Social/Emotional Needs Tracy L. Cross Nerds and Geeks: Society’s Evolving Stereotypes of Our Students With Gifts and Talents

Over the past 25 years, my colleagues and I have Since the early 1980s many popular films, conducted research into the experiences of our stu- books, and television shows have been produced dents with gifts and talents, particularly those in with an intellectually capable student as the main school. We have written many papers and even a character. Some examples are Searching for Bobby couple of books describing these students’ lives and Fischer (1993), Good Will Hunting (1997), and how they live them. An obvious part of their expe- “Family Matters,” a sitcom showcasing Steve Urkel rience can be reflected in the stereotypes used in as “America’s favorite nerd.” All of these examples society to describe these children. The two most portrayed gifted students in a broader light than common ones are nerd and geek. When we first did the strict stereotypes that were just described. started interviewing gifted students about these Even though these characters did have some nega- terms in 1982, we found that both terms had very tive aspects to their lives that were tied to society’s Onegative ramifications in the gifted students’ per- stereotypes, they were seen as people, as individuals, ceptions. For example, nerds were generally consid- and that was a huge step forward. ered as socially inadequate, shy or overbearing, As the years passed, the current generation of smart, and perhaps too smart as we learned later in children has grown up immersed in an increasingly our studies. Nerds were also perceived as being very rich technological society. This continues today focused on academic endeavors, physically weak, with many homes having computers of one form or uninteresting, unnecessary to society, and ulti- another. In general, children are receiving a signifi- mately undesirable. Generally speaking, all these cant amount of exposure to media of different things might be categorized under the heading of kinds, and thus also have gained experience in feeling abhorrent, which was the way most of these using many diverse technologies (e.g., video games, students described their experience of being gifted. cell phones, PDAs). Because of this exposure, this Although the term nerd had many negative generation of children who are now in their teens connotations, the term geek was even more potent. has become so technologically savvy that being pas- Some students I met years ago in programs that I sionate about technology is becoming more com- have championed or been director of had in a way monplace, an emerging norm of sorts. This passion reconciled themselves to being thought of as nerdy, for technology has not only improved children’s but they really did not want to be thought of as a learning experiences, but also has had a dramatic geek. Geek was a term that at that time had great effect on the term geek. power to stigmatize. The experience of being a geek The term geek is now used increasingly as an was as one who others are embarrassed to be adjective, rather than merely a strict stereotype. For around. This element of guilt by association is an example, “tech geek” is a common phrase used to important component of the stigma theory of describe someone whose passion for technology has Irving Goffman (1963). Geeks were thought to be made him or her a computer expert. This more pos- extremely inadequate socially—more so than the itive spin on the word geek has occurred for two rea- nerds—and also too focused in academic or techni- sons. First, many people in our society are passionate cal endeavors. about computers, so being viewed as an expert (geek)

