When Gifted Kids Upset the Social Order
Author: Center for Identity Potential
“Windstorm in Bubbleland”: When Gifted Kids Upset the Social Order
by Kristin Cotts
Gifted Kids Can Be Annoying
Gifted children can be disruptive in the classroom and annoy their teachers and peers in many different ways. One of the most common complaints we hear from parents in our practice is that their child is disruptive because the work is too easy and they are bored. They don’t have enough to stimulate their minds, so they get into mischief. Other gifted children are disruptive regardless of the difficulty or ease of the work due to issues with regulation. Still others are disruptive out of frustration over not being able to demonstrate what they know. These are all just different manifestations of the same root problem.
The gifted-child-is-disruptive-problem that interests me most was described in a 2008 study about how teachers subconsciously have a negative affect toward gifted children due to concerns around “the potential use of high intelligence toward social noncompliance” (Geake and Gross, 2008).
In [early human] society where language was beginning to evolve…an individual with marked superiority in intelligence could have a superior understanding of the various relationships between members of the group and could thus be regarded as having the potential to affect, manipulate, exploit, or even distort the group’s social relationships (Geake, 2000)
The individual who even seemed to show the potential to develop such powers could be viewed as a threat to the group. If so, then it could be in the group’s self-interest to cut such a precocious tall poppy down to size” (Geake and Gross, 2008).
Geake and Gross posit that teachers and other students have a negative attitude toward academically gifted students due to an evolutionary social defense mechanism to protect the social order from those who might be able to dismantle it. Certainly, this kind of disruption can be problematic if it disrupts learning, but if a group of people do in fact have bias against neurodivergent children, then it’s clear that the social order needs to be challenged in that group.
Fred Rogers and the Windstorm
History, literature, and film are full of gifted truth-tellers, who are banished or otherwise punished. Elphaba in Wicked is the most contemporary example of this. According to the musical, the Wicked Witch of the West was actually a misunderstood animal rights activist with great power. One of my favorite gifted-truth tellers who upset the social order is Hildegarde Hummingbird. She shows up in what some might consider an unlikely place: an episode of Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood from 1980 called Windstorm in Bubbleland.
In addition to being a master of understanding child development, Fred Rogers was a composer and pianist. He wrote some operas for his children’s show using the immense talent of some of his neighbors in the cast. He was also, as we shall see, a semi-secret social activist.
Windstorm in Bubbleland
takes place in a utopia full of bubbles that glimmer and shimmer and float around for all to enjoy. “There is never any trouble here in Bubbleland,” Jim Reardon sings, looking like a cable news anchor, when cable news was just a glint in Rupert Murdoch’s eye. His newscast is sponsored by Spray Sweater, an aerosol in a canthat the company claims has the power to spray a sweater into existence “to protect your bubbles or to just wear.” Betty of Betty’s Better Sweaters (Betty Aberlin) points out that it’s a fraud, that sweaters must be knitted with skill and care, and that the cans are filled with only air.
At this point the Lady Elaine puppet, playing the part of Hildegarde Hummingbird, flies in to announce that their bubbles are going to be blown away due to the overuse of the aerosol cans of Spray-Sweater, which is starting to create strong winds. When Hildegard tells the other characters that trouble is coming to Bubbleland, they dismiss her as alarmist. “But I’m just doing my job!” cries Hildegard, “Why won’t you believe me?” The three humans (actually two humans and one porpoise) line up and shout in unison, “Because we don’t want to!”
Well, it turns out that the diabolical CEO behind Spray Sweater, named W.I. Norton Donovan (W.I.N.D) is the wind itself. He is very proud of the apparent success of his plan to blow the bubbles around while also making a lot of money selling Spray Sweater. He then transforms from business man into the wind, donning a long, shimmering cape and sprouting what looks like tinsel on his eyebrows and mustache. With an evil laugh, he threatens to finally send the bubbles flying out of Bubbleland.
The humans and porpoise, played by opera star François Clemens in a bizarre porpoise suit with a giant zipper, realize that Hildegarde was right. They ask her for help, and she tells them that Bubbleland is not about the bubbles; it’s about the people who live there. She says: “You can blow more bubbles, but you can’t blow another you.” She agrees to help them and tells them to build a wall on the edge of the ocean. In a stroke of genius and intense skill, the also gifted Betty of Betty’s Better Sweater’s speed knits a net to enclose and stabilize a pile of crates, which act as a bulwark against the wind. But it is not enough. The wind hovers dangerously on the edge of the shore as the bubbles dance wildly. Hildegarde flies directly into the wind, driving the W.I.N.D. away. She is knocked unconscious and feared dead. The rest of the cast sings a lament. She wakes up, and the friends apologize. The final line of the opera is, “There will never be a trouble here in bubble land that we, good friends together, cannot end.”
Transcending Victimhood
In the context of child development and particularly the asynchronous development we see in gifted children, Windstorm in Bubbleland is a perfect parable for the non-normative person disrupting the social order. If we look at what HIldegarde Hummingbird has to go through to be true to herself, we can see parallels to the struggle and pain of a child who has the capacity to disrupt the social order for the better.
Hildegarde has the gift of flight and the gift of being able to confront a hard reality (the disruption of bubbles) that others are unable to accept. They cannot fly to other places to see what is happening to the bubbles (though it seems like the porpoise should be able to swim there - I think that’s a plot hole). When they don’t believe her warnings, she self-isolates and feels misunderstood. She gives them another chance, and then when she saves the day, they accept her.
It’s important not to look at Hildegarde as a victim dependent on others “believing her” and “understanding her.” In reality, her pain and struggle do not come from being rejected. The rejection is very real, but it is a symptom. Her fundamental problem is that she is not able to use her gifts to help others. Hidelgarde’s reward is not acceptance by the others. Her reward is the freedom to be able to use her gifts to contribute to the well-being of others. Developing friendships co-occurs with that process, but acceptance and friends need to be congruent with self to be meaningful.
Accomplices in Disruption
I believe that parents, educators, and counselors have an obligation to support a child’s disruption of the social order, which, by the way, is not the same as disrupting the classroom or the family. We can support them to develop social, emotional, and intellectual awareness so they they can develop skills in a way that fits them This process also requires the development of moral reasoning, because all social order disruptions are not created equal.
If we simply focus on helping a child feel better about being different, we risk reinforcing their isolation. On the other hand, if we give them opportunities to learn how to both use their gifts and integrate into society, this complex and arduous journey can lead to an ability to activate potential and connect to others, creating change in the various systems and institutions along the way.
Fred Rogers Was a Gentle Radical
Fred Rogers was ahead of his time. His gentle demeanor masked a radical rebelliousness against the greed and self-absorption of modern society. More than thirty years before Occupy Wall Street brought the concept of corporate control to the forefront, he created a children’s opera about an environmental crisis, a deceptive news organization, and a greedy corporate boss.
As an educational tool, Windstorm in Bubbleland is a shining example of how to combine social, emotional, and cognitive development with moral development and political awareness. In doing so, the opera underlines the importance of having a sense of meaning. Hildegarde, like the other denizens of Bubbleland, has a purpose. In the case of gifted learners, the purpose may manifest in a more extreme way than the normative, but purpose is the beginning, end, and in-between of supporting any learner.
Just One More Thing…
While I understand the purpose of having the brilliant François Clemens in the opera, I don’t see why he had to wear that horrible porpoise costume. I don’t understand the purpose of the porpoise. But then again, I’m not the one who needs to. The porpoise determines his own purpose.
References
Geake, J. G., & Gross, M. U. (2008). Teachers’ negative affect toward academically gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208319704
Rogers, F. (1980, May 23). Making an Opera; Windstorm in Bubbleland. Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood. Season 10. Episode 15. Pittsburgh, PA; WQED.
Way Home Studio Image by wayhomestudio on Freepik
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.
Plans and Schemes and Strategies and Dreams I See Schemes Our world is full of schemes. They’re everywhere. Advertising is all about encouraging schemes. Buy this product, and your whole life will be better. The detergent won’t just clean your clothes. This restaurant won’t just feed you a good meal. These products will actually change the meaning of your existence on this earth. Clean clothes will transform you from your mediocre self into a model parent with clean children and an important job. The smiling, healthy faces in ads for fast food promise that buying their food will bring you health, happiness, and great teeth. As a musician, I have attended many meetings and conferences that provided all kinds of schemes for how to “make it.” Create an electronic press-kit. Make sure your name is after the @ in your email rather than using gmail or aol or whatever. Network, network, network. As an educator, I once attended a conference on differentiated learning where the speaker suggested that we deal with the increased workload of creating five different lesson plans per class by working on them during the commercials of a football game or when the teams are setting up their next play. Never mind that not everyone watches football. There is nothing inherently wrong with schemes. However, they are not grounded in foundational understandings of who we are and what we want and need. As a result, they seldom provide the change that we might want. Distinguishing between plans and schemes is important for any of us who are working to effect change in our own lives and to assist others with that process as well. Schemes and plans can both fail; they can also both succeed. The difference is that plans integrate a broader understanding of ourselves and the various systems we encounter as compared to schemes. Plans vs. Schemes Schemes are something we try to do to get what we want quickly without emphasis on who we are or our sense of purpose. If I want to get out of debt and one week I decide to start walking dogs in the neighborhood without taking into account other factors in my life and then the next day I go to the racetrack and the next day I invest in cryptocurrency, I am scheming. There is nothing inherently wrong with schemes. Trying out different ideas is essential to figuring out what we want, which engenders and catalyzes growth. But most of the time schemes in and of themselves don’t work in terms of creating meaningful change. A plan, on the other hand, is connected to a goal that attempts to reflect what we really need, who we really are, and how we relate to the world. Plans can provide a guide for us to engage in the process of change. If I’m working with an executive function coaching client, for example, I start by creating a relationship and evaluating where they are at in terms of what executive functions are giving them trouble. I would probably not say right off the bat, “Oh, you’re late all the time, let’s get you an alarm clock.” I need to know if that is going to work. Have they tried it before? Rather than only looking at the symptom - being late all the time - I look at it in the context of all the different systems in the client’s life. My mentor Andy Mahoney created a model for this process called the FIT, originally called the Gifted Idenitity Formation Model. Read about it here. Understanding these systems puts us in a position to create plans that are consistent with who we are. When Schemes are Called Strategies Unfortunately, schemes are often presented as plans or strategies. For example, when executive function coaches say they are providing strategies and they tell a child with severe EF problems to start using a calendar without providing scaffolding, they are presenting the child with a scheme rather than a plan or strategy. A strategy is a very specific process that will only be effective in this case if it accounts for where the child is developmentally. It should not be about controlling that child. It should about empowering them. And like all educational and therapeutic tools, a strategy needs to be developed through the relationship between the coach and the client. A Big Self-Helping of Schemes The self-help world is full of schemes too. For example, I just watched a talk by Dr. Brené Brown on the “Seven Pillars of Trust.” They fit into the acronym BRAVING, and they are as follows: (1) Boundaries, (2) Reliability, (3) Accountability, (4) Vault, (5) Integrity, (6) Non-judgment, and (7) Generosity. According to Brown, we should use these concepts to evaluate whether or not someone is worthy of trust. Do they set clear boundaries? Are they accountable? Will they hold what I share in confidence? Are they willing to do the right thing in difficult situations? Are they non-judgmental? Are they generous? According to Brown, only if you can answer yes to all of these questions is someone worthy of your trust. While it’s crucial evaluate our relationships before baring our souls, BRAVING offers nothing in the way of a plan for change. It is essentially a screening rubric that casts us as gatekeepers of our souls, rather than active, risk-taking human beings. How can we know if someone has these qualities if we don’t interact with them? How can we understand boundaries if we don’t cross them sometimes? How can we be compassionate if we avoid getting hurt? BRAVING presents neither a strategy nor a plan. It is a scheme. It sends the message that we should avoid painful experiences rather than learn how to navigate them. Another Acronym A more empowering way of looking at these descriptors is to cast them as skills we need to develop. How do we (1) Set our own boundaries and Recognize those of others? (2) Become more reliable and Ascertain someone else’s capacity to be reliable? (3) Take accountability for ourselves and Hold others accountable? (4) Wisely share and Keep confidences? (5) Understand our values in Relation to the values of others? (6) Examine our prejudices and develop Awareness of how we have integrated the prejudices into our sense of self? and (7) Share ourselves with the world while also Accepting kindness. These processes fit neatly into the acronym SRBATHWKUREASA, which unlike BRAVING, is almost impossible to remember. The processes described through it, however, are infinitely more rewarding. They are also a lot of work. “Aye, there’s the rub.” Real change is a lot of work. Real growth means getting hurt. It means inadvertently letting people in who don’t respect our vulnerability. It means “wasting” time on relationships that don’t pan-out. It means trying some schemes when we don’t know what else to do. Real growth and change are intrinsically and inherently challenging and painful. Lost relationships and schemes are only a waste if we don’t learn anything. Please don’t shoot the messenger. Schemes are popular, because they sell. Pain doesn’t sell. The promise of an absence of pain sells. Real plans and strategies aren't always so appealing, but they help us to engage in processes to discover who we are, what we want, how we can grow, and how we can contribute to the world. Rather than using an acronym to screen out bad people and avoid painful experiences, we can create plans and strategies based on the best of our desires for how to be in this world. We’ll have to scheme a bit, but as long as we realize the scheme is not the end game, we can grow. The reality is that there is no endgame. When we realize we are engaged in a process, we have arrived. Paradoxically, arriving means recognizing that we never get “there.” Dreams Our purpose; our sense of who we are and what we want; our importance and interconnectedness to humanity, nature, the universe; our vision of what life could be are foundational to the growth process. This is the stuff dreams are made of. We don’t know if they will come true. They will likely change. And yet, if we keep them alive by staying true to who we are and what we value, we won’t mistake the empty platitudes of schemes and advertisers for the richness, unpredictability, and ever-changing promise of our dreams. What is braver than that? References Brown, Brené. 1 November, 2015. SuperSoul Sessions. The Anatomy of Trust. Accessed on 5/9/2025. https://brenebrown.com/videos/anatomy-trust-video/#:~:text=About%20this%20video,Play%20Time:%2023%20minutes Mahoney, A. S. (1998). In search of the gifted identity:from abstract concept to workable counseling constructs. Roeper Review, 20(3), 222–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199809553895 Shakespeare, W., Raffel, B., & Bloom, H. (2003). Hamlet. Yale University Press.
When I first heard about AI being used for counseling, I didn’t take it that seriously. AI can’t create a relationship. It might tell the therapist what to say, I thought, but they will still be accountable to their client. I didn’t think much more about it. Then recently, found out that a therapy tool in the Magic Classroom AI platform was actually being used in schools, both for counselors to use for guidance and for kids to use one-on-one, with a counselor supervising. I got to try it out. I pretended I was a depressed student, conversed for a few minutes, and then requested a summary. This is what AI-Therapist said: Here's a summary of our conversation: You shared that you feel angry all the time You expressed specific anger about: School budget cuts Losing a favorite teacher Having to use AI instead of having human support You challenged my responses about: My use of emotional words like "appreciate" My ability to be "honest" Making mistakes in how I communicate Key clarifications I made: I am only a computer program, not a real person I cannot have real feelings or emotions I cannot form real friendships I cannot replace human teachers or counselors Important takeaways: Your feelings about these changes are valid AI has clear limitations Your counselor remains available for real human support Real connections should be made with actual people, not AI Would you like to discuss any of these points further, or would you prefer to speak with your counselor? This response from AI-Therapist falls somewhere between completely useless and outright harmful. I suspect many adloescents would simply find it ridiculous, others who are perhaps feeling disconnected or lack critical thinking skills would likely feel even more alienated. I can’t imagine any therapist would think this was okay, and I don't know any that do. That’s not what is in doubt. What is problematic is that it seems that there is this constant pressure on society as a whole to be "open minded" to technology. This is not surprising in our consumer-based, ad-saturated culture. I asked Chat GPT, “Is AI therapy problematic?” It responded: “AI therapy can be problematic, especially if it's used as a replacement for human care, or without clear guidelines, oversight, and ethical frameworks. It’s not all bad, but it really depends on how it’s used, who is using it, and what it's used for.” That pretty much sums it up. A more human response from a caring therapist might be “Horrified, terrified, infuriated.” Even so, in describing our reaction there is a lot of social pressure to use disclaimers and point out the positives. If we don’t, we could be accused of being anti-technology or not accepting the reality that it’s here to stay. But those accusations are not reasonable. Criticizing technology is not the same as opposing or denying it. And being open-minded does not mean we reject critical thinking. Being conciliatory toward AI is about not rocking the boat, not opposing the system, not offending well-meaning people who celebrate AI. It’s about self-preservation through fealty to the social order, but as therapists, educators, parents, or humans in a system that is increasingly dehumanizing, we cannot worry about hurting AI’s feeling. To stay relevant and be effective, we have to be ready to criticize the people and systems that promote a technology that holds such risk. I’m less concerned about whether AI is the savior of humankind, the cause of its doom, or somewhere in between than I am about having the discussion controlled by invisiible powers, who, without accountability, determine the parameters of acceptable discourse. We should be concerned that AI is being normalized for kids too young to understand the repercussions. We should be concerned that it is being developed and used to make decisions about which civilians to target in Gaza. And we should feel free to raise concerns without equivocation. The problem is not AI. AI is a thing. It’s not inherently good or bad. The problem is not even how it’s implemented. That’s secondary. The problem is much more fundamental. The influence of AI is about power, control, and who makes the decisions. As with any technology, those with the most power can use AI to profit without concern for what happens the rest of us or society as a whole. Chat GPT didn’t mention that. AI will always be a slave to those in power. The photo is a still from the webseries "Your Call Is Important to Us" created by Martha Keavney. Used with permission. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZIQMCtsXwM&t=6s
On Transitions, Pain, and Saving the World Happy New Year! Welcome to the next transition. As we move from 2024-2025, as the days increase in length and the weather grows colder (depending on where you live), we are confronted repeatedly by the specter of transition. It is easy to miss how much transitions affect us. We may be relieved to be back at work or school, but even welcome transitions create stress on any organism. If you or your kids are feeling crabby or unsettled, just remembering that we are in transition can help us to find ways of coping more effectively., Transitions occur on micro and macro levels. We transition from being asleep to being awake; from one activity to another; from one class to another; from school to home; from the week to the weekend; from school to break; from one grading period to another; from the school year to summer; from one school to another; from one relationship to another. All of these transitions require different types of adjustments. Just because a transition seems small, like moving from one class to another, does not mean it feels that way. Smooth transitions require executive functioning skill, which do not always develop in a linear way. But beyond more typical transitions, our world seems to be transforming at a breakneck speed. These global changes have become more visible as we actually feel the effects of global warming ,over-population, and endless wars, which are live-streamed on devices we hold in our hands. Regardless of who you are or what your political bent it’s hard to deny that the world is wobbling precariously on its axis. The effects of Covid and the lockdowns are still felt. The U.S. and Israel continue to raze Gaza as conflict spreads rapidly throughout the Middle East. Ukrainians and Russians are dying in a ruthless and unwinnable war. Homelessness is up. Economic uncertainty is a reality for many of us. Mass shootings are occurring on an average of more than one a day. More and more, the warnings from dystopian novels and films become realities. We are on camera a good part of the day, and most of the time we don’t know it. Cars drive themselves. And speaking of cars, those cyber-trucks that look like tanks from a futuristic sci-fi movie are reproducing like rabbits. Transitions occur on individual, family, national, and international levels, and we all feel these changes whether or not we are aware of them. These realities sneak into our minds and bodies and create anxiety that we unknowingly and unwillingly can pass on to our kids and those around us. And, of course, kids pass on a lot of anxiety to adults as well. I know, I know - great way to start off the new year, but to quote Shakespeare, “As good to chide the waves as speak them fair.” In other words, denying reality will only put us in greater danger. So where is the hope? Well, the hope, I believe, lies in becoming more aware of reality, even though it can be ugly. It all begins with paying attention. In his book On Becoming a Person , Carl Rogers emphasized the importance of listening at a very deep level. To paraphrase, he said that people seldom do this, because if we really hear one another, we might realize we have to change, and change is terrifying to the human brain. But it stands to reason that standing still can be just as terrifying. As difficult as transitions can be, the word itself is a synonym for change. The more aware we are of what is happening within ourselves, the lives of others, and the wider world, the more we can cope with transition and the more likely we are to make changes, incrementally or precipitously, and on a micro and macro level, that promote love, joy, and hope, rather than violence, hate, and ignorance. Transitions can be good, bad, or neutral in terms of how they affect us; but where there is the possibility of change, there is the possibility of change for the better. And as we become more aware of reality through our attentiveness, we become more capable of creating conditions that allow ourselves and the world around us to change. In doing so, we can invest the energy of our hearts and minds more fully into what really matters: the beauty of nature, the power of relationship, and the wonders of the universe over consumerism, superiority, and domination. Photo by G. Lady from Pixabay