Eminence and Creativity

7/29/2019 Eminence and Creativity

1/26

13

Chapter 2

emInenCe and

CreatIvIty

In seleCted

vIsual artIsts

I dream o painting and then I paint my dream.Vincent Van Gogh

who is eminent? How does one qualiy to be

eminent? In what does eminence consist?Eminence (n.d.) is dened as distinguishedsuperiority, elevated rank as compared with

others; in reputation, intellectual or moral attainment, orthe possession o any quality, good, or (sometimes) bad;acknowledgement o superiority; an excellence. Simonton(1999b) dened eminence as having made a name or one-sel (p. 647). Some speak o true eminence being dened asthe person having made an original contribution to the tal-ent domain, as opposed to high achievement, which consistso continuing old thought in the domain; thus, eminenceis viewed as the highest level o the development o onestalent.

People know who is eminent in the talent domains withwhich they are amiliar, or in which they work, but eminencealso exists in domains with which most people are not amil-iar. Eminent people have biographies written about their lives;they are cited in journals, magazines, newspapers, and othermedia. Simonton (1999b) noted that predicting eminence

rom mere prominence depends on certain criteria. In termso individual dierences, the productivity, intelligence level,

by

JanePiirto


2/26

14 PIIrTo

leaDIng changeIn gIfTeD eDucaTIon:

personality attributes, and degree o psychopathology are somewhat distinctive ineminent people. In terms o development, the amily pedigree, childhood precoc-ity, birth order, presence o early trauma, the presence o role models and mentors,and ormal education and training are important. In terms o the sociocultural

context, the political, economic, cultural, and ideological contexts are vital. Mosto the research on eminence has ocused on men (Albert, 1992; Cattell, 1903;Goertzel, Goertzel, Goertzel, & Hansen, 2004; Simonton, 1999a; Smith, 1938,erman & Oden, 1959); Simonton (1999b) stated that ewer than 3% o eminentpeople throughout history were women, Marie Curie notwithstanding. Te U.S.Inventors Hall o Fame includes ew women, as do most other Halls o Fame.Tis has led researchers and eminists to propose their own lists (Kronberg, 2008;Piirto, in press-a).

And what about creativity? o put it simplistically, there are several ways to

approach creativity. Creativity research ocuses on the personwho is creative?;theprocesswhat happens when one is being creative?; theproductwhat doesthe creative person make?; and thepresswhat is the environmental pressure onperson, process, product (Rhodes, 1961)? One judges a product creative and thenlooks at the person who has produced that product to see what orces operated inthe creation o that product and what that person is like. Another approach testsa child through paper and pencil or through observation, pronouncing him orher potentially or really more creative than others, on a presumed normal curve ocreativity, as a construct which supposedly exists within everyone to some degreeor another.

Domain-based studies o creators have been a ocus o research since the 1950s,with the landmark studies o the Institute o Personality Assessment and Research(IPAR) at Berkeley (Barron, 1968, 1972; MacKinnon, 1975). Ghiselin (1952)presented an anthology o creators in various domains discussing their creativeprocess. Feldman and Goldsmith (1986) studied six child prodigies in variousdomains. Vanassel-Baska (1989) noted that that there are certain necessary butnot sufcient characteristics necessary or creators in domains (p. 146). She alsocommented on domain-based creativity in 2005, summarizing the research oncreativity in domains. Gardner (1993) did case studies o exemplars or seven ohis eight intelligences. Creativity in domains also was prominently eatured in the

Encyclopedia o Creativity(Runco & Pritzker, 1999).My approach has been to look at the creative person and the creative press.

Elsewhere I studied creative writers (Piirto, 1998, 2002, in press-b). Vanassel-Baska (1996) also has studied creative writers, exploring themes in the lives oCharlotte Bront and Virginia Wool. (Note: Tis correspondence between JoyceVanassel-Baskas interests and mine is striking, as my own masters thesis (Piirto,1966), studied Charlotte Bronts novel Villette.) With much yet to be said aboutcreativity in creative writers, the present chapter looks at persons who have pro-duced creative products in the visual arts. What are their backgrounds, theirpersonalities, their experiences, and their ways o looking at the world?


3/26

15eMInenceanD creaTIVITy

The fesTschrIfTof Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska

Te methodology I have used in the research to be presented here is qualita-tive and archival. Scholarly biographies, autobiographies, memoirs, and publishedinterviews have ormed the basis or this research. Te ndings in qualitativeresearch are inductive. In doing the massive reading necessary or writing a syn-optic textbook, I ormulated my rst version o the Piirto Pyramid in 1994. Tismodel has since guided my work on talent in domains (Piirto, 1992, 1994, 2000,2004). It is a contextual ramework or a biographical method that considers per-son, process, and product, as well as press, or environmental actors (see Figure2.1).

GenesATT

RIBUTES

Genes

SpecificTalentsMinimumIntellectual

Competence

PERSONALITY

InaDom

ain***

forFunc

tioning

inChos

enDoma

inDrive

PassionSelf-DisciplineIntuitionCreativityCuriosity

Openness(Naivet)ImaginationRisk-TakingPerceptionInsightToleranceforAmbiguity

Volition

Perfectio

nism

Resilien

ce

Androgy

ny

Persistence

Overexc

it-

abilities

(Intensiti

es)

Intellectu

al

Emotiona

l

Imagina

tional

Sensual

Psych

omotor

**Arts

MusicVisualTheaterScienceWritingAthleticsEntrepreneurship

**

Math

Dance

Social

Invention

Academ

ics

Mechan

ics

Busines

s

Spiritual

etc.

***The Talent Becomes

a Calling, or Thorn ***

5. The Environmental Aspect

the 5 suns

2. The Emotional

Aspect:

Personality

3. The Cognitive Aspect

4. The Aspect of Talent

in Domains

1. The Genetic Aspect

Sun

of School Sun of

Community

& Culture

Sun

of Gender

Sun

of Home

Sun

of Chance

FIgure 2.1. the piiro pyramid (piiramid) of talen Develomen.


4/26

16 PIIrTo


the Piirto PyramiD (PiiramiD) oF talent DeveloPment

Te eight basic assumptions o the Piirto Pyramid include (1) creativity isdomain based; (2) environmental actors are extremely important; (3) talent is aninborn propensity; (4) creativity and talent can be developed; (5) creativity is nota general aptitude, but is an attribute o personality, dependent on the demandso the domain; (6) each domain o talent has its own rules and ways in which tal-ent is developed; (7) these rules are well-established and known to experts in thedomain; and (8) talent is recognized through certain earlypredictive behaviors, thatis, certain patterns that are common to those who enter the same eld. Along withthese predictive behaviors are certain crystallizing experiences (Feldman, 1982).Crystallizing experiences are unique to the individual, while predictive behaviorsare common to the eld. Te crystallizing experience lets the person know that

this particular domain is the one or him and sets him on the path.

1. The Genetic Aspect and the Emotional Aspect:Personality Attributes

Many studies have emphasized that successul creators in all domains havecertain personality attributes in common (e.g., Baird, 1985; Feist, 1999). Tesemake up the base o the model, the aective aspects o what a person needs to suc-ceed. Tese rest on the oundation ogenes. Among these are androgyny; creativity;imagination; insight; introversion; intuition; naivet, or openness to experience;overexcitabilities; passion or work in a domain; perceptiveness; persistence; preer-

ence or complexity; resilience; risk-taking; sel-discipline; sel-efcacy; toleranceor ambiguity; and volition, or will(see Piirto, 1992, 1994, 2000, 2004).Tis listis by no means discrete or complete, but shows that creative adults have achievedeectiveness partially by orce o personality, and talented adults who achieve suc-cess possess many o these attributes. One could call these the oundation, along

with the genetic aspect, and one could go urther and say that these may be innatebut to a certain extent they also can be developed and directly taught.

