Gifted early adolescents’ negotiating identity: A case ... · environments. It extended the...

The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 21 (2) 19

T 19

Gifted early adolescents’ negotiating identity: A case study of self-presentation theory Susan Luus & James J. Watters Queensland University of Technology, Australia

Abstract Academically gifted students are recognised as possessing considerable achievement potential. Yet many fail to perform at a level commensurate with their ability. Often gifted students in early adolescence are faced with a forced choice between fulfilment of potential and achieving stable positive relationships with peers. This choice can affect their achievement and may have far-reaching personal and social costs. This case study explored the viability of self-presentation theory to explain students’ ways of negotiating their sense of self whilst developing public identity and the concomitant affects on achievement and the fulfilment of potential. It examined how gifted students moderate their images in their learning and extra-curricular environments. Further, the study identifies those self-presentation strategies adopted that either facilitate or hinder achievement. This study may assist parents, educators and school counsellors to provide greater support for gifted adolescents. Introduction Knowing one’s giftedness and having a well-developed sense of identity as a gifted person are crucial for the development of the self (Mahoney, 1998). Gifted youths’ attitudes towards their abilities are complex, and there are many theoretical challenges to understanding the issues associated with identity formation in the gifted. Ask gifted children and youth about their personal sense of giftedness and they are often quick to dismiss claims that they are gifted. Many gifted individuals perceive that giftedness affects the manner in which others treat them, indeed some perceive giftedness to be socially stigmatising (Coleman & Cross, 2005) and so feel the need to influence how others interact with them through adoption of a range of self-presentation strategies designed to manage the impressions others form. Rationale and significance Providing optimal learning environments that enable gifted students to fulfil their potential and create meaningful relationships is vital for overall mental health and well-being. Environments that provide a positive person-context sense of fit have a range of benefits for growth and development. Mahoney (1998) suggests that there are four person-context constructs found in all environments which shape and influence identity development in some way. These are validation, affirmation, affiliation and affinity. Each construct either facilitates or hinders the fulfilment of potential, relationships and the ability to achieve an integrated identity.

Validation of giftedness and the gifted individual provides sustained motivation to fulfil potential. Affirmation encourages the exploration of giftedness generally facilitating a healthier differentiation of self, one that integrates giftedness more fully. Affiliation with others who have similar intensities, passions, desires and abilities, allows individuals to integrate into a group without the loss of self-identity, and affinity that maintains the “fire of the self” (Mahoney, 1998, p. 224). For many gifted students the school environment appears to lack these key constructs resulting in disengagement, denial of giftedness due to perceptions of stigmatisation and often, chronic underachievement. There has been little research exploring the motives, experiences and strategies that gifted students utilise in relation to the fulfilment of potential. Understanding the functioning of gifted students within their environmental contexts is essential to supporting these students in their endeavours to fulfil their potential. The extent to which gifted individuals are able to fulfil their potential depends on how they envisage themselves as to who they are and what they want to be, those intrapersonal catalysts that Gagné (2004) describes in his Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT). Thus far, self-presentation theory (Goffman, 1959) has not been drawn upon to examine early adolescence, giftedness, fulfilment of potential and so it presents an original lens for analysis. This study explored the viability of self-presentation theory to explain students’ ways of negotiating their sense of self whilst developing

20 The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 21 (2)

2 The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 21(2)

public identity and the concomitant effects on achievement and the fulfilment of potential. It examined how gifted students moderate their images in their learning and extra-curricular environments. It extended the research on forced choice dilemma (Gross, 1989) and the big fish, little pond effect (Marsh, Hau & Craven, 2004) by examining qualitatively the responses and strategies that students use in and between environments to negotiate identity formation , achievement and affiliation. Giftedness in early adolescence Being identified as gifted raises a raft of issues not least during the early years of adolescence, the period between 10 to 14 years (Steinberg, 2005). Adolescence is a time of increased social engagement and self-other comparison. For some gifted youth increased social interaction, which occurs in early adolescence, exerts pressure on identity development and achievement, two key issues arising during adolescence (Erikson, 1963, 1968). Some gifted adolescents find that they are required to negotiate their identity development through managing the information others have about them using various strategies (Coleman & Cross, 2005). These strategies are known as self-presentation strategies (Goffman, 1959) or impression management, and refer to attempts to control how others perceive the self (Leary & Kowalksi, 1999). According to Mahoney (1998), defining identity may be almost as complex as developing one’s identity. He suggests that identity includes the unity and integration of all aspects of the self both conscious and unconscious. Erikson (1968) proposes that identity formation is largely an unconscious process. This process becomes conscious when “inner circumstances combine to aggravate a painful or elated identity-consciousness” (p. 23), for instance when individuals’ public identity is not aligned with their inner or true selves. In essence identity answers the question, “Who am I?” Identity construction is a dynamic process that integrates and shapes distinct pieces of the self into a unique being through person-context interaction (Bosma & Kunnen, 2008). As Erikson (1963) highlighted in his eight ages of man, the challenge of adolescence concerns how adolescents “appear to be in the eyes of others as compared with what they feel they are” (p. 261). It is the perspective of others, which is important in fostering the emergence of identity. In childhood, others were primarily family and the home environment. However, in the adolescent years family competes with friends, classroom peers, teachers and the social

environment as the adolescents explore and negotiate their identity. Thus, these mediators become powerful influences that fashion the shape and robustness of their sense of identity. Identity negotiation is a process used in the initial stages of relationship formation in which each respective identity is established (Swann, Johnson & Bosson, 2009). Failure to acquire an identity leaves the individual with a sense of insecurity. The construction of a healthy identity contributes to an ideal sense of wellbeing and optimism for the future. Eccles et al. (1993) suggested “some of the negative psychological changes associated with adolescent development result from a mismatch between the needs of developing adolescents and the opportunities afforded them by their social environments” (p. 92). School is one of those environments. The interface between the school system and the identity of a gifted person is critical as it plays a major role in contributing to the development of the self’s identity as a gifted person (Mahoney, 1998). Students make judgments of themselves through comparison with peers. Adolescents develop relations between the self and experience around which they construct stories of their lives and in so doing express their preferred self-identity (Dai, 2004; Pasupathi & Weeks, 2011). People engage in constructing relationships that align with their existing or preferred sense of self. Gifted early adolescents may experience identity formation and their perceptions of self differently to their average ability peers because giftedness creates a different organisation of the self (Silverman, 1998). Generally gifted individuals think more abstractly at an earlier age relative to their average ability age peers, process new learning at faster rates, exhibit greater efficiency in reasoning and problem solving, understand advanced and complex concepts more easily, demonstrate deeper emotional sensitivity and insightful thinking, and have unusual and varied interests (Clark, 2008; Davis & Rimm, 2004; Foust & Booker, 2007). Advanced intellectual functioning may cause tension between two competing drives encountered in early adolescence, achievement and affiliation. As Gross (1989) found, the gifted student is faced with a forced choice between the drive for achievement and the attainment of relationships with peers that contribute to a diffused sense of personal identity. Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, and Jarvis (1996) argued that while all people strive to develop a sense of identity those with low and high levels of the construct “need for cognition” (NFC) do so in different ways. The need for cognition represents a desire to engage in effortful


T 21

thought or intellectual challenge which one might generally conceive of as school academic engagement. This need to engage is influenced by past history and current experiences. Indeed Njus and Johnson (2008) found among college students that high NFC people are more likely to explore aspects of identity and attain higher levels of identity development. Other findings suggest that gifted student traits such as purposiveness and low levels of inferiority are also associated with successful identity formation (Zuo & Tao, 2001). One could hypothesise that where the learning environment lacked opportunities for cognitive engagement which potentially leads to boredom and disengagement (Preckel, Go, & Frenzel, 2010), identity formation is frustrated. Academic self-concept provides one insight into the social identity of a student. We know that gifted students in favourable circumstances have high levels of academic self-concept and as shown in a quantitative study conducted over 25 years ago by Kerr, Colangelo and Gaeth (1988), they can be positive about their giftedness. We also know that gifted students’ self-perceptions, in particular their sense of academic self-concept, are dependent on the environment, both social and educational. For instance, Marsh, Hau, & Craven (2004), drawing on social comparison theoretical frameworks (Festinger, 1954), have argued the “big fish, little pond” effect to explain how students’ academic self-concept is moderated in response to achievement levels of classmates. Students moving from one frame of reference, for instance a mixed ability class, to another, such as an extension class, are likely to experience a decrease in academic self-concept if that frame of reference constitutes more able students, more challenging work and possibly higher levels of competition. Interacting with this effect is the potential for gifted students to find schooling boring through lack of challenge and relevance. Preckel, Gö and Frenzel (2010) have suggested positive emotional experiences due to success in class on the one hand, and lack of challenge on the other hand may interact to impact students’ sense of wellbeing. Students may underachieve or disengage in such circumstances. Self-presentation theory has the potential to provide yet another insight into identity development during the transitional phase of early adolescence. Self-presentation theory and adolescent identity Self-presentation theory (SPT) (Goffman, 1959) provides a powerful lens through which to examine how identities are negotiated. Goffman

proposed that individuals perform in multiple roles during everyday interactions, adopting strategies that depend on the individual’s personal goals and priorities at that point in time. These roles, therefore, are situation and context dependent, and result from an interaction between the individual and the environment in which he/she finds him/herself. Humans desire to be perceived positively and have a persistent and ongoing concern with their self-presentation (Leary, 1996) and the manner in which others perceive them. This desire aligns with the fundamental human need for belonging and social connection (Bosson, Weaver & Prewitt-Freilino, 2012). Intellectually gifted individuals’ desire for belonging and connection is often perceived to be somewhat challenging. Their advanced cognitive ability and heightened awareness generally imbue gifted students with high self-awareness and make them quick to understand how others perceive them. Acute social awareness may lead to feelings of difference to their average ability peers. Some intellectually gifted students may perceive their giftedness (Coleman & Cross, 2005) as a stigma, which denies them opportunities for positive social interactions because giftedness influences the manner in which they are perceived and treated by others. Lack of sense-of-fit and awareness that their peer group may not accept them may incline some gifted students to make a choice between their needs for peer acceptance and the pursuit of academic achievement. This phenomenon is the forced choice dilemma (Gross, 1989). In early adolescence, among gifted students, it is possible that forced choice dilemma is more prevalent because of the increase in peer group influence. This is likely to be particularly prevalent in environments where academic achievement is perceived negatively within the school culture. The perception of giftedness as stigmatising may lead gifted individuals to manipulate the information others have about them through a variety of coping strategies (Cross, Coleman, & Terharr-Yonkers, 1991). Self-presentation strategies that facilitate information management, may be adopted to assist the gifted individual to negotiate a public identity aligned to their choice of either social or achievement goals. It is hypothesised that in environments where students perceive that academic achievement is not valued, social goals may become a priority with direct consequences for fulfilment of academic potential. In contrast, environments where academic performance is valued and giftedness is validated, students are likely to construct an identity that is accepting and supportive of academic pursuits. Self-presentation strategies can be adopted to



facilitate achievement of their prioritised choice. Twelve self-presentation strategies are identified in the literature. These strategies fall into two functional categories: to assert self and to defend self, namely, assertive and defensive strategies (Lee, Quigley, Nesler, Corbett, & Tedeschi, 1999) (see Table 1). Assertive self-presentation is used to develop or create identity (Lee et al., 1999). Conversely, defensive tactics are remedial strategies used to preserve the identity; their use is intended to prevent a possible perceived threat to the public identity or image of an individual. Sub-categories exist in

one assertive strategy namely, ingratiation and two defensive strategies, accounts and disclaimers. The manifestation of these strategies encompasses two distinct processes; these are impression motivation and impression construction. Impression motivation pertains to the desire to create a specific impression in the minds of others (Leary & Kowalksi, 1990), and impression construction occurs when behaviour is altered with the desire to affect others’ impressions of them. Activation of these processes involves the interaction of situational and dispositional factors.

Table 1. Functional categories of self-presentation strategies (Leary, 1996; Tedeschi, & Lindskold, 1976)

Assertive Strategies Defensive Strategies Ingratiation

Complimentary other enhancement- (flattery) Conformity Performing favours Attractive self-descriptions

Intimidation Supplication Entitlement Enhancement Basking and Blasting (twin strategies) Supplication

Apologies Accounts

Excuse Justification

Avoiding (Refusals) Disclaimer

Hedging Faulty memory

Sandbagging Self-handicapping

Method The study was shaped by two research questions. These were:

1. What relationship exists between self-presentation strategies and the fulfilment of potential?

2. What self-presentation strategies were adopted by the participants?

Case study was adopted because it is an ideal method when holistic, in-depth investigation is needed (Yin, 2009). The aim of case study is to engage with and report the meanings that individuals bring to settings and construct within them (Yin, 2009). Illumination of an issue is considered to be of prime importance in case study research. This study used case study method to document how gifted early adolescents negotiate their identity and examine the self-presentation strategies they use to facilitate the development of the prioritised identity. It further examines the impact of these strategies on the fulfilment of personal potential.

Participants Three early adolescent gifted students, aged between 12 and 14 years old, participated in this study. They were two males, Blayde and Stephen, and one female, Amanda. To protect confidentiality, pseudonyms were used for all participants. Students attended the same public school where they participated in academic extension classes for some or all of the core school subjects. These included Mathematics, Science, English, and Studies of Society and Environment. School documentation indicated that these students were high achievers. The parents and/or the students, themselves, however, had a sub-optimal view of their achievement, believing that their achievement was not commensurate with the potential indicated by their formal identification. Giftedness had been identified in each of the three participants, utilising standardised measures including the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC IV), the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (SB5), and the Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM). School assessments included the Middle Years Achievement Test (MYAT) in which participants had scored within


T 23

the 95th percentile and a variety of International Competitions and Assessments for Schools (ICAS) in which they achieved distinctions and high distinctions. Process of data collection The researcher knew of the participants through her prior association with the school, where she provided assistance with curriculum adjustment for students with diverse learning needs. Parents and two of the students initially approached the researcher with concerns that the standard of work expected by the school restricted the students’ ability to fulfil their potential resulting in the demonstrated performance significantly below their identified potential (Reis, 2000). Initial student contact was established through the parents. This was followed by an introductory session with each prospective participant. Each family was provided with a research information pack that included a demographic survey, a parent information sheet, consent and assent forms. Students selected dates for interviews and a mutually accessible public venue was arranged. Initially interview data were supplemented with documentary evidence verifying the selection criteria was sighted by the researcher to establish that students were in the identified age group, and had formal identification of giftedness. The students’ school reports were utilised to verify student participation in academic extension classes and their achievement patterns in four key areas, Mathematics, Science, English, and Studies of Society and Environment. However, the primary method of data collection comprised three semi-structured interviews with each participant, supported by documentary evidence such as school reports, and extra-curricular participation (Yin, 2009). Three semi-structured interviews (Kvale & Brinkman, 2009), lasting for approximately 60 minutes were conducted with each of the participants. The face-to-face interviews were conducted at regular 10-14 day intervals to facilitate transcription, member checking (Yin, 2009) and analysis. Analysis Case study research generally produces a great volume of raw data that is verbal in nature, which needs to be processed and interpreted. In this study, a two-fold approach was applied to analyse data. First, data were analysed using a data-driven inductive approach (Boyatzis, 1998) and second, deductive analysis in which an a priori template of codes was applied (Crabtree & Miller, 1999). Inductive analysis was utilised initially for three reasons. They are:

1. To provide immersion in the data. 2. To facilitate the reduction of the

data to a manageable quantity. 3. To maintain the integrity of

participant voice. Cross-case comparison (Boyatzis, 1998) was then conducted to reveal common themes arising from the data. The development of categories from raw data into a framework that captured major themes was achieved through deductive analysis. An a priori template of codes (Crabtree & Miller, 1999) derived from the research literature and questions was imposed on data and themes that emerged from the inductive analysis phase. Deductive thematic analysis allows the researcher to confirm or refute exiting theories (Boyatzis, 1998). Thematic analysis, at a latent level requires the researcher go beyond the semantic content of the data to identify fundamental patterns and ideas prevalent in the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This process was necessary to identify the self-presentation strategies adopted by the students from the incidents they reported. Findings and discussion The focus of this paper is on how students negotiate their sense of self by moderating the image they present socially utilising self-presentation strategies, and how their choice of strategies affects their ability to fulfil their potential. The study was guided by the following research questions:

1. What relationship exists between self-presentation strategies and the fulfilment of potential?

2. What self-presentation strategies were adopted by participants?

Findings of this study suggest the existence of a relationship between self-presentation and the fulfilment of potential. A prevalence of assertive strategies led to an on-going pursuit of the achievement of excellence, while defensive strategies tended to align more closely with the desire to attain relationships with peers and moderated achievement. Forced choice dilemma between achievement and affiliation is a phenomenon recognised in considerable research on gifted youth (Gross, 1989, 2010; Jung, Barnett, Gross, & McCormick, 2011). It appeared that confronting the forced choice between excellence and affiliation was a catalyst for identity formation and negotiation. The findings supporting this contention are presented in two parts. First, the three participants, Stephen, Amanda and Blayde are



profiled. Second, the strategies adopted by the three students to facilitate identity negotiation and achieving goals they valued are examined. Student profiles Stephen, Amanda and Blayde had all encountered forced choice within their school environment, some relatively earlier than others did. Each individual presented a different response. Stephen had first become aware of his deep-seated drive to pursue academic excellence in his first year in middle school. He was committed to pursuing academic excellence. He described that he wanted to achieve and that he was at school to learn. Academic achievement was important to his life because he would “need it later”. He perceived that achieving optimally at school would enable him to follow one of the two career options he was considering, engineering or architecture. He engaged in a range of extra-curricular activities at school and home. School activities included school radio, the stage crew, debating and tennis. At home, he pursued his passion for music by composing melodies and writing lyrics. He commented that he always set goals:

At the moment my goal is to become either an architect or an engineer and school is quite important because at school if I was going to become an architect I’d need to do graphics an also do art for design ...but for engineering I’d need physics and maths and things like that, which I get taught at school, so it’s crucial for that career. (Stephen)

From the excerpt, it can be concluded that Stephen’s desired future self is associated with his identity negotiation and guided his choice to pursue achievement goals and academic excellence. A second aspect influencing Stephen’s prioritisation of achievement is his awareness of difference to his age peers of average ability. Along with boredom, awareness of difference appears to have been the catalyst that prompted his search for more appropriate learning opportunities. He recalled that in Year 6 he realised that he wasn’t “achieving to my potential” because his school results were significantly in advance of his average ability age peers, the work was “easy for me”. He anticipated that middle school might be an environment in which he would encounter challenging work but found that after one term in Year 7, he was intensely bored and isolated.

Well in my, the last term in my regular grade, everything was boring, I

wasn’t really participating in the class, I was there in a corner sitting down doing worksheets and I don’t like working like that. (Stephen)

In addition to boredom, Stephen also perceived that he was different to the majority of his age peers.

I feel that I’m different from my classmates ’cause everyone turns up to school ’cause they have to. And I turn up ’cause I want to learn and also the way that everyone behaves. Yeah, everyone’s mucking around, everyone’s talking through everything...everyone’s talking and you can’t even hear what it’s, what’s being said. We’ve got a Science teacher that’s saying just baby words that’s not going in depth about anything, just brushing the surface and it’s, it really slows down the class and it affects me because I’m sitting there in class, everyone else is having a great time, talking to their friends and texting and I’m just sitting there bored. (Stephen)

Affiliation did not appear to be a dominant drive with Stephen. He reported that he had a small stable group of friends. His friendship needs were satisfied through this group, which was not determined by age but by shared interests, much like the type of friendships more often encountered among older adolescents and adults. Stephen achieved a strong sense of belonging at school through his participation in cultural and sporting extra-curricular activities. These factors facilitated Stephen’s decision that achieving academic excellence was his priority at school and assisted his self-advocacy for access to appropriate challenge, successfully negotiating a full year’s grade acceleration and further subject acceleration in two areas in which he was significantly more advanced than his peers. A second participant, Amanda, was unable to pursue academic achievement or affiliation needs within the school environment due to a perceived personal-context mismatch. This is not uncommon in early adolescence (Eccles, 1993) particularly for gifted adolescents whose development is generally asynchronous (Silverman, 2000). Amanda also performed at an elite level and had a strong sense of self as a dancer. In order to overcome the feelings of alienation associated with her lack of sense of fit in the school environment she decided that she would minimise her efforts at school but would seek to achieve within an acceptable average


T 25

range so that she did not draw attention to herself from staff or students or parents. This would enable her to spend less time on school related activities and more time on dance. She articulated that her desire to maintain a good standard of work at school was to keep her options open so that in the “future I can do whatever I want, after dancing”. Academically Amanda perceived that her experience of school had little relevance to her life. Unable to access curriculum that provided appropriate challenge and faced with problematic relationships with some teachers and peers, Amanda felt disconnected. She perceived that she was not understood. “They just don’t get me, they don’t understand how I learn” (Amanda). It appeared that her striving to belong was continuously rejected. There was a clear mismatch between her and the learning environment. Learning did not appear to be mastery based and Amanda reported that there was an expectation that she would engage in work that lacked stimulation and was highly repetitive. She describes her feelings of social alienation when she was “ditched” from her peer group because she did not conform to their norms.

I had to like what they liked, do what they did, I had to be like them to really fit in and then when I started being my own person, which was actually this year, when I went to ballet and I had a spot where I could be myself, I learned that I could be myself...when I was being myself and I kind of got ditched. (Amanda)

She reported that when it first occurred it impacted on her ability to work to potential.

My mind kept drifting to “why”. Why have they decided to disconnect from me, and it’s actually hard to explain. That’s when I stopped enjoying school, I used to love school. I’ve stopped working harder and I don’t know how I can work harder. (Amanda)

The impact of her alienation from her peer group had a profound effect on Amanda’s enjoyment of school and her motivation to pursue achievement. The negative effects were relatively short lived possibly because her ballet environment, in which she was affirmed, provided Amanda with opportunities to evaluate her lack of acceptance at school. She realised

that at school she was not being true to her self. This excerpt describes her thought processes.

When I went to ballet, I don’t know, it just kind of happened, I kind of realised that I’m not really being myself (at school) and I began getting really depressed and thinking that nobody likes me kind of thing. Well I wasn’t sure that I was unhappy in that group. I thought it was just because I wasn’t trying hard enough or something and then I went to ballet and I didn’t have to try at all and it was kind of “Well why do I have to try so hard at school, but why don’t I have to try at all at ballet?” And it really blocked my mind for a while. I kind of got blocked for a while, I kind of didn’t do anything for a while, I actually kind of stopped learning for a while. I stopped doing real homework and kind of just copied the answers from the book because I was trying to figure out what was going on and then I figured it out that I’m not really being myself and there is something wrong with this group, this group isn’t where I need to be right now. (Amanda)

In this excerpt, the process of identity formation as proposed by Erikson (1968) shifts from an unconscious to a conscious process. He elegantly described that this shift occurs when “inner circumstances combine to aggravate a painful or elated identity-consciousness” (p. 23), for instance when individuals’ public identity is not aligned with their inner or true selves. It is possible that this conscious process and its concomitant awareness enabled Amanda to commit to her identity as a dancer. In the dancing environment she was able to uphold her own values, was not required to compromise her sense of self in an effort to fit in with the peer group, and she could focus her dual drives for excellence and affiliation in an environment in which she felt connected and belonged. In contrast to Stephen and Amanda, Blayde was motivated principally by his desire for peer approval and affiliation. In response to the prioritisation of his need for affiliation, he denied his academic ability in his domain of giftedness, refused opportunities for extension and talent development, and produced work that was perceived by peers and teachers as average. Blayde guardedly acknowledged: “I’ve always like English probably because I'm good at it and it's like my best subject. I like writing English and apparently, I'm good with words.” English was the area in which Blayde had demonstrated significant potential from a very young age.



However, in relation to his peers he denied his ability. He said that although many people perceived that he had talent in English he was “just not as good as they suspected.” He was keen to accept offers of extension work conditionally.

Only if it was offered to everyone in my class, I don’t want to be different to everybody else by going into year 11. It would be so intimidating everyone would alienate you. I just want to do the same as everyone else. I hate being singled out. (Blayde)

Intensely aware of difference to his age peers, Blayde made every attempt to minimise the visibility of his giftedness. His peer group was his reference point and the data indicated many instances of his expressed desire to be the same as his peers, to be an invisible class member and “not try too hard” because that would have repercussions in terms of peer alienation. The themes of alienation and belonging were prevalent throughout Blayde’s interviews. He spoke frequently of the value of friendship stating that “It’s really bad not having friends at school. You kind of just sit on your own and you get picked on if you don’t have any friends, so friendship is probably a big part.” When asked what he would advise new pupils to his school environment he commented:

Don’t ruin it for yourself. Like don’t say things that other people don’t like and then eventually when you have, you find yourself alone with no friends and everyone is bullying you. Sometimes around groups of people, that have a different opinion, you can’t say what you really think because they’ll like ridicule you. First impressions are really important. (Blayde)

Blayde’s prioritisation of affiliation over achievement appeared to place some constraints on his development, chiefly requiring him to create a public identity that would enable him to align with the values and interests expressed by his peers. In the next section, the self-presentation strategies adopted by the participants to negotiate their identities to align with the prevailing environments and the consequential outcomes for achieving their potential are discussed. A brief definition of each strategy is followed by examples of its use drawn from the

data. It is necessary to elaborate on these strategies, as self-presentation terminology is somewhat different to general societal interpretation. Anecdotal and interview data are reported to provide a context in which the participants functioned and the self-presentation strategy was demonstrated. The strategies are presented according to the two competing drives noted by Gross (1989) in the forced choice dilemma, achievement and affiliation. Self-presentation strategies Identity exploration and commitment processes influenced the choice of self-presentation strategies adopted by the participants to negotiate and establish their desired self. The self-presentation strategies adopted to facilitate the negotiation process affected the students’ ability to demonstrate achievement commensurate with their ability. Stephen and Amanda, who were committed to the achievement of excellence, one academically and the other in performing arts, nevertheless both selected a range of assertive self-presentation strategies and employed relatively fewer defensive self-presentation strategies. They both exhibited continued achievement drive albeit in different environments. Conversely, Blayde pursued his need for affiliation. He utilised relatively fewer assertive self-presentation strategies in comparison to defensive strategies, and when assertive strategies were utilised they were noticeably associated with a need for peer approval (See Table 2). Identity development appeared to be a major factor influencing the choices these gifted adolescents considered. The strategies selected appeared to align with three aspects of identity formation, which were the students’ sense of self founded on the awareness of their current personal and social identity, their commitment to that identity, and in some cases their perceptions of their future selves. Achievement drive Assertive strategies selected by two of the three participants, Stephen and Amanda, were somewhat similar. Minimal use was made of ingratiation with self-promotion and entitlement being the two strategies revealed most frequently in the data. Exemplification was another strategy used successfully by Stephen to access more appropriately challenging curriculum.


T 27

Table 2. Self-presentation strategies and strategy sub-types adopted by student participants

Self presentation Strategies & Strategy Subtypes Blayde Stephen Amanda Assertive Strategies

Ingratiation *** ** * Exemplification 0 *** 0

Self-Promotion 0 *** *** Entitlement 0 ** ***

Basking and Blasting *** 0 * Defensive Strategies

Accounts Excuses ** * ** Justification *** * * Disclaimers Hedging * ** 0 Faulty Memory * ** 0 Sandbagging *** 0 0

Frequency of strategy utilisation: 0 – not used; * – rarely used; ** – often used, *** - frequently /consistently used.

Ingratiation is a self-presentation strategy motivated by a desire for approval (Jones & Pitman, 1982). Approval and acceptance affect the manner in which individuals are treated and so it is not uncommon that this self-presentation strategy be adopted to achieve goals. Stephen used ingratiation effectively with staff and administrators, as he perceived them to be power brokers in the school environment, who were able to assist him to access opportunities that would facilitate his endeavours to strive for excellence. This strategy enabled him to establish an image of “reliability and extreme maturity” (Stephen, Report comment). Documentary evidence indicates that he was considered by teachers to “have made an excellent contribution” to his accelerated grade, and that he was an enthusiastic student who set high standards for himself (School/Report). Commitment to the achievement of excellence and constructing a public (social) identity that aligned with his personal identity was crucial to this student and self-presentation strategies that facilitated this were utilised effectively within the given environment. Individuals who are perceived as intelligent and competent generally fare better within social groups (Leary, 1996). It is understandable then that most people often attempt to present themselves as such. Self-promotion refers to an individual’s attempt to be perceived as competent, knowledgeable and skilled (Jones & Pitman, 1982). Exemplification involves self-presentations that convey impressions of virtue, going beyond what is expected (Leary, 1996), and entitlement is a strategy in which an individual claims responsibility and credit for positive achievements (Tedeschi & Lindskold,

1976). The following example encapsulates these self-presentation strategies.

I probably see myself as the most involved person at my school in my grade. I’m a captain, I’m in the radio, and stage crew. I was doing musical earlier this year. I do debating, and I’m always involved in special events and things like that. I think my teachers see me as very responsible. Well in my schoolwork, I have a good work ethic. Other things, I don’t tease anyone, and I don’t call people names or anything like that. I cross at the traffic lights, one of the few people who do; I always try hard to achieve something. I think I’m above average academically, Well, I understand more concepts, and get better marks than the majority of our class...not of our class but of my age group, definitely my age group and year. (Stephen)

Only one of the possible three major categories of defensive self-presentation strategies, accounts, was evident in two of the participants striving for excellence, and there was limited use of the strategies. Accounts are verbal explanations for unanticipated, undesirable or disappointing behaviour designed to rectify a self-presentation predicament and is inherently a face-saving device (Leary, 1996). Two types of accounts adopted were excuses and justification. Excuses are verbal explanations that deny responsibility for negative events (Tedeschi & Lindskold, 1976) and justification occurs when the person engaged in negative behaviour



(Gibson & Sachau, 2000) accepts some responsibility for it. For example, one participant provided an example of an excuse to explain why she lacked engagement in class, a factor she believed affected her ability to achieve:

Distractions, it also depends on the environment in the classroom. If it is right next to a green area, a bird, like the environment, what colour the walls are, could distract me. A lot of things distract me, I’m like OCD. Other people, um, other pages in my textbook. I think I could learn more if there was less distraction, if I was in a black-box room and there was just me and the teacher I’d learn more. (Amanda)

In this example of an excuse the participant’s lack of engagement is highly dependent on both the internal and external environment. Distraction is perceived to be anything that is external to herself, thus she asserts that for optimal learning to take place she needs to be in an environment where there is no stimulus apart from the teacher, because she has no responsibility for external stimuli. Justification, on the other hand, is evident in the following example in which a participant is explaining why his Mathematics results decline at the beginning of each year. In this example, he initially states that it is because of time he spends over the vacation with his father but only apportions partial responsibility for his declining marks to his father. He is ultimately aware that he is responsible for his results as was indicated when questioned further.

I’ve got sort of a pattern happening, because the last two years I’ve got a C in Maths, first term. I’m not sure why...some of it definitely comes from my dad, ’cause it’s the period that mum’s away and my dad’s um, well he’s sort of over the top in everything. (Stephen)

Overall, the prevalent use of assertive self-presentation was motivated by the desire to accomplish excellence and access learning that was commensurate with identified potential and mastery based. Utilisation of these strategies did not always translate into academic achievement but did sustain the desire for excellence and the pursuance of opportunities that would enable fulfilment of potential. Students saw that they were self-efficacious, an aspect that assisted ongoing identity formation. As such assertive self-presentation strategies were perceived to

have been associated with the development of a positive sense of self, a level of autonomy, and sustained motivation. Affiliation Drive Contrary to the pursuit of excellence and the associated assertive self-presentation strategies, Blayde demonstrated a prevalence of defensive strategies. Key defensive strategies that he adopted were frequent use of accounts (excuses and justification), disclaimers, (hedging and faulty memory) and sandbagging. The following example provides insight into the processes moderating his sense of self. In this example of justification, Blayde attempts to justify a bullying incident in which he was peripherally involved. He does not want to be identified as a bully as he had at times been a victim of bullying, however, he was simultaneously aware of the protective function of the peer group. He therefore denies any responsibility for the incident laying blame firmly with the victim by saying that the victim invited the bullying behaviour because he was obsessed with bullying and exhibited a range of behaviours that made him a target.

Yeah, a guy in my last year, was so paranoid about people bullying him when they actually weren’t, he got sent to the support class twice that year when nobody else did and he thought that everyone else was bullying him. He was like a massive ‘goodie two shoes’. So on free dress day, he had this shirt and my friend was like, ‘I like your shirt’ and he was being serious, and this kid was so paranoid about everyone bullying him when like pretty much no one does. People only started bullying him because he was like so paranoid about it. (Blayde)

Blayde’s use of justification in regards to this event has a dual function, to protect his self-identity and establish peer loyalty. Had he defended the victim, his actions may have threatened his group acceptance. This use of justification enabled Blayde to remain aligned with his peers. Furthermore, he attempted to justify his peers’ behaviour and the lack of his response in the face of bullying through seeking to normalise the behaviour demonstrated by his peers through pathologising the victim’s preoccupation with bullying as an obsession. This type of response is also an example of basking and blasting, a dual response in which an


T 29

attempt is made by an individual to prove association with others who are successful, powerful, attractive, popular or are otherwise held in high esteem (basking) and disassociation from people whom one perceives negatively (blasting). These strategies were utilised frequently by Blayde who sought acceptance and affiliation. The data reflect consistent descriptions of groups who were “not to be associated with” because they were “rebels, nerds, friendless” (Blayde). He defined his group as the “cool” group, one which he defined as “not nerdy and we do our work” as opposed to the “rebel kids that you don’t even go near...they do skating and illicit narcotics” (Blayde). Group identity within the school environment was critical to Blayde’s well-being. He defined himself by the group with whom he belonged. For instance, when he was asked how he perceived certain groups at school he was quick to respond that the views of others were not his personal views alone but echoed what “pretty much everyone in our group thinks” (BI2). His subject interests and those in which he achieved were generally those approved of by peers. In his domain of giftedness he stated that he worked hard but did not achieve to the expectations of others because “I’m just not as bright as they think I am” (Blayde). Sandbagging was the final defensive strategy revealed in Blayde’s data. It is a self-presentation strategy in which a false claim of inability, or fake demonstration, is staged to create low expectation of performance (Gibson & Sachau, 2000). Academic achievement in his domain of giftedness was constrained. A number of strategies were used to control the visibility of his giftedness. These included denial of ability, refusal to engage in opportunities for extension unless they were provided for the whole class, and achievement of outcomes that were at least three years below his predicted potential, but were aligned to the average grade those individuals in his peer group attained. Creating a public identity that aligned closely with peers had implications for identity development and achievement. Personal identity development may have been restricted through Blayde’s high usage of ingratiation, which facilitated assimilation into a peer group. The data revealed several ingratiation tactics such as, opinion conformity, rendering favours and attractive self-presentation (that is, displaying characteristics favoured by the group). In the following example, Blayde describes the importance of opinion conformity and the consequences of voicing an opinion contrary to that of the group.

Sometimes, when you're around groups of people that have a different opinion than you, you can't say what you really think because everybody else, like you can't say what you think sometimes because they'll always like ridicule you for that. (Blayde)

Blayde’s awareness of attractive self-presentation is obvious in his description about impressions and how to create a “good” impression. Impressions deemed as “good” are highly dependent on the values held by each group. Ascertaining group values is difficult.

First impressions are always really important; um they depend on who you're with... ’cause everybody hangs out in groups, some group might value something and some groups might value something else and they hang out in different groups because they have conflicting values, I guess, and they don't like each other because of that, so it depends on who you're with and it's really hard to judge what they're interested in and what they like when you first come into a group. You just kind of don't say anything stupid and stay out of the way I guess. You need to know what kind of different groups people are interested in and what their attitudes are like um, and you know which groups shouldn't you get involved with because they're not very nice people. (Blayde)

He reported that his group was the “cool group” students who generally conformed to school rules, did their work, did not engage in inappropriate games unlike the “Nerd Empire” who played “Yugioh (card game) at lunch time”, or the “Rebels” whose idea of cool “is probably like skating and like doing illicit narcotics” (Blayde). The implications of group identity for Blayde affected his autonomy. Compliance to group standards appeared to govern social and academic achievements. Academically Blayde moderated his achievement so that his results aligned with his peers. In subjects which peers thought favourable and high achievement was considered positive, such as computer graphics, Blayde achieved highly. Despite learning processes involved in this subject quickly and being highly competent in the software, achievements commented on by the teacher as of being at a highly proficient level, Blayde positioned himself as average. He appeared to perceive that any deviance from the group norm



indicated a lack of loyalty and might alienate him. Consequently, his demonstrated achievement fell short of his identified potential. Conclusion Significant shifts in social identity are common in adolescence as a function of the changes in social context and cognitive development (Tanti, Stukas, Halloran, & Foddy, 2011). Participants articulated increased awareness of these shifts, from negotiation of an assimilated group identity, through the desire to maintain a personal identity within a group, to commitment to a scholarly identity, personal achievement expectations and goals that were likely to promote fulfilment of potential. Forced choice seems likely to have direct relevance for identity development and achievement. Stephen and Amanda’s choice of achievement assisted in their continued talent development and striving to fulfil potential as well as increased autonomy. Conversely, Blayde’s choice of affiliation resulted in underachieving behaviour, the lack of sustained talent development and increased peer dependence. The students selected self-presentation strategies that aligned with their prioritisation of choice and aided negotiation of their desired identities. The strategies utilised tended to facilitate or restrict ongoing talent development. Assertive strategies appear to facilitate the ongoing pursuit of fulfilment of potential, autonomy and motivation while defensive strategies tend to create dependence on peers and limit self-regulation in both academic achievement and identity formation. Four person-context constructs in environments shape and influence identity development in some way. They are validation, affirmation, affiliation and affinity (Mahoney, 1998). A mismatch between these constructs and individuals is likely to impact on development. Lack of person-context match appears to have influenced participant decisions when encountering the forced choice dilemma. Three options were observed in the participants’ decisions: Stephen prioritised achievement, Blayde affiliation, and Amanda, for whom there appeared to be the greatest lack of fit, chose an alternative environment in which to seek both achievement and affiliation. In doing so, she limited her performance and integration at school. It is considered that the more closely aligned the person-context match was, the more able the student was to negotiate his/her

identity autonomously. Stephen demonstrated the closest person-context alignment and he was able to resolve issues to some extent through strong self-advocacy, which enabled him to gain access to more appropriate curriculum through full grade and subject acceleration. All four person-context constructs were evident in his data. Blayde is considered to have achieved affiliation, to some degree, and partial validation in the school environment. Affiliation was negotiated through moderation of the visibility of his ability, and validation arose from his participation with peers in extension classes. The least evidence of these constructs appeared in Amanda’s data, so it is unsurprising that she redirected her desire for achievement of excellence to an extra-curricular pursuit, where she was validated, affirmed, had her affiliation needs met and had ongoing affinity. For optimal learning and psychosocial development, it is necessary that schools provide environments, therefore, where students’ potential and needs are matched with opportunities for validation, affirmation, affiliation and affinity. Student perspectives in early adolescence are critical if they are to remain engaged, avoid the development of underachieving behaviours and strive to reach their potential in schools. In selecting a school for a gifted adolescent person-context match is therefore an important factor to consider for optimal learning and psychosocial development. References Bosma, H. A., & Kunnen, E. S. (2008). Identity in

context is not yet identity development-in-context. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 281-289. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.03.001

Bosson, J.K., Weaver, J.R., & Prewitt-Freilino, J. L. (2012). Concealing to belong, revealing to be known: Classification expectations and self-threats among persons with concealable stigmas. Self and Identity, 11, 114-135. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2010.513508

Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-253. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197

Clark, B. (2008). Growing up gifted. (7th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. (2005). Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. (2nd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.


T 31

Crabtree, B. F. & Miller, W. L. (1999). A template approach to text analysis: Developing and using codebooks. In B. Crabtree & W. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 163-177). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Cross, T., Coleman, L. & Terharr-Yonkers, M. (1991). The social cognition of gifted adolescents in schools: managing the stigma of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 44-55.

Dai, D. Y. (2004). How universal is the big-fish-little-pond effect? American Psychologist, 59(4), 267-268. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.4.267

Davis, G. & Rimm, S. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., & Mac Iver, D. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents' experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist, 48(2), 90-101. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.48.2.90

Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.) New York: Norton.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.

Foust, R. C., & Booker, K. (2007). The social cognition of gifted adolescents. RoeperReview, 29(5), 45-57.

Gagné, F. (2004). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. High Ability Studies, 15(2), 119-147. doi: 10.1080/1359813042000314682

Gibson, B., & Sachau, D. (2000). Sandbagging as a self-presentational strategy: Claiming to be less than you are. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(1), 56-69.

Goffman, Erving. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York. NY: Doubleday, Anchor Books.

Gross, M. U. M. (1989). The pursuit of excellence or the search for intimacy? The forced-choice dilemma of gifted youth. Roeper Review, 11(4), 189-194. doi: 10.1080/02783198909553207

Gross, M. U. M. (2010). All gifts are equal but some gifts are more equal than others: Variations on an Australian theme. In Miraca Gross, in her own write: A lifetime in gifted education (pp.20-42). Sydney: GERRIC.

Jones, E. E. & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jung, J. Y., Barnett, K., Gross, M. U. M., & McCormick, J. (2011). Levels of intellectual giftedness, culture, and the forced-choice dilemma. Roeper Review, 33(3), 182-197. doi: 10.1375/ajgc.21.1.85

Kvale, S., & Brinkman, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kerr, B., Colangelo, N., & Gaeth, J. (1988). Gifted adolescents’ attitudes towards their giftedness.

Gifted Child Quarterly, 32(2), 245-247. doi: 10.1177/001698628803200201

Leary, M. R. (1996). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behaviour. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Leary, M. R. & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34-47.

Lee, S. J., Quigley, B. M., Nesler, M. S., Corbett, A. B. & Tedeschi, J. T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(4), 701-722.

Mahoney, A. S. (1998). In search of the gifted identity: From abstract concepts to workable counseling constructs. Roeper Review, 20(3), 222-226. doi:.org/10.1080/0278319980553884.

Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551-558.

Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology. New York: Wiley.

Marcus, H. & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954-969.

Marsh, H. W., Hau, K-T. & Craven, R. (2004). The Big-Fish-Little-Pond effect stands up to scrutiny. American Psychologist, 59(4), 269-271. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.59.4.269

Pasupathi, M., & Weeks, T. L. (2011). Integrating self and experience in narrative as a route to adolescent identity construction. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 131, 31-43. doi: 10.1002/cd.287

Preckel, F., Götz, T. & Frenzel, A. (2010). Ability grouping of gifted students: Effects on academic self-concept and boredom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 451-472. doi: 10.1348/000709909x480716

Reis, S. M. & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly. 44(3), 152-170.

Rimm, S. (1997). An underachievement epidemic. Educational Leadership, 54(7), 18-22.

Silverman, L. K. (1998). Through the lens of giftedness. Roeper Review, 20(3), 204-210.

Silverman, L. K. (Ed.) (2000). Counseling the Gifted and Talented. Denver, CO: Love.

Steinberg, L. (2005). Adolescence (7 th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Swann, W. B. Jr., & Bosson, J. K. (2008). Identity negotiation: A theory of self and social interaction. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3 ed. pp. 448-471). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Swann, W. B. Jr., Johnson, R. E., & Bosson, J. K. (2009). Identity negotiation at work. Research in Organizational Behaviour,29, 81-109. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2009.06.005

Tanti, C., Stukas, A. A., Halloran, M. J., & Foddy, M. (2011). Social identity change: Shifts in social identity during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 3, 555-567. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.05.012

Tedeschi, J. T., & Lindskold, S. (1976). Social psychology: Interdependence, interaction, and influence. New York: Wiley.



Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research design and methods. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zuo, L. & Tao, L. (2001). Importance of personality in gifted children’s identity formation. Journal of Advanced Academic, 12, 212-223. doi:10.4219/jsge-2001-667

Contact details Susan Luus Email: [email protected] Biographical details Susan Luus is the founder and Director for GiftEd, a consultancy that provides specialist support for the education of gifted students. She is a dedicated educator with over 25 years’ experience in Catholic, State and Independent School systems in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. After initially training in Special Education training, Sue has spent the last 12 years focussing on gifted education. She has a double MEd in Gifted Education, which included original research on Self Presentation and Underachievement in Gifted Early Adolescents. In addition to her specialist consulting activities, Sue has presented at local and international conferences, and is the SENG Liaison for Australia.

James J. Watters is an Associate Professor in Education at QUT. He has a strong commitment to apply research to practice. He works extensively with education sectors to provide professional development and to explore effective ways of supporting teachers to challenge students gifted in science and mathematics. He has received the QUT Award for Outstanding Contribution in 2000, Vice Chancellor’s Award for Outstanding Service 2007, alongwith awards for science education and gifted education initiatives.

Date post:	21-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	6 times
Download:	0 times

Gifted early adolescents’ negotiating identity: A case ... · environments. It extended the...

Documents