Parallel Session Proceedings »
4.5.2 Revisiting Underachievement: How We've Gotten the Words All Wrong
Underachievement in the gifted population is a common topic of research and debate. This session approaches it through a different lens, using the current body of research to explore underachievement as a neutral construct in gifted identity. What if the issue is the definitions themselves? What if our inability to describe what we mean by “ability” “underachievement” and “achievement” is creating a false sense of underachievement where none exists? What if underachievement is a normal developmental phase many gifted individuals grow through? This session explores the challenges in parsing out what we mean by all of the terms we use to discuss and describe underachievement. It explores the nuance of parental and educator expectation in constructing a false dichotomy of achiever versus non-achiever. Particular note is made of the idea that underachievement can only exist in a paradigm of comparison. The individual must be compared to expectations or to others in order to be considered an underachiever. Participants are invited to explore their own biases, preconceptions and expectations in order to construct a more reasonable, less aggressive view of underachievement. This is a practitioner-friendly session that requires no previous understanding of gifted research and is accessible to first-time attendees. It is specifically designed to be approachable to a broad audience to help both experts and novices understand the current models of in the field.