2. The Cognitive AspectTe cognitivedimension in the orm o an IQ score has been overemphasized.

Te IQ test oten is an abstract, out there screen that served to obuscate oureorts, and IQ is aminimum criterion, mortar and paste, with a certain level ointellectual ability necessary or unctioning in the world. Having a really high IQis not necessary or the realization o most talents. Rather, college graduation seemsto be necessary (except or proessional basketball players, actors, and entertain-ers), and as Simonton (1999a) said, most college graduates have above-averageIQs but not stratospheric IQs. Teoretical physicists and philosophers may needthe highest IQs.


5/26



3. Talent in DomainsTe talentitselinborn, innate, mysteriousalso should be developed. Each

school has experts in most o the talent domains that students will enter. Te talentdomain is the tip o the Pyramid. Te talents are quite well-dened academically,

and people can go to school to study in any o them. Most talents are recognizedthrough certain predictive behaviors, or example, voracious reading or linguis-tically talented students or a preerence to be class treasurer or mathematicallytalented students. Tese talents are demonstrated within domains that are sociallyrecognized and valued within the society, and thus may dier rom society tosociety.

4. Environmental SunsTese our levels described could theoretically be called the individual person.

In addition, each individual is inuenced by ve suns. Tese suns may be lik-ened to certain actors in the environment. Te three major suns reer to a childsbeing (1) in a positive and nurturinghomeenvironment, and (2) in acommunityand culturethat conveys values compatible with the educational institution, andthat provides support or the home and the school. Te (3) schoolis a key actor,especially or those children whose other suns may have clouds in ront o them.Other, smaller suns are (4) the inuence ogender, or there have been ound ewgender dierences in personality attributes in adult creative producers; and (5)

what chancecan provide. Chance can be improved by manipulating onesel so thatone can indeed be in the right place at the right time. Te presence or absence o

all or several o these make the dierence between whether a talent is developedor whether it atrophies. Many peoples suns have clouds beore them, and theirprogress in the development o their talents is obuscated by circumstance.

5. Talent Multipotentiality: Feeling the Call, or the ThornHowever, although absolutely necessary, the presence o talent is not sufcient.

Many people have more than one talent, and wonder what to do with them. Whatis the impetus, what is the reason, or one talent taking over and capturing the pas-sion and commitment o the person who has the talent? A useul explanation comesrom Socrates, who described the inspiration o the Muse (Plato, Ion). Carl Jung

(1965) described the passion that engrosses; Csikszentmihalyi (1990) describedthe process o ow; and depth psychologist James Hillman (1996) described thepresence o the daimon in creative lives. All o these provide clues as to what talenta person will choose to develop. Tis is similar to the notion o vocation or call.I would call it inspiration or passion or the domain. Philosophers would call itsoul, and depth psychologists would agree (Reynolds & Piirto, 2005, 2007). Tus,I have put an asterisk, or thorn on the pyramid to exempliy that talent is notenough or the realization o a lie o commitment. Sufce it to say that the entirepicture o talent development ensues when a person is pierced or bothered by a

thorn, which is similar to the daimon (Jung, 1965), the acorn (Hillman, 1996) orthe call (vocational psychology)that leads to commitment.


6/26

18 PIIrTo


6. Crystallizing Experiences and CatalystsMuch evidence exists that the creative person decides to pursue the develop-

ment o his or her talent ater some catalyst reveals that this is what must happen.It may be winning a contest or receiving praise or may come ater a long period o

thought and meditation. Te creative person recognizes that the thorn is prickingand the call must be answered. In this chapter, I will elucidate only one o thetalent domains, visual arts, using the Piirto Pyramid as a ramework.

Domain: visual arts

Vasari (1561) began the consideration o eminence in visual arts with his classicbooks, Lives o the MostEminent Artists(emphasis added).Troughout this medi-

eval text, themes that are still current in the lives o artists show up, especially inthe presence o the predictive behavior o compulsive drawing during childhood.

1. The Genetic AspectTe evidence shows that talent in visual arts runs in amilies (Goertzel et al.,

2004) with the amilies o Calder, Duchamp, Renoir, Picasso, OKeee, Kahlo,Raphael, Bernini, and Utrillo as examples. Nochlin (1988) pointed out that inthe 17th and 18th centuries,

the transmission o the artistic proession rom ather to son was consid-

ered a matter o course; . . . a large proportion o artists, great and notso great, in the days when it was not normal or sons to ollow in theirathers ootsteps, had artist athers. (p. 156)

Greer (1979) pointed out that emale visual artists requently came rom dynastieso artists, but their works oten went unsigned.

2. The Emotional Aspect: Personalities of Visual ArtistsStudies (Barron, 1972; Sloane & Sosniak, 1985) have shown that visual artists

care little about social conormity, have a high need to achieve success indepen-

dently, and are exible. Personality attributes recognized through biographical stud-ies (as cited in Piirto, 2004) were androgyny, risk-taking, depression, tolerance orambiguity, preerence or complexity, naivet, nonconormity, intuition, ambitionor drive, and interests and values that resemble those o other people in the arts.

3. The Cognitive Aspect in Visual ArtistsTe intelligence o visual artists is spatial intelligence (Gardner, 1993), or

gural intelligence (Guilord, 1967). As Vincent Van Gogh, in his letters to hisbrother, said, It is at bottom airly true that a painter as man is too much absorbed

by what his eyes see, and is not sufciently master o the rest o his lie (Stone &Stone, 1937, p. 45). Te Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi (1976) study o visual artists


7/26



revealed that their cognition is most aptly described as problem nding, ratherthan problem solving. Problem nding precedes problem solving.

4. The Domain Thorn in Artists

Art is a vocation, a sacred calling, and those who heed the call have a certaincharacter besides interest and talent. Te decision to commit their careers to mak-ing artto being artistscame as a progressive or sequential revelation, accord-ing to Sloane and Sosniak (1985, p. 130). For example, N. C. Wyeth as a child wasdriven by a constant need to draw, and he put a drawing table in his bedroom(Michaelis, 1998, p. 32). His schoolbooks and notebooks were lled with sketchesin the margins. He begged his merchant ather to pay $10 or art lessons rom alocal woman who had graduated rom the state art school. As another example,de Kooning also displayed his early talent, and at age 12, when he nished his

academic education in Rotterdam, he began working or a design rm. Tey wereso impressed with his talent that they paid or him to attend the local art school(Stevens & Swan, 2006).

Biographical evidence (Piirto, 2004) indicates that there are certain predic-tive behaviors or the visual artists, including precocity, or creating art like olderchildren do, being known as the class artist, using drawing as a means to commu-nicate and to sel-comort, keeping sketchbooks, winning art contests, continuingto draw when other children stop because they cant achieve verisimilitude, anddemonstrating interest in the work o other artists. For example, Salvador Dalidescribed his battle at the age o 8 with his parents or a playroom in which he

could paint (Dali, 1942, p. 174). Nochlin (1988) cited several mythic stories thataccompany stories o artists childhoods, such as doodling in the margins o theirschoolbooks, the mysterious inner call in early youth, the lack o any teacher butNature hersel . . . the airy tale o the discovery by an older artist or discerningpatron o the Boy Wonder, usually in the guise o a shepherd (p. 154).

5. Environmental Suns for Visual ArtistsSun o Home. No outstanding demographic patterns have suraced as to the

proessions o the parents. As many athers were proessionals as were blue-collarworkers. Coincidentally, both Dalis and Marcel Duchamps athers were notaries

in their hometowns (Etherington-Smith, 1995; omkins, 1998). Families wereboth encouraging and discouraging (Getzels & Csikszentmihalyi, 1976; Goertzelet al., 2004). Te elder Duchamp gave each o his three artist sons 150 rancs permonth while they established themselves. Te elder Dali did the same or his son.Te genetic aspect seems to apply, especially historically, where whole amilieswere engaged in the business o making art. Childhoods were both idyllic andtraumatic. de Kooning, who grew up in Rotterdam, experienced the divorce ohis parents, moving 14 times in 7 years, extreme poverty, and the necessity to bea child laborer (Stevens & Swan, 2004), while Duchamp grew up in pleasantnessand security (omkins, 1998).


8/26

20 PIIrTo


Sun of Community and Culture.Cross-ertilization and cross-cultural inuencesamong artists is common (e.g., Matisse and Picasso). Artists do not create in avacuum. It is a myth that artists do not respond to community and culture. Forexample, Picassos repeating theme o the Minotaur had a proound inuence on

Jackson Pollock (Naieh & Smith, 1989). Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi (1976)used the term lot cultureto describe the interactions among artists in art centersin urban areas. Tey stated that the artist oten must move rom the setting thatinspired the art to a place where one can make ones name among the artists andthe galleries.

It is difcult to make a living making visual art, and the art collector is animportant part o the community and culture, or the press (Rhodes, 1961) othe milieu o the visual artist. Saarinen (1958) described the collecting passionand patronage o individuals and amilies such as Mrs. Potter Palmer o Chicago;

Isabella Stewart Gardner o Boston; J. Pierpont Morgan o New York City, whopurchased by the carload (p. 75); as well as Gertrude Stein and her siblings, whokept a amous salon in Paris that was memorialized in Hemingways (1964) A

Moveable Feastand other memoirs o the time.Art critics and art galleries also are important in making the public aware o

the work being done. An entry-level gallery and a group show are the rst steps,and the visual artists move progressively to higher level galleries, one-person shows,and higher prices or their works. Te artists who are not darlings o the criticsor who do not win the prizes oten band together to do shows that are outsidethe mainstream, but which eventually become recognized and accepted into the

mainstream such as the Surrealists in Paris (Etherington-Smith, 1995).Sun o School.In both academic school and art school, visual artists showed

intense drawing and the emphasis on products, on making the drawings realisticand recognizable representations. Regular academic school oten is a challenge,

with apocryphal stories abounding: Dali being so dreamy that he never learnedto read until his teenage years; Picassos ather taking him out o academic schoolso he could paint and draw at home; Jackson Pollock almost unking out o highschool. Te childhood o Mark Rothko is anomalous amidst the stories o howpoorly many visual artists did in academic school; in act, his childhood resemblesthat o creative writers, who are oten good academic students in verbal areas

(Breslin, 1993).Sun o Chance.In order to enhance their chances o eminence, visual artists

must rent or buy a lot, move to an art center such as New York City, Los Angeles,Paris, or London, and be in juried art shows. Tey must try or a one-man/womanshow and begin with group shows. An alternate strategy is to continue studying toget a master o ne arts, and to try to become art proessors or teachers, althoughthe danger o teaching is that it may suck the creative juices needed or doing art.Good luck ollows proximity to the world o art. Proximity may be enhanced byattractiveness, as it was or Georgia OKeee, who attracted Alred Stieglitz withher beauty as well as her talent.


9/26



Sun o Gender. Women are and have been less likely to become well-knownartists. Greer (1979) commented that historically, women were not permitted tosign their paintings (thus the plethora o paintings by Anon.), and were relegatedby their brothers and athers in artistic amilies to paint miniatures o the easel

portraits painted by their male relatives. Te very lack o existence o scholarly biog-raphies on women artists other than Mary Cassatt (Hale, 1975), Georgia OKeee(Robinson, 1989), and Frida Kahlo (Herrera, 1991) speaks to this marginalization.

Women also are more likely to go into art education than into ne arts, perhapsor practical reasons, including the reason that many creative women usethemommy imperativehow can I be in the creative arts and still be a mother (Piirto,1992)? Feminist critic Linda Nochlin (1988) pointed out that women were not per-mitted to study in the academies as late as the early 20th century, but in the 20th

century, the barriers began to be broken down. In the 1950s in New York City, inthe abstract expressionist school, the ew women artists who hung around with themen at the caes and bars were, as Stevens and Swan (2004) stated, quite strong:

Te strongest emale gures o the period reusing to be pitied, becameremarkably tough survivors. Tey oten did so not by rejecting the machoo the period, but by embracing it, showing the world that they couldout-boy the boys. (p. 345)

examPleoF willemDe kooning (19041997)

As an example o how one eminent visual artists lie is illuminated when utiliz-ing the Piirto Pyramid o alent Development (see Figure 2.1) as a biographicalmethod, let us ocus on the creativity o Willem de Kooning (Stevens & Swan,2004).

Regarding de Koonings genetic aspect,he wasgood-looking, sturdy, and roma working class Dutch amily. Te personality attributes/emotional aspectattrib-uted to de Kooning included (1) intense ambitionalways thinking o his careerand his art; (2) skill at deusing tension rom experiences in his childhood home

atmosphere; (3) a strong work ethic, clean and neat, and pride in being Dutch; (4)willingness to endure poverty or long periods o his adult lie; (5) melancholyheoten battled with alcohol and depression; (6) his introversion: preerence to workalone and he did not like to go to parties; (7) intensity: he was always describedas intense; (8) tolerance or ambiguity: poetic elusiveness and joy in paradox(Stevens & Swan, 2004, p. 108); (9) persistence: he continued to paint even whenhe was not validated as an artist and painted until 1988; (10) shrewdness: he keptthe end result in mind when dealing with people; (11) stubbornness: he wouldnot change his style at the whim o the art world; (12) perceptiveness; (13) intu-ition; (14) risk-taking; and (15) generosity: he gave away drawings, paintings, andnancially helped many. In regards to the cognitive aspect,de Kooning (1) was


10/26

22 PIIrTo


academically talented and always in the top three o his grammar school class; (2)was always well read in philosophy and art criticism, having read Wittgensteinor entertainment; (3) sought to relate his work to art o the European past; and(4) rst admired what Picasso was doing and later acknowledged the inuence o

Rubens and Matisse.de Koonings talent in theartistic domainwas exhibited through (1)drawing

on walls as a child and drawing as a constant throughout his lie; (2) a scholarshipto Rotterdam design arts academy; and (3) the creation o a ew drawings aterimmigration that resulted in being hired over many others by Eastman Brothersas stage designer. Te thorn or the artistic domainwas demonstrated through(1) his need to draw rom an early age; (2) seeking out the company o artistsrather than house painters when he illegally immigrated to U.S., even thoughhe made less money as a commercial artist; (3) his decision that he had to paint

(clutched stomach when talking about need) in early 1930s; (4) an experience oan epiphany in 1932 at Gorkys studiohe was overwhelmed and became dizzyat true metaphysics o art; (5) model o meeting a serious artist who made art thecenter o his lie; and (6) his passion or painting even when economic disasterensued.

Inuences upon de Kooning rom theenvironmental sunsincluded the ol-lowing. TeSun o Homeincluded (1) a poor amily in Rotterdam with constantnancial problems; (2) his ather let to live with and start another amily; (3) hismother remarried and took in wash, and his stepather kept a tavern; (4) violencein the home: his mother had screaming ts and beat her children with wooden

shoes; (5) he suered borderline malnourishment and rotted teeth; (6) he moved14 times between age 4 and 13; (7) he rented his rst lot in 1932 and always hadone because o a hatred o small, chintzy apartments; (8) he lived with multiple

women, some simultaneously, several o whom had multiple abortions; (9) hehad one child, Lisa; (10) he had many bouts with severe alcoholism that were liethreatening; and (11) he painted in isolation in his studio on Long Island exceptor assistants.

Te Sun o Schoolincluded (1)teachers noticed his git or drawing; (2) ormalacademic education ended at age 12, as was typical or most working-class people;(3) began to work as apprentice in decorating rm at age 12; (4) given drawing

scholarship to technical arts academy in Rotterdam by owners o decorating rmat age 13 and was the best student in the class; (5) returned on scholarship to acad-emy and went to 5th orm, then quit; and (6) never returned to ormal education,although he taught art at Yale and Black Mountain.

Te Sun o Community and Cultureincluded (1)his rst mentor (BernardRomein, store display designer) at age 16, who showed him Mondrian, Frank Lloyd

Wright, and Dostoevsky and introduced him to commercial art; (2) he hung aroundin extreme poverty with the bohemian crowd on docks in Rotterdam, went withtwo riends into Belgium, and worked as sign painter; (3) moved to GreenwichVillage ater illegal immigration, in search o artists and was riends with Pollock,Kline, Rothko, Rosenberg, and Noguchi; (4) emigr artists at Eastman Brothers


11/26



ormed a group o highly intelligent, talented outsiders; (5) spent summers at art-ist colonies at Woodstock, Provincetown, Southampton, and Black Mountain; (6)

was prooundly inuenced by Arshile Gorky, Stuart Davis, John Graham, Picasso,Matisse, and Rubens; (7) regularly visited galleries and museums; (8) was part

o the downtown scene or many years until moving to Long Island, where hesocialized with high society, while always treasuring his working class origins; and(9) changed gallery representation and vastly improved nancial status on adviceo riend Eastman.

Te Sun o Chanceincluded (1) stowing away on a British ship bound orAmerica in 1926 (he didnt become a U.S. citizen until 1962); (2) his design back-ground and talent would always help him get a jobhouse painting, signs, design,and carpentry; (3) WPAs artist program made him nally stop side jobs anddeclare he was a ull-time painter in 1935 and poverty ensued; (4) his rst one-

man show in New York City in 1948 did not sell any art but was a turning pointthat made the art world conscious o himthe critics, galleries, and museums takenotice, and this became the turning point or his career; and (5) eventually win-ning the Presidential Medal o Freedom and many other national and internationalawards.

Te Sun o Genderincluded (1) hispaintings o men indicate insecurity andvapidness; (2) his paintings o women indicate deep misogyny and mistrust, anger,rage, and ascination; (3) like other artistic men o his generation, he viewed his artas primary, oten neglecting his daughter and didnt think it important she attendschool; and (4) he had many women as muses.

de Koonings creative processwas characterized with the ollowing: (1)being aslow worker, scraping and rescraping his work many times; (2) the use o exercisesuch as walking and bicycling to meditate on his work; (3) drawing multiples

while watching television, similar to automatic writing: In this way the drawingcomes rom something deeper (Stevens & Swan, 2004, p. 245); (4) talking abouttechnical aspects o his workpalette knives, paint chemistrywith other artists;and (5) his inspiration rom travel, nature, and women.

conclusion

Tis very brie introduction to the biographical method I have employed toelucidate themes in the lives o creators in domains is, perhaps, too acile. How-ever, my students studies have conrmed these themes. Hundreds o my gradu-ate students, teachers studying to be teachers o the gited and talented, and myundergraduate students in general studies have completed biographical case studiesthat have mostly conrmed the themes I have discussed here.


12/26

24 PIIrTo


commentary

I have known o Joyce Vanassel-Baska since she was Joyce Vanassel. I wasnishing my dissertation at Bowling Green State University in 1977, and had takena job as a gited coordinator in Hardin County. One o my proessors, in hearingthat I had entered the eld o the education o the gited and talented, told me hehad a graduate student at the University o oledo in the joint doctoral programthat the two universities had at that time named Joyce Vanassel, who was thegited coordinator or the city o oledo. Both o us graduated rom that program

with our doctorates in educational administration and supervision. Joyce went toIllinois, and I went to Michigan and then to New York City, and then back toOhio. I ollowed her career rom then on, and we connected at various coner-ences. Over the years, we have become riends, having lunch and dinner together

at conerences here and abroad, and we have shared our similar backgrounds andour passions or literature and the arts. Joyce asked me to speak at several o thecurriculum conerences at William and Mary, and I have required my graduatestudents in the curriculum class in our endorsement program to buy and to prepareto teach one o the William and Mary units. We stay in touch. I am very honoredto be asked to contribute a chapter to this volume, and to celebrate the transitiono my riend rom the present to the uture, where she will break new ground, Iam sure.

reFerences

Albert, R. S. (Ed.). (1992). Genius and eminence(2nd ed.). Oxord, UK: Pergamon Press.Baird, L. L. (1985). Do grades and tests predict adult accomplishment? Research in Higher

Education, 23(1), 385.Barron, F. (1968). Creativity and personal reedom. New York: Van Nostrand.Barron, F. (1972).Artists in the making. New York: Seminar Press.Breslin, J. E. B. (1993).Mark Rothko: A biography. Chicago: University o Chicago Press.Cattell, J. M. (1903). A statistical study o eminent men. Popular Science Monthly, 62,

359377.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: Te psychology o optimal experience. New York: Cam-bridge University Press.Dali, S. (1942). Te secret lie o Salvador Dali. New York: Dial Press.Eminence. (n.d.). In Oxord English dictionary. Retrieved on November 13, 2008, rom

http://dictionary.oed.comEtherington-Smith, M. (1995). Te persistence o memory: A biography o Dali. New York:

Da Capo Press.Feist, G. H. (1999). Inuence o personality on artistic and scientic creativity. In R.

Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity(pp. 273296). New York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

Feldman, D. H. (1982). A developmental ramework or research with gited children. In

D. Feldman (Ed.), New directions or child development: Developmental approaches togitedness and creativity(pp. 3146). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


13/26



Feldman, D. H., & Goldsmith, L. (1986). Natures gambit. New York: Basic Books.Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy o creativity seen through the lives o Freud,

Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). Te creative vision: A longitudinal study of

problem nding in art. New York: Wiley.Ghiselin, B. (1952). Te creative process. New York: Bantam.Goertzel, V., Goertzel, M. G., Goertzel, . G., & Hansen, A. M. W. (2004). Cradles o

eminence(2nd ed.). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Greer, G. (1979). Te obstacle race: Te fortunes of women painters and their work. New

York: Farrar Straus Giroux.Guilord, J. P. (1967). Te nature o human intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill.Hale, N. (1975).Mary Cassatt. New York: Addison-Wesley.Hemingway, E. (1964).A moveable east. New York: Bantam.Herrera, H. (1991). Frida: A biography o Frida Kahlo. New York: Perennial.Hillman, J. (1996). Te souls code: In search o character and calling. New York: Random

House.Jung, C. G. (1965).Memories, dreams, reections. New York: Vintage.Kronberg, L. (2008). alent development o eminent Australian women. Unpublished doc-

toral dissertation, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.MacKinnon, D. (1975). IPARs contribution to the conceptualization and study o cre-

ativity. In I. A. aylor & J. W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity(pp. 6089).Chicago: Aldine.

Michaelis, D. (1998). N.C. Wyeth: A biography. New York: Alred A. Knop.Naieh, S., & Smith, G. W. (1989).Jackson Pollock: An American saga. New York: Clarkson

Potter.

Nochlin, L. (1988). Women, art, and power, and other essays. New York: Harper & Row.Piirto, J. (1966). Charlotte BrontsVillette. Unpublished masters thesis, Kent State Uni-

versity, Kent, OH.Piirto, J. (1992). Understanding those who create. empe, AZ: Gited Psychology Press.Piirto, J. (1994). alented children and adults: Teir development and education. New York:

Macmillan.Piirto, J. (1998). Temes in the lives o contemporary U.S. women creative writers at

midlie. Roeper Review, 21, 6070.Piirto, J. (2000). Te pyramid o talent development. Gited Child oday, 23(6), 2229.Piirto, J. (2002).My teeming brain: A psychology o creative writers. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton

Press.Piirto, J. (2004). Understanding creativity. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.Piirto, J. (in press-a). Eminent women. In B. Kerr (Ed.), Encyclopedia of giftedness, creativity,

and talent. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Piirto, J. (in press-b). Temes in the lives o creative writers using the Piirto Pyramid as a

ramework. In E. Grigorenko, E. Mambrino, & D. Preiss (Eds.). Handbook of writing:A mosaic o perspectives and views. New York: Psychology Press.

Reynolds, F. C., & Piirto, J. (2005). Depth psychology and gitedness: Finding the soulin gited education. Roeper Review,27, 164171.

Reynolds, F. C., & Piirto, J. (2007). Honoring and suering the thorn: Marking, naming,initiating, and eldering: Depth psychology, II. Roeper Review, 29, 4553.

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis o creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305310.Robinson, R. (1989). Georgia OKeefe: A lie. New York: Harper & Row.


14/26

26 PIIrTo


Runco, M., & Pritzker, S. (Eds.). (1999). Encyclopedia of creativity(2 vols). San Diego,CA: Academic Press.

Saarinen, A. B. (1958). Te proud possessors. New York: Conde Nast Publications.Simonton, D. K. (1999a). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. New York:

Oxord University Press.Simonton, D. K. (1999b). Eminence. In M. Runco & S. Pritzer (Eds.), Encyclopedia o

creativity(Vol. 1, pp. 646649). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Sloane, K. D., & Sosniak, L. A. (1985). Te development o accomplished sculptors. In

B. Bloom (Ed.), Developing talent in young people(pp. 90138). New York: BallantineBooks.

Smith, M. (1938). Te general ormal education o eminent men. Scientic Monthly, 46,551560.

Stevens, M., & Swan, A. (2004). De Kooning: An American master. New York: Alred A.Knop.

Stone, I., & Stone, J. (Eds.). (1937). Dear Teo. New York: Doubleday.erman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1959). Te gited group at mid-lie: 35 years ollow-up o

the superior child. Stanord, CA: Stanord University Press.omkins, C. (1998). Duchamp: A biography. New York: Henry Holt.Vanassel-Baska, J. (1989). Characteristics o the developmental path o eminent and

gited adults. In J. Vanassel-Baska & P. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (Eds.), Patterns ofinuence on gited learners: Te home, the sel, and the school(pp. 146162). New York:eachers College Press.

Vanassel-Baska, J. (1996). Te talent development process in women writers: A study oCharlotte Bront and Virginia Wool. In K. D. Arnold, K. D. Noble, & R. F. Subotnik(Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 295316).

Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Vanassel-Baska, J. (2005). Domain-specic gitedness: Applications in school and lie.

In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness(2nd ed., pp.358376). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Vasari, G. (1561). Lives of the most eminent painters, sculptors, and architects. (Gaston C. DeVere, rans.) London: Philip Lee Warner. Retrieved rom http://www.en.org/~acd/vite/VasariLives.html


15/26

595

About the

Authors

Linda D. Averyreceived her Ph.D. in educational policy,planning, and leadership rom Te College o William andMary in 1999. She served as manager o the Center or GitedEducation until 2002, during which time she was integrally

involved in Project SAR and Project Phoenix. Her earlierwork was in state government programs, rst in Michiganand then in Illinois. She has conducted several state and localgited program evaluations and has published book chapters,

journal articles, and research and evaluation reports.

Ariel Baska teaches Latin and drama in Fairax CountyPublic Schools, while pursuing her masters degree in gitededucation at George Mason University. She received her

bachelors degree in classics rom Te College o William andMary, where she received a scholarship to adapt and directancient plays. She has written two Navigatorindependentstudy activities or the Center or Gited Education, and hascowritten a book chapter and an article with her mother,

Joyce Vanassel-Baska, or publication.

Bruce Bracken currently is a proessor in Te College o Wil-liam and Mary School o Education. During his career, Dr.Bracken has published more than 150 articles, reviews, book

chapters, tests, books, curricula, training CDs, and videos.He coounded theJournal of Psychoeducational Assessmentand


16/26

596

Leading Changein gifted eduCation:

edited the journal or more than 20 years. He currently sits on the editorial boardso eight national and international educational and psychological journals. He isa Fellow o the APA in the Division o School Psychology (Div 16) and the Divi-sion o Child and Adolescent Psychology (Div 53). Dr. Bracken is a Diplomate

and Fellow in the American Board o Assessment Psychology and a Fellow o theAmerican Educational Research Association.

Linda E. Brodydirects the Julian C. Stanley Study o Exceptional alent (SE) atthe Johns Hopkins Center or alented Youth (CY), which provides counselingservices to students with exceptional academic abilities and studies their progressover time. She also supervises the counseling eorts o the Jack Kent Cooke YoungScholars program or CY, the development o Cogito.org or top math and sci-ence students, and the publication o the award-winningImaginemagazine. Her

research ocuses on evaluating strategies to serve gited students and on specialpopulations including the highly gited, gited emales, and twice-exceptional stu-dents. She earned her doctorate at Johns Hopkins.

Elissa F. Brown is the director o the Middle/High School Council or the NorthCarolina Department o Public Instruction where she acilitates statewide reorminitiatives that impact middle and high schools. She came to the state agency in2007 as the state consultant or gited education. Prior to her appointment withthe department, she was the director or the Center or Gited Education at TeCollege o William and Mary where she received her Ph.D. in educational policy

planning and leadership with an emphasis in gited education. She also is a ormerteacher and coordinator o gited programs.

Brandy L. E. Buckingham is a doctoral student in learning sciences at Northwest-ern University. She holds a B.S. in cognitive science and theater rom MI as wellas a M.A.Ed. in curriculum and instruction or gited education rom Te Collegeo William and Mary. Her broad research interests include the design o inormallearning environments; the cognitive dierences in learning rom dierent media,artiacts, and environments; and the nature o intelligence and its impact on thedesign o learning environments.

Laurence J. Coleman is proessor, Judith Daso Herb Chair in Gited Education,at the University o oledo in Ohio. He is the principal investigator o Accelerating

Achievement in Math and Science in Urban Schools, a Javits-sponsored program.His scholarly interests include capturing the ordinary experience o gited childrenand teachers in context and studying passions that uel advanced development. Dr.Coleman coauthored Being Gifted in Schooland Nurturing alent in High Schools:Life in the Fast Lane, served as editor o theJournal for the Education of the Gifted,and received the Distinguished Scholar Award rom NAGC.


17/26

597aboutthe authors

the festsChriftof dr. JoyCe VantasseL-baska

Lucas Cookis an intern with the Center or Gited Education Policy. In additionto his contributions to the Vanassel-Baska estschrit chapter, he has played animportant role in preparing the Centers proessional development modules orteachers and in enhancing its Web site. He also is a ull-time student at American

University majoring in psychology and education.

Jennifer Riedl Cross received her Ph.D. in educational psychology rom Ball StateUniversity, with a specialization in cognitive and social processes. She served 17years as an assistant or managing editor or several dierent research journals ingited education, includingGifted Child Quarterly, Roeper Review, andJournal forthe Education of the Gifted. She has presented at numerous gited education con-erences at the local, regional, and international level and has conducted researchconcerning attitudes towards gited students and their education.

Tracy L. Cross, George and Frances Ball Distinguished Proessor o Psychology andGited Studies, is the associate dean or graduate studies, research, and assessmentor eachers College at Ball State University. For 9 years he served as the executivedirector o the Indiana Academy or Science, Mathematics, and Humanities, a pub-lic residential school or academically gited adolescents. Dr. Cross has publishedmore than 100 articles and book chapters, and a coauthored textbook, Being Giftedin School: An Introduction to Development, Guidance, and eaching. He is the edi-tor o theJournal for the Education of the Giftedand editor emeritus o the RoeperReview, Gifted Child Quarterly, andJournal of Secondary Gifted Education.

Andrew S. Davis is an associate proessor o psychology at Ball State Universityand a licensed psychologist and school psychologist who specializes in pediatricneuropsychology. Dr. Davis is the editor o the upcomingHandbook of PediatricNeuropsychologyand has published or presented more than 100 research studies,book chapters, test reviews, and encyclopedia entries in the areas o clinical neu-ropsychology and school psychology. He is the clinical director o neurobehavioralhealth and his pediatric clinical practice primarily ocuses on neurodevelopmentaland genetic disorders and psychiatric disorders with a neurological component.

Joy L. Davis is a graduate o Te College o William and Marys masters anddoctoral programs in gited education. She has worked as a local and state admin-istrator, adjunct instructor, and consultant specializing in the education o Arican

American gited learners. She currently is director o the Center or the Advance-ment o Academic Excellence at Virginia Union University and is serving her rstterm as chair o the NAGCs Diversity and Equity Committee.

Ashley Edmiston is a program ofcer or the Center o Psychology in Schoolsand Education and also acts as project director or the Catalyst program with theCenter or Gited Education Policy. She provides support and assists with projectsinvolving the Coalition or Psychology in Schools and Education and the ask


18/26

598


Force on Classroom Violence Against eachers. She holds a B.S. in psychologywith a concentration on neuroscience rom the University o Westminster.

Annie Xuemei Fengis a behavioral scientist with the Behavioral Research Program

o the Division o Cancer Control and Population Sciences at the National CancerInstitute (NCI). Previously, she was the director o research and evaluation at theCenter or Gited Education at Te College o William and Mary. Annie also is acoprincipal investigator o the International Studies o Academic Olympiads. Shereceived her B.A. in English language and literature rom Jilin University in Chinaand her doctorate in education rom St. Johns University in New York.

Melanie Frankserved as an intern with the Center or Gited Education Policy(CGEP) during 2008. She devoted much o her eort to the estschrit chapter as

well as to helping CGEP write up an evaluation or the Centers Catalyst Project.Catalyst is one o CGEPs signature programs, providing adolescents with dem-onstrated high levels o motivation and accomplishment in the sciences access toeminent mentors in the chemistry. She is currently a reshman psychology andeducation major at the University o Vermont.

Heather M. French is the director o education or Te Riley Behavioral andEducational Center in Huntsville, AL, which provides comprehensive services orchildren with autism, pervasive developmental delay, and Aspergers syndrome.Dr. French holds a B.A. in English rom Birmingham-Southern College, a M.S.

in English education rom Florida State University, and a Ph.D. in educationalpolicy, planning, and leadership with an emphasis in gited education rom TeCollege o William and Mary.

John P. Gaais a proessor o educational psychology and codirector o the Urbanalent Research Institute at the University o Houston. He has conducted research ina variety o areas including applied motivational interventions, goal-setting, locus ocontrol, gender identity and sex role development, and ego and moral development.Most recently his research has ocused on the aective and social-emotional develop-ment o gited students, most specically those students gited in the arts.

Franoys Gagn obtained his Ph.D. in educational psychology (1966) atlUniversit de Montral. Ater devoting a decade to the study o student evalua-tions o teaching, he spent the rest o his career in the Department o Psychology,at lUniversit du Qubec Montral (UQAM). He has published extensivelyon theoretical matters, peer identication, and motivational issues and is knownor his Dierentiated Model o Gitedness and alent (DMG), which has beenendorsed by educational authorities in many countries. Dr. Gagn has won majorawards in the eld o gited education, among them NAGCs Distinguished Scholar

Award (1996). Since retiring in 2001, Dr. Gagn has maintained internationalpublishing and keynoting activities.


19/26

599aboutthe authors


James Gallagher has spent more than 40 years in research and teaching on thesubject o exceptional children. He has been a proessor at the University o Illinois,the rst director o the Bureau o Education or the Handicapped in the U.S. Ofceo Education, the director o the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center

at University o North CarolinaChapel Hill or 17 years, and a Kenan Proessoro Education or 32 years at the university. He has authored or edited more than10 textbooks and more than 200 articles.

Shelagh A. Gallagher is a nationally recognized consultant in gited education,who spent 10 years at the University o North Carolina at Charlotte as an associ-ate proessor in education where she directed two Javits grants. Prior to that, she

worked at Te College o William and Mary or a year and managed the Javitsgrant that produced the William and Mary problem-based learning (PBL) science

units. She also has worked as research director or the Illinois Mathematics andScience Academy (IMSA). Dr. Gallagher has served two terms on the NAGC Boardo Directors, has won two NAGC Curriculum Division awards, and the NAGC

Article o the Year award. She and her ather, James Gallagher, coauthored eachingthe Gifted Child. She is a doctoral graduate o the University o Arizona.

Leslie W. Grantis a visiting assistant proessor in the curriculum and instructionand educational leadership areas at Te College o William and Mary in Wil-liamsburg, VA. Leslie is the coauthor oTeacher-Made Assessments: How to Con-nect Curriculum, Instruction, and Student Learning. She has worked with school

districts in the areas o teacher evaluation, student achievement goal setting, andstudent assessment. Her research interests include classroom-based assessments andteacher quality. Dr. Grant was a teacher and instructional leader beore serving asa developer o state customized assessments or a major test publishing company.She received her doctoral degree rom Te College o William and Mary.

Miraca U. M. Gross is director o the Gited Education Research, Resource, andInormation Centre (GERRIC), at the University o New South Wales, Australia.Dr. Gross has won several international research awards including the Holling-worth Award or Excellence in Research in Gited Education in 1987, and, in 1988

and 1990, the Mensa International Education and Research Foundation Awardsor Excellence. In 2005, the National Association or Gited Children honored her

with its Distinguished Scholar Awardthe rst time this was awarded to a scholaroutside North America. In 2008, she was appointed a Member o the Order o

Australia in the Queens Birthday Honours List or services to gited education.

Suzanna E. Henshon graduated rom Te College o William and Mary in 2005with a Ph.D. in gited education and teaches creative writing and compositionull time at Florida Gul Coast University. She is the author o 150 publications,including three Navigatorstudy guides; childrens novels entitledMildew on theWall(2004) and Spiders on the Ceiling(2006); and numerous publications on the


20/26

600


writing process, includingKing Arthurs Academy: Descriptive and Narrative WritingExercises(2007), Haunted House: Descriptive and Narrative Writing Exercises(2007),and Notes from a Writer(2008).

Claire E. Hughes is an assistant proessor in the School o Education at Bellarm-ine University. She graduated rom Te College o William and Mary with dualemphases in gited education and special education in 2000 ater being a graduateassistant at the Center or Gited Education. She is a ormer elementary and middleschool teacher, has presented at numerous national and state conerences, and hasauthored several articles and book chapters.

Susan E. Jackson is a doctoral student in educational psychology and individualdierences and is associated with the Urban alent Research Institute at the Uni-

versity o Houston. Her masters thesis ocused on the eectiveness o the gitedprogram created by Te Kids on the Block, Inc., and she anticipates her doctoraldissertation will entail research on the Renzulli Learning program. She has workedor many years with parent and community support groups in gited education.