26 fall 2005 • vol 28, no 4 Nerds and Geeks: Society’s Evolving Stereotypes of Our Students With Gifts and Talents is socially rewarding. Second, because semantic distinction between choos- nerd or geek, and experienced the many others strive to become more ing a behavior and manifesting nega- stigma of giftedness (Coleman & technologically savvy, the expert or tively perceived traits is important to Cross, 1988) and limited social accept- geek is seen as a helper, and in many stigma theory because behavior is ance (Cross, Coleman, & Terhaar- cases the term geek even attaches an changeable, while attributing nega- Yonkers, 1991), are now less likely to avant-garde quality to this individual. tives to another’s appearance is merely experience being an outcast. This is In addition to the individual striving an attribution that is socially influ- due to the growing awareness that to become more technologically enced. As evidence of this evolution in being a nerd or geek could actually advanced, the evolution of cyber cafés the stereotype, the term geek is also have a positive outcome. I am encour- and other multimedia advances in our often used in very specific ways such aged to think that these students’ expe- culture (especially in the bigger cities), as being a tech geek, or a geek for art, riences in life will improve in a parallel have contributed to the evolving news, or weather. What is interesting fashion as the use of these two terms stereotype of a geek. and worth noting about these changes and stereotypes have evolved. Perhaps So, where does this leave us in the is their similarity to another analogy: one day these gifted students will be year 2005? What does this mean, and the swan emerging from an ugly able to live without the negative social what does this suggest for gifted kids? duckling. Being thought of as a nerd consequences associated with being a Well, in listening carefully, interview- as a child (an ugly duckling) does not student with gifts and talents. ing, and observing gifted children, I have the negative connotation that it I have often said that one of the have learned that the term nerd has once did. The knowledge of what great outcomes of our Western soci- become rather neutral. It has almost great things can come from such early ety’s integration of computers has become like a color in certain ways it interests (the swan) has motivated a been to remind us that children are is used. It is as though a person can be change in perceptions of the “nerdy” far more capable than adults often nerdy but also have many other qual- child. Therefore, the accoutrements to give them credit for being. As adults, ities that are not included under that being academically oriented or work- many of us who are computer immi- stereotype from 25 years ago. I believe ing hard in school, in time, could grants rely on our children—or chil- that people like Bill Gates and other cease to be as problematic for children dren in general—to be our advisers figures who present themselves in in our schools as before. because they have a higher degree of ways that would historically have Our schools have been described facility and expertise than we do, or placed them in the category of a nerd as anti-intellectual environments by will ever have. This transference of or a geek are no longer viewed as such many people in the field of gifted edu- skills from child to adult is yet because of the extent to which our cation including Howley, Howley, and another mechanism that is assisting in society holds these people in such rev- Pendarvis (1995) and Coleman and the evolution of these stereotypes and erence. This societal perception has Cross (2001). However, the evolution also has the potential to improve the also had a large impact on the way in these two stereotypes suggests that lives of gifted students. Perhaps our cultural stereotypes for nerds and there is a growing awareness of the things will improve enough that one geeks have evolved. importance of competence in our soci- day I will have inscribed on my grave- Obviously, as a psychologist who ety. This realization represents our studies gifted children, I am pleased society’s movement from a manufac- stone “He aspired to be a geek.” GCT that these terms are losing their nega- turing base to an information age. Our tive power. I think there will be many children are seeing this, and the References benefits as the terms get increasingly change has primarily focused on the fleshed out and used more neutrally. recognition that people like Bill Gates Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. Recently, I overheard young gifted (once considered to be a geek) make (2001). Being gifted in school: An children using the term nerd in the very significant contributions to our introduction to development, guid- following way: “I am going to be society, and other intellectually gifted ance, and teaching. Waco, TX: nerdy today and stay at home and individuals are handsomely rewarded Prufrock Press work on my homework.” This state- for their accomplishments. Thus, the Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. ment implies that being a nerd is actu- children who would have been typi- (1988). Is being gifted a social ally a choice, not a state of being. This cally identified early by their peers as a continued on page 65

gifted child today 27 Nerds and Geeks Welcoming All Students to Room 202

continued from page 27 continued from page 30 tions: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill. handicap? Journal for the Ford, D. Y., & Harris, J. J., III. Irvine, J. J. (2002). In search of whole- Education of the Gifted, 11, 41–56. (1999). Multicultural gifted edu- ness: African American teachers Cross, T. L., Coleman, L. J., & cation. New York: Teachers and their culturally specific Terhaar-Yonkers, M. (1991) The College Press. Foster, M. (1994). Effective Black classroom practices. New York: social cognition of gifted stu- teachers: A literature review. In E. Palgrave Macmillan. dents in schools: Managing the R. Hollins, J. E. King, & W. C. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The stigma of giftedness, Journal for Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of the Education of the Gifted, 15, populations: Formulating a knowl- African American children. San 44–55. edge base (pp. 225–241). New York: Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on State University of New York Press. Storti, C. (1998). The art of crossing the management of spoiled iden- Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive cultures (2nd ed.). Yarmouth, tity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: teaching: Theory, research, and ME: Intercultural Press. Prentice Hall. practice. New York: Teachers Storti, C. (1999). Figuring foreigners Howley, C., Howley, A., & College Press. out: A practical guide. Yarmouth, Pendarvis, E. (1995). Out of our Hall, E. T. (1981). Beyond culture ME: Intercultural Press. minds: Anti-intellectualism and (2nd ed.). Garden City, NY: Shade, B. J., Kelly, C., & Oberg, M. talent development in American Anchor Press/Doubleday. (1997). Creating culturally respon- schooling. New York: Teachers Hofstede, G., & Hofsted, G. J. sive classrooms. Washington, DC: College Press. (1991). Cultures and organiza- American Psychological Association.

Meeting the Educational Needs of Young Gifted Readers in the Regular Classroom

continued from page 47 Books. Who are they and how can they be gramming. In N. Colangelo, & G. Tolan, S. S. (1985, November/ served in the classroom? Gifted A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted December). Stuck in another Child Today, 25(2), 14–21. education (2nd ed., pp. 75–88). dimension: The exceptionally Wang, M. C., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989) Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and gifted child in school. G/C/T Teaching students to assume an Bacon. 41(4), 22–26. active role in their learning. In M. Rogers, K. (1998). Using current Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The C. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge base research to make “good” decisions Differentiated Classroom. for the beginning teacher, (pp. about grouping. NASSP Bulletin, Alexandria, VA: