The Problem With Labeling Kids “Gifted” (And Why It’s Time to Rethink the Term)
A parent at a school meeting once turned to me and said, “My kid’s teacher called him ‘gifted,’ but honestly, it just makes me cringe.” Her confession sparked a lively conversation about the baggage this label carries. Turns out, she’s far from alone in her discomfort.
The term “gifted” has been used for decades to identify students with exceptional abilities, but its implications are increasingly being questioned. Critics argue that it’s exclusionary, reinforces harmful stereotypes, and oversimplifies the complexities of human potential. Let’s unpack why this label rubs so many people the wrong way—and explore what we could do differently.
The Trouble With “Gifted” as a Permanent Label
Calling a child “gifted” often feels like stamping them with a permanent identity rather than acknowledging a set of skills or interests. Imagine being told at age eight that you’re “gifted” in math. Suddenly, every mistake feels like a failure to live up to that label. Research by psychologist Carol Dweck on “fixed vs. growth mindsets” shows how such labels can backfire: Kids praised for innate “giftedness” often avoid challenges to protect their “special” status, fearing that effort undermines their perceived talent.
Meanwhile, peers excluded from the “gifted” category internalize a different message: You’re not special. You don’t have what it takes. This binary framing ignores the reality that abilities develop unevenly and depend on opportunity, support, and environment. A child who thrives in a hands-on science program might struggle with abstract math concepts—and vice versa. Reducing their potential to a single label dismisses this nuance.
Historical Roots (And Why They’re Outdated)
The concept of “giftedness” emerged alongside early 20th-century IQ testing, which sought to categorize intellectual ability objectively. But modern neuroscience and education research have debunked the idea that intelligence is fixed or one-dimensional. We now know that factors like socioeconomic privilege, access to enrichment activities, and even teacher biases shape who gets identified as “gifted.” For example, Black and Hispanic students are disproportionately overlooked in gifted programs, despite having equal potential.
The term also carries elitist undertones. Calling someone “gifted” implies they’ve been bestowed with a rare, almost magical quality—something others can’t attain through effort. This undermines the value of hard work and perpetuates the myth that success is about innate talent rather than persistence.
The Hidden Emotional Toll
Parents of “gifted” kids often share stories of unexpected struggles. One mother described her daughter’s anxiety after being placed in an accelerated program: “She started saying, ‘What if I’m not smart enough anymore?’” The pressure to maintain this identity can lead to perfectionism, burnout, and social isolation, especially when children feel they must prioritize achievement over curiosity or creativity.
On the flip side, students left out of gifted programs may lose confidence. A high school teacher once told me about a student who’d been rejected from a gifted track in elementary school. “She still brings it up,” the teacher said. “Like it defined her limits.”
Alternatives to the “Gifted” Framework
If the term is so problematic, how should we discuss children’s abilities? Many educators advocate for a more flexible, inclusive approach:
1. Focus on Specific Strengths: Instead of labeling a child “gifted,” describe their skills contextually: “Sophia shows advanced problem-solving in physics” or “Jaden has a remarkable ability to synthesize complex ideas.” This recognizes abilities without boxing the child into an identity.
2. Emphasize Growth and Effort: Praise progress, not fixed traits. Saying “You worked hard to master this—well done!” encourages resilience. Schools can adopt “mastery-based” learning models, where students advance by demonstrating understanding rather than competing for a “gifted” label.
3. Broaden Definitions of Intelligence: Not every child will excel in traditional academic areas—and that’s okay. Programs that celebrate artistic talent, leadership, empathy, or mechanical aptitude create more opportunities for kids to shine.
4. Use Terms Like “Advanced Learner”: Some districts now say students have “advanced learning needs” instead of “giftedness.” This shifts the focus to providing tailored support rather than assigning status.
What Parents and Educators Can Do
Change starts with small shifts in language and mindset:
– Avoid comparisons: Saying “You’re so much smarter than your classmates!” fosters arrogance and anxiety. Instead, try: “I love how you’re challenging yourself!”
– Normalize Struggle: Share stories of famous scientists, artists, or athletes who failed repeatedly before succeeding. This helps kids see effort as part of the process.
– Advocate for Inclusive Enrichment: Push for programs that allow students to explore advanced topics without gatekeeping. A robotics club or writing workshop open to all curious kids can be more effective than exclusive gifted tracks.
The Bigger Picture: Rethinking Success
Critiquing the “gifted” label isn’t about dismissing children’s talents—it’s about rejecting a system that sorts kids into hierarchies. As author Alfie Kohn argues, “When we rank students, we trivialize learning.” True equity means giving every child opportunities to grow, regardless of whether they fit an arbitrary standard of “giftedness.”
So, yes, plenty of people dislike the term—not because they resent high-achieving kids, but because they believe in a world where all children are seen as works in progress, full of evolving potential. After all, being called “gifted” might feel like a compliment, but being called “capable of greatness” is a promise. And that’s a label worth fighting for.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » The Problem With Labeling Kids “Gifted” (And Why It’s Time to Rethink the Term)