Susan K. Johnsen is a proessor in the Department o Educational Psychology atBaylor University. She has written more than 150 articles, monographs, technicalreports, and books related to gited education. She is editor oGifted Child odayand serves on the boards oGifted Child Quarterly,Journal for the Education ofthe Gifted, and Roeper Review. She is the author oIdentifying Gifted Students: A

Practical Guideand coauthor o three tests used in identiying gited students. Sheis president o Te Association or the Gited, Council or Exceptional Childrenand past president o the exas Association or Gited and alented.

Patricia Johnson has been a reading teacher or more than 25 years. Most o hercareer has been spent working side-by-side with elementary classroom teachersin schools with diverse populations in Fairax County, VA. She also has been aliteracy consultant, area reading resource, Reading Recovery teacher, and adjunctaculty member at the George Mason University Graduate School o Education.

Johnson is the author o the bookOne Child at a ime: Making the Most of Your

ime With Struggling Readers, K6.

Kyung Hee Kim is an assistant proessor at the College o William and Mary.Her research interests include understanding the nature o creativity and charac-teristics o creatively gited students; assessing creativity; and nurturing creativity,particularly concerning environmental and cultural interactions with creativity.She received the Hollingworth Award rom the National Association or GitedChildren (NAGC) in 2008, the Ronald W. Collins Distinguished Faculty Research

Award, the Outstanding Faculty Award in 2008, and the Faculty Scholarship Rec-ognition Award in 2007 rom Eastern Michigan University. She also received


21/26

601aboutthe authors


research awards rom NAGC in 2005, rom the American Creativity Associationin 2005, and rom the International Council o Psychologists in 2004.

Margie K. Kitano serves as associate dean o the College o Education and pro-

essor o special education at San Diego State University. She codeveloped andworks with the San Diego Unied School District collaborative certicate in gitededucation. Te program combines current theory and research with best practicesto support services to gited students, with special attention to underrepresentedpopulations. Her current research and publications ocus on improving servicesto culturally and linguistically diverse gited learners.

David W. Leslie is Chancellor Proessor o Education Emeritus at Te Collegeo William and Mary. He was named an Alumni Fellow o the Pennsylvania State

University in 2000, received the Research Achievement Award rom the Associa-tion or the Study o Higher Education in 2002, and has served as a IAA-CREFInstitute Fellow (20042008). He taught and studied education policy at TeCollege o William and Mary in Virginia.

Catherine A. Little is an assistant proessor in educational psychology at Te Uni-versity o Connecticut. She teaches courses in gited and talented education andin the undergraduate honors program. She previously served as visiting assistantproessor in gited education at Te College o William and Mary, and as curricu-lum coordinator at the Center or Gited Education there. Her research interests

include proessional development and curriculum dierentiation. She coeditedContent-Based Curriculum for High-Ability Learnerswith Joyce Vanassel-Baska.

David F. Lohman is a proessor o educational psychology at the University oIowa. He is a ellow o the American Psychological Association, the AmericanPsychological Society, and the American Educational Research Association. Heis the recipient o numerous awards, including a Fulbright Fellowship and theIowa Regents Award or Faculty Excellence at the University o Iowa, Gifted ChildQuarterlyResearch Paper o the year (2006 and 2008), and the NAGC Distin-guished Scholar Award. He currently directs the Institute or Research and Policy

on Acceleration at the Belin-Blank International Center or Gited Education andalent Development. Since 1998, he has coauthored the Cognitive Abilities estwith Elizabeth Hagen.

D. Betsy McCoach is an assistant proessor in the Educational Psychology Depart-ment in the Neag School o Education at the University o Connecticut, whereshe teaches graduate courses in measurement, educational statistics, and researchdesign. Dr. McCoachs areas o substantive research interest include closing theachievement gap, the underachievement o academically able students, and motiva-tion. Her methodological research interests include hierarchical linear modeling,


22/26

602


instrument design and analysis, conrmatory actor analysis, structural equationmodeling, latent growth modeling, and quantitative research methodology.

Susan McGowan is a National Board Certied eacher with 15 years o classroom

experience. She obtained her bachelors degree rom George Mason University andher masters degree in education rom Marymount University in Arlington. Herinterest in gited education stems rom her work with high-ability students at themiddle school level and led her to work with Dr. Vanassel-Baska at Te Collegeo William and Mary, where she received her Ed.D. in educational policy planningand leadership with an emphasis in gited education. She is an assistant proessoro education at Longwood University.

Virginia L. McLaughlin is dean o the School o Education at Te College o

William and Mary. Dr. McLaughlins teaching and research eorts have ocused onprogram development and evaluation and collaborative service delivery or studentswith disabilities and those at risk. She has directed numerous grants supportingteacher and leadership development and leads several school-university partner-ships to improve public education.

F. Richard Rick Olenchak is proessor, psychologist, and codirector o theUrban alent Research Institute at the University o Houston. Prior to his researchcareer, he was a teacher, principal, and consulting psychologist. Having servedin a number o ancillary proessional roles, including service as president o the

National Association or Gited Children, he is interested in examining cognitiveand aective interactions and exploring how educators and parents can enhanceoptimal development o young people.

Paula Olszewski-Kubilius is the director o the Center or alent Developmentat Northwestern University and a proessor in the School o Education and SocialPolicy. She has conducted research and published more than 80 articles or bookchapters on issues o talent development, particularly the eects o acceleratededucational programs and the needs o special populations o gited children. Shehas served as the editor oGifted Child Quarterlyand as a coeditor oTe Journal of

Secondary Gifted Education. She also has served on the editorial advisory boards otheJournal for the Education of the Giftedand Gifted Child International, and wasa consulting editor or Roeper Review.She currently is a member o the editorialboard oGifted Child odayand Gifted Child Quarterly.

William Orton has taught gited learners in grades 28 over a 30-year period.Additionally, he has taught multiple gited endorsement courses or two universi-ties, directed the Saturday/Summer Enrichment Program through the Center orGited Education at William and Mary, and directed the Virginia Summer Resi-dential Governors School in Science, Math, and echnology. He also has served ascoordinator o gited education in Hampton City Schools. Dr. Orton holds a B.S.


23/26

603aboutthe authors


in engineering, an M.A. in education, and a Ph.D. in education administration-gited rom Te College o William and Mary.

Jane Piirto is rustees Distinguished Proessor at Ashland University in Ashland,

OH. An award-winning novelist and poet, she is a specialist in creativity, theeducation o the gited and talented, and qualitative research. Among her booksare alented Children and Adults(three editions), Understanding Tose Who Create(two editions), Understanding Creativity, and My eeming Brain: UnderstandingCreative Writers. Her latest book o poetry is Saunas.

Sally M. Reis is a Board o rustees Distinguished Proessor and eaching Fellowin educational psychology at the University o Connecticut, where she also serves asprincipal investigator o Te National Research Center on the Gited and alented.

She was a classroom teacher in public education as well as an administrator beorecoming to the University o Connecticut. She has authored and coauthored morethan 140 articles, 12 books, 50 book chapters, and numerous monographs andtechnical reports, and worked on a research team that has generated more than$35 million in grants in the last 15 years.

Joseph S. Renzulli is the Neag Proessor o Gited Education and alent Devel-opment at the University o Connecticut, where he also serves as the directoro Te National Research Center on the Gited and alented. He has served onnumerous editorial boards in the elds o gited education, educational psychology

and research, and law and education. His major research interests are in identi-cation and programming models or both gited education and general schoolimprovement.

