The Case for a Schism: A Commentary on Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (2011)

Creator(s)

Matthew T. McBee, East Tennessee State UniversityFollow
D. Betsy McCoach, University of Connecticut
Scott J. Peters, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Michael S. Matthews, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

10-1-2012

Description

Lack of theoretical coherence in the field of gifted education has given rise to multiple attempts at a grand unification, including most recently the work of Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (2011). The authors argue that the incoherence is an inevitable consequence of the fundamental incompatibility of theoretical and definitional features desired by psychologists and educators. Our field could best progress by splitting into the two related but distinct disciplines of high-ability psychology and advanced academics. Furthermore, the prospective adoption of Subotnik et al.'s eminence framework as an organizational principle for either advanced academics or high-ability psychology is criticized.

Citation Information

McBee, Matthew T.; McCoach, D. Betsy; Peters, Scott J.; and Matthews, Michael S.. 2012. The Case for a Schism: A Commentary on Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, and Worrell (2011). Gifted Child Quarterly. Vol.56(4). 210-214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212456075 ISSN: 0016-9862