Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment SAI Assessment/Education Model

I just read Anne-Marie Roeper's essay on the SAI model (Self-Actualization, Independence) model in High IQ Kids. It's an approach that examines the whole child, focusing on their emotional sides in addition to their cognitive characteristics. Roeper views giftedness as an emotional phenomenon, rather than a cognitive on, if I read her right.

I'm curious if anyone on the board has adopted this model and knows of human or research resources built on this foundation.

Thanks!

I'm not familiar with this article. Do you have a link? I'd like to read it.

My interpretation is that she views giftedness holistically, and considers how it affects every aspect of a person. She does not deny the cognitive piece or undervalue it, but she stresses the often overlooked social and emotional components of g.

Is the essay you're referring to in "High IQ Kids"?

For many years, it seems that little attention was paid to the myriad ways that gifted kids differ from the norm. Basically, they were treated as fast learners and walking encyclopedias. While I see your point, Dottie, I still appreciate the way the Roeper has made people aware of how gifted kids are different in how they perceive the world and experience life. They feel more, make more and deeper connections between things, and are not just "good students". Do you know what I mean?

As I said, I haven't read the article, so may be way off. But from what I'm reading here and my own initial take to what fitzi wrote, I have mixed feelings.

On the one hand, I like holistic approaches to people, and anything that acknowledges that GT kids aren't merely "walking brains" sounds good.

OTOH, my initial reaction was to have the same sorts of concerns you're expressing, Dottie. I don't believe that evaluation is an intrusion. I think evaluation is necessary for ID, and ID is necessary for service. If fitzi's summary of Roeper's approach is accurate, I don't really accept that "giftedness [is] an emotional phenomenon, rather than a cognitive one." I just don't think that's true.

Maybe *in addition to* a cognitive phenomenon *in some kids*, but certainly in 3 of the 4 members of our family, our GTness is primarily/exclusively intellectual, not emotional. We are not RE people by nature. (The 4th, DS4, may or may not be GT, but he IS RE, so we'll see there. As a result, I'm not talking about DS4 here, since if he is GT, an emotional approach may be a good one for him.)

In terms of GTness, I wouldn't want emotions to become/have become the primary focus for the three of us. That approach just wouldn't work for DS7, and it wouldn't have worked for DH or for me when we were GT kids. We're all very clear about what we feel and why, and we tend to express our feelings very intellectually and very directly. A lot of touchy-feely stuff would NOT appeal to us.

OTOH (3 hands?), I doubt very much that this approach *would* become dominant. So if it helps people, then I'm all for it. More tools in the old GT toolbox is better than fewer! But it does sound to me like it might be overbroad in the stance it's taking.

But I freely admit that I only know what I'm reading here and may be misunderstanding Roeper's whole point!

Late follow-up (sorry, sometimes I only check the board every other day or so).

First, the essay is in the book High IQ Kids. I don't have the skill yet to get italic or underline fonts into my posts (I tried) so sorry about the ambiguity.

Second, there is a Roeper related essay I came across on the web that anyone might be able to find with a Google search.

Third, Roeper's emphasis on the emotional did not lead her to neglect the cognitive, nor to an excessively psychological focus on gifted kids. It was partly her way of looking at the whole child when considering how to form the best educational environment for him/her, rather than just the intellectual side. If I have understood her properly, she feels that a high degree of emotional sensitivity and intensity is the driver for development of so-called gifted cognitive functions; the child is driven to understand as much about the world as he or she can in a way because of emotional needs for fairness, balance, wholeness.

I'm probably not presenting her position quite right, but it's one that is intuitively appealing to me (perhaps in part because I attended the school she and her husband founded when I was a child, and continue to look back on it very fondly).

Responding to Dottie, I think faith and religious systems are, on the whole, very effective human effort to come to grips with these dimensions of human experience. I have a pretty secular in outlook and and driven to find secular ways of coming to grips with them. However, this discussion could lead us very far afield ....

Thanks for all the responses!

I hope I didn't get you wrong! I don't think religion in general excludes intellect; rather, I think it makes up a bigger picture of the individual, within which intellect is incorporated. Within this big picture, you can shine the spotlight where you will.

Roeper's approach, as I understand it, is to provide assistance to the parent in forming up a total learning environment that will best help the child to self-actualize and become independent. The parent must decide which parts of this total environment gets turned over to the schools, and which are dealt with at home (or church, or temple, or elsewhere). Personally, I agree with you that I wouldn't want the school to get involved in all aspects of my child's education and development.