Rochelle Rickofis program ofcer at APAs Center or Psychology in Schoolsand Education (CPSE). She provides research and programmatic support to theCPSE director in developing and executing CPSE projects, including the NationalScience Foundation grant-unded study o the impact o specialized public highschools o science, mathematics, and technology. She has a BFA in theater studiesrom Boston University and a M.Ed. in international education policy rom the

Harvard Graduate School o Education.

Janice I. Robbins is the interim director o the Center or Gited Educationand adjunct proessor in the School o Education at Te College o William andMary. She was ormerly chie o curriculum and instruction or the Departmento Deense Education Activity, directing curriculum, instruction, and assessmentat stateside and overseas schools. Dr. Robbins is a ormer elementary and middleschool principal and coordinator o the gited program or Fairax County PublicSchools in Virginia. Janice earned her Ph.D. in educational research and evaluationrom Virginia ech and her masters in curriculum and instruction rom GeorgeMason University.


24/26

604


Ann Robinson is a proessor o education and ounding director o the Centeror Gited Education at the University o Arkansas at Little Rock. She is a ormereditor oGifted Child Quarterlyand serves as the vice president o the National

Association or Gited Children. She coauthored Recommended Practices in Gifted

Education: A Critical Analysis, identied as one o the 50 most infuential worksin gited education by the Research & Evaluation Division o NAGC; and BestPractices in Gifted Education: An Evidence-Based Guide. She has been recognized asthe Purdue University Alumna o Distinction and received awards or public serviceand aculty excellence in research rom the University o Arkansas at Little Rock.

Nancy M. Robinson is Proessor Emerita o Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciencesat the University o Washington and ormer director o what is now known as theHalbert and Nancy Robinson Center or Young Scholars. Known previously or a

30-year career in mental retardation, her research interests since 1981 have ocusedon eects o marked academic acceleration to college, adjustment issues o gitedchildren, intellectual assessment, and verbal and mathematical precocity in veryyoung children. She received the 1998 NAGC Distinguished Scholar Award andthe 2007 NAGC Ann Isaacs Founders Memorial Award.

Karen B. Rogers is a proessor o gited studies in the Department o SpecialEducation & Gited Education in the College o Applied Proessional Studies atthe University o St. Tomas in Minneapolis. She is author oRe-Forming GiftedEducation: Matching the Program to the Child, as well as several other books, chap-

ters, articles, and program evaluations. She has written 36 dierentiated units oinstruction or gited learners, including the Omnibus units. She is a past membero the NAGC Board o Directors, a past president and board member o Te Asso-ciation or the Gited division o the Council or Exceptional Children, and currentchair o the AERA special interest group, Research on Intellectual Gitedness.

Ken Seeleyis president o the National Center or School Engagement in Denver,CO. As a proessor o education at the University o Denver or 10 years, he createdthe teacher education program or gited and advised doctoral research. He wasprincipal o the Laboratory School at the University o Northern Colorado. As a

community volunteer, Dr. Seeley has helped develop charter schools in Colorado,and served as the ounding president o the KIPP Sunshine Peak Charter schoolin West Denver. He also serves as board president o Colorado Heritage Campsand Qualistar Early Learning Center in Denver.

Del Siegle is an associate proessor o educational psychology in the Neag Schoolo Education at the University o Connecticut where he was honored as a teachingellow. Prior to earning his Ph.D., he worked as a gited and talented coordinatorin Montana. He is president o the National Association or Gited Children andserves on the board o directors o Te Association or the Gited (CEC-AG).He is coeditor o theJournal of Advanced Academicsand authors a technology


25/26

605aboutthe authors


column or Gifted Child oday. Dr. Siegles research interests include Web-basedinstruction, motivation o gited students, and teacher bias in the identicationo students or gited programs.

Linda Kreger Silverman is a licensed clinical and counseling psychologist whohas contributed more than 300 publications to the eld, including the books,Counseling the Gifted & alentedand Upside-Down Brilliance: Te Visual-SpatialLearner. She ounded and directs the Institute or the Study o Advanced Devel-opment (ISAD), and its subsidiary, the Gited Development Center (http://www.giteddevelopment.com), which has assessed more than 5,500 children in the last29 years. She is cochair o the NAGC ask Force on Assessment.

Frances R. Spielhagen is an associate proessor o education at Mount Saint Mary

College, Newburgh, NY. From 20032006, she was an AERA/IES Post-DoctoralResearch Fellow at the Center or Gited Education at Te College o William andMary in Williamsburg, VA. Her book, Debating Single-Sex Education: Separateand Equal, was published in December 2007. Her new book, Unsolved Equations:Te Algebra Solution to Mathematics Reform, is based on her postdoctoral research.Dr. Spielhagen is a career educator with more than 30 years experience as a highschool Latin teacher.

Robert J. Sternbergis dean o the School o Arts and Sciences, proessor o psy-chology, and adjunct proessor o education at uts University. He also is Honorary

Proessor o Psychology at the University o Heidelberg. Prior to his appointmentat uts, Sternberg was IBM Proessor o Psychology and Education and proessoro management at Yale University. Sternbergs Ph.D. is rom Stanord Universityand he has 10 honorary doctorates. He is past president o the American Psycho-logical Association.

James H. Stronge is the Heritage Proessor in the educational policy, planning,and leadership area at Te College o William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. Hisresearch interests include policy and practice related to teacher quality and teacherand administrator evaluation. His work on teacher quality ocuses on how to

identiy eective teachers and how to enhance teacher eectiveness. Stronge hasauthored, coauthored, or edited 19 books and more than 90 articles, chapters, andtechnical reports.

Rena F. Subotnik is director o the Center or Gited Education Policyat theAmerican Psychological Association. She was previously a proessor o educationat Hunter College where she coordinated the secondary education program andserved as research and curriculum liaison to the Hunter College laboratory schools.She has been awarded research and training grants with the National ScienceFoundation, the Javits Grant Program o the U.S. Department o Education, and


26/26

606

the Spencer Foundation. She currently serves on the editorial boards o RoeperReviewand Gifted Child Quarterly.

Carol L. Tieso is an assistant proessor at Te College o William and Mary where

she teaches courses in gited education. Beore joining the aculty at Te Collegeo William and Mary, she served as program coordinator or Programs in GitedEducation at Te University o Alabama. Her research interests include examin-ing the eects o dierentiated curriculum and instruction and addressing specicaective and personality characteristics o gited and talented students.

Kimberly M. Tyler is an assistant proessor o education at exas Wesleyan Uni-versity. Beore moving to higher education, she spent 14 years teaching in pub-lic schools. Dr. yler earned her undergraduate degree in elementary education

rom Louisiana State University and a masters degree in special education withan emphasis in gited education rom the University o Southern Mississippi. Shedid her doctoral work at Te College o William and Mary where she earned aPh.D. in educational policy, planning, and leadership with an emphasis in gitededucation.

Susannah M. Woodreceived her B.A. in psychology and English rom the Uni-versity o Richmond. She completed her M.Ed. in school counseling and herPh.D. in counselor education with a cognate in gited education at Te Collegeo William and Mary. She won the Margaret, Te Lady Tatcher Medallion or

academic excellence. She currently is an assistant proessor at the University oIowa where she teaches both doctoral students and students who are pursuingtheir masters in school counseling with an emphasis in gited education. She alsoholds an appointment at the Belin-Blank Center or Gited Education and alentDevelopment.

Frank C. Worrell is a proessor at the University o Caliornia, Berkeley, wherehe also is director o the School Psychology program and aculty director o the

Academic alent Development Program. He serves as codirector or research anddevelopment or the Caliornia College Preparatory Academy, a charter school

partnership involving UC Berkeley and Aspire Public Schools. His research inter-ests include academic talent development, at-risk youth, scale development andvalidation, and teacher eectiveness.

Documents

Eminence and Creativity