Alessi IntroductionIn the 1993 national report, National Excellence, the United States government defines gifted children in the following manner:Children and youth with outstanding talent perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared withothers of their age, experience, or environment.These children and youth exhibit high performance, capability in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, possess an unusual leadership capability, or excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools.Outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor. (as cited inDelisle, 2000, p. 81) This definition incorporates a number of important facts. First, it highlights the fact that there are a number of ways in which giftedness can be manifested, whether it is academically, creatively, artistically, or otherwise. Also, it emphasizes that giftedness is not specific to a particular race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. Though there have been issues with the identification of gifted minorities, all types of students can be and are gifted. A third important point that is identified in the federal definition of giftedness is that gifted students require programs that are not generally offered by their schools. This is a truth that professionals in the field of gifted education have known since the 1920s, ifnot before. Louise Specht wrote in 1919:Special classes for defective children with a course of study adapted to their needshad been in existence for some time. Why not organize special classes for children at the other end of the scale composed of those showing the highest gradeof intelligence? Surely these children, society's greatest assets, were entitled to progress at the rate of speed that was desirable and normal for them. If defective children of ungraded classes were worthy of a course of study peculiarly adapted to their limitations, certainly an enriched curriculum must be provided with 1Alessi privileges to meet the needs of children whose capabilities extended to the highestpossible degree of attainment. (as cited in Klein, 2002, p. 121-122)A great deal of effort has been put into providing special programs for those students whoare of below average intelligence or who have other learning disabilities. Gifted students also need special educational programs to learn and reach their potential. These special educational needs of gifted students are well-documented, yet giftededucation has not been made a priority in the United States. Why is this? Gallagher (2003) provides the following explanation: "Gifted education is a small boat on a huge educational ocean and will be moved around depending on the other societal or professional forces at work... programs for gifted students have been influenced by societal issues of equity and by national politics" (p. 21). Since its earliest days, gifted education has been tied to the social and political climate in the United States. Support isgiven to gifted programs when it is deemed necessary by the prevailing sociopolitical climate, then dropped when the need no longer exists. As a result, the course that gifted education has taken since the early twentieth century has been turbulent.The rocky road that gifted education has traveled in the past has not smoothed in the present, either. Fervent egalitarianism, characteristic of America throughout most of its history, prevents many people from giving support to programs for gifted students. Likewise, legislators are reluctant to provide legislation or funding for gifted programs. They equate democracy with equality, wanting everyone to receive the same education. Leta Hollingworth, who studied the gifted population during the 1920s, realized the problem with this line of thinking. "In the United States, the theory was adopted that all men are created equal. All children must, therefore, be required to take the same education. Such a system violates individuality even more painfully and wastefully than the despised caste system of the older countries does" (as cited in Klein, 2002, p. 129). Though equality is a desirable goal, it must not be made paramount at the cost of other things, such as education. Each student has individual educational needs that must be met. Educating each student in exactly the same manner is ineffective. Therefore, permanent changes to gifted education need to be made. These changes should be made for the sake of the gifted students, in order to support them and accommodate their special educational needs. However, because gifted education has 2Alessi been tied to the sociopolitical situation for so long, it may be useful to recognize the benefits that the nation would reap if lasting changes were made. Since the federal government has the power to shape the sociopolitical situation, the responsibility primarily lies with the federal government to take the lead in mandating the necessary programs for the gifted, just as it did in regard to programs for students with disabilities.3Chapter 1: HistoryLooking at the history of education in the United States, the tumultuous path that the field of gifted education has taken is evident. At times, excellence was valued. Gifted education was given a great deal of importance during those times, often receivingincreased funding for special programs and initiatives. At other times, equity was purported to be more important than educational excellence. When this was the overall consensus, gifted education received little attention and even less funding. A lack of funding caused many schools to cut special programs for gifted students. This perpetual waning and waxing of the amount of value placed on gifted education, so clear throughout the history of the field, makes it seem that the field does not deserve constant attention or development. Rather, it seems to be an optional field that can be supported when the social and political atmosphere deem it necessary, and forgotten or even despised when there is no pressing need for it. Section 1: The Feebleminded, Eugenics, and Hereditary DeterminismDuring the late 19th century, many social and political problems existed in the United States. Feebleminded people, or people who, by today's standards, would be considered mentally retarded,