much of the scholarly literature on this topic lacks empirical support and is largely anecdotal, more rigorous empirical studies aimed at assessing the effectiveness of particular interventions are needed.

References Achter, J. A., & Lubinski, D. (2005). Blending promise with passion: Best practices for counseling intellectually talented youth. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 600–624). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Adams, C. M. (2012). Calling and career counseling with college students: Finding meaning in work and life. Journal of College Counseling, 15, 65–80. doi:10.1002/j.2161-182.2012.00006x Arnold, K. D., Noble, K. D., & Subotnik, R. F. (Eds.). (1996). Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Berman, K. M., Schultz, R. A., & Weber, C. L. (2012). A lack of awareness and emphasis in preservice teacher training: Preconceived beliefs about the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Today, 35, 18–26. doi:10.1177/1076217511428307 Campbell, J. R., & Walberg, H. J. (2011). Olympiad studies: Competitions provide alternatives to developing talents that serve national interests. Roeper Review, 33, 8–17. doi:10.1080/0278 3193.2011.530202 Chen, C. P., & Wong, J. (2013). Career counseling for gifted students. Australian Journal of Career Development, 22, 121–129. doi:10.1177/1038416213507909 Chen, S. J. (2006). The impact of parental expectations on the career decisions of academically successful and multi-talented Asian American students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York, NY. Colangelo, N. (2003). Counseling gifted students. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 373–387). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. I). Iowa City: University of Iowa, Connie Belin and Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development. Dundes, L., Cho, E., & Kwak, S. (2009). The duty to succeed: Honor versus happiness in college and career choices of East Asian students in the United States. Pastoral Care in Education, 27, 135–156. doi:10.1080/02643940902898960


Guiding the Talent and Career Development of the Gifted Individual Emerich, L. J. (1992). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students’ perceptions of factors that reverse the pattern. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 140–146. doi:10.1177/001698629203600304 Ferriman, K., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 517–532. doi:10.1037/a0016030 Figg, S. D., Rogers, K. B., McCormick, J., & Low, R. (2012). Differentiating low performance of the gifted learner: Achieving, underachieving, and selective consuming students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23, 53–71. doi:10.1177/ 1932202X11430000 Fisher, L. D., Gushue, G. V., & Cerrone, M. T. (2011). The influences of career support and sexual identity on sexual minority women’s career aspirations. The Career Development Quarterly, 59, 441–454. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2011.tb00970.x Gibbons, M. M., Pelchar, T. K., & Cochran, J. L. (2012). Gifted students from low-education backgrounds. Roeper Review, 34, 114–122. doi:10:1080/02783193.2012.660685 Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations [Monograph]. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545 Gottfredson, L. S. (2002). Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription, compromise, and self-creation. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 85–148). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Gottfredson, L. S. (2005). Applying Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise in career guidance and counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 71–100). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Greene, M. J. (2003). Gifted adrift? Career counseling of the gifted and talented. Roeper Review, 25, 66–72. doi:10.1080/ 02783190309554201 Greene, M. J. (2006). Helping build lives: Career and life development of gifted and talented students. Professional School Counseling, 10, 34–42. Grier-Reed, T., Arcinue, F., & Chahla, R. (2012). Constructivist career counseling with Asian American college students. Career Planning and Adult Development Journal, 28, 15–26. Hébert, T. P., & Kelly, K. R. (2006). Identity and career development in gifted students. In F. A. Dixon & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The handbook of secondary gifted education (pp. 35–63). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Jung, J. Y. (2012). Giftedness as a developmental construct that leads to eminence as adults: Ideas and implications from an occupational/career decision-making perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 189–193. doi:10.1177/0016986212456072 Jung, J. Y., & McCormick, J. (2011). The occupational decisionrelated processes for amotivational adolescents: Confirmation of a model. Journal of Career Development, 38, 275–292. doi:10.1177/0894845310367638

Lee, K. H., & Sriraman, B. (2012). Gifted girls and nonmathematical aspirations: A longitudinal case study of two gifted Korean girls. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 3–14. doi:10.1177/0016986211426899 Leung, S. A. (2008). The Big Five career theories. In J. A. Athanasou & R. Van Esbroeck (Eds.), International handbook of career guidance (pp. 115–132). Philadelphia, PA: Springer Science. Little, C. A., Kearney, K. L., & Britner, P. A. (2010). Students’ selfconcept and perceptions of mentoring relationships in a summer mentorship program for talented adolescents. Roeper Review, 32, 189–199. doi:10.1080/02783193.2010.485307 Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: Uncovering antecedents for the development of math–science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 316–345. doi:10.1111/j.17456916.2006.00019.x Marcia, J. E. (1993). The ego identity status approach to ego identity. In J. E. Marcia, A. S. Waterman, D. R. Matteson, S. L. Archer, & J. L. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychological research (pp. 3–21). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Matthews, D. J., & Foster, J. F. (2005). A dynamic scaffolding model of teacher development: The gifted education consultant as a catalyst for change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 222–230. doi:10.1177/001698620504900304 Maxwell, M. (2007). Career counseling is personal counseling: A constructivist approach to nurturing the development of gifted female adolescents. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 206–224. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2007.tb00078.x McCall, R. B., Evahn, C., & Kratzer, L. (1992). High school underachievers: What do they achieve as adults? Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (1999). Multipotential abilities and vocational interests in gifted adolescents: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Psychology, 34, 81–93. doi:10.1080/002075999399981 Muratori, M., & Brody, L. (2012). Schools and talent search centers: Meeting the needs of academically talented students. Parenting for High Potential, 1, 16–19. National Science Board. (2014). Science and engineering indicators 2014. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/ Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2010). The last word: Interview with Linda Brody: How out-of-school programs help gifted kids. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21, 740–750. doi:10.1177/1932202X1002100407 Park, H., Choi, B. Y., Nam, S. K., & Lee, S. M. (2011). The role of career stress in the relationship between maladaptive perfectionism and career attitude maturity in South Korean undergraduates. Journal of Employment Counseling, 48, 27–36. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1920.2011.tb00108.x Parris, G. P., Owens, D., Johnson, T., Grbevski, S., & HolbertQuince, J. (2010). Addressing the career development needs of high-achieving African-American high school students: Implications for counselors. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33, 417–436.


181

Muratori & Smith Peterson, J. S. (2001). Successful adults who were once adolescent underachievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 236–250. doi:10.1177/001698620104500402 Peterson, J. S. (2002). A longitudinal study of post-high-school development in gifted individuals at risk for poor educational outcomes. Journal for Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 6–18. doi:10.4219/jsge-2002-384 Peterson, J. S., & Rischar, H. (2000). Gifted and gay: A study of the adolescent experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 149–164. doi:10.1177/001698620004400404 Rubenstein, L. D., Siegle, D., Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., & Burton, M. G. (2012). A complex quest: The development and research of underachievement interventions for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 678–694. doi:10.1002/pits.21620 Rysiew, K. J., Shore, B. M., & Carson, A. D. (1994). Multipotentiality and overchoice syndrome: Clarifying common usage. Gifted and Talented International, 9, 41–46. Rysiew, K. J., Shore, B. M., & Leeb, R. T. (1999). Multipotentiality, giftedness, and career choice: A review. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77, 423–430. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1999.tb02469.x Sampson, J. P., & Chason, A. K. (2008). Helping gifted and talented adolescents and young adults make informed and careful career choices. In S. I. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (pp. 327–346). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Savickas, M. L. (2005). The theory and practice of career construction. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 42–70). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

182

Schenk, P. M., Anctil, T. M., Smith, C. K., & Dahir, C. (2012). Coming full circle: Reoccurring career development trends in schools. The Career Development Quarterly, 60, 221–230. doi:10.1002/j.21610045.2012.00018.x Schoffner, M. F., & Newsome, D. W. (2001). Identity development of gifted female adolescents: The influence of career development, age and liferole salience. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 201–211. Subotnik, R. F., Edmiston, A. M., Cook, L., & Ross, M. D. (2010). Mentoring for talent development, creativity, social skills, and insider knowledge: The APA catalyst program. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21, 714–739. Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3–54. doi:10.1177/ 1529100611418056 Walker, J. V., & Peterson, G. W. (2012). Career thoughts, indecision, and depression: Implications for mental health assessment in career counseling. Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 497–506. doi:10.1177/1069072712450010 Watters, J. J. (2010). Career decision making among gifted students: The mediation of teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 222–238. doi:10.1177/0016986210369255 Willard-Holt, C. (2008). “You could be doing brain surgery”: Gifted girls becoming teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 313–325. doi:10.1177/0016986208321807 Williams, W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2012). When scientists choose motherhood. American Scientist, 100, 138–145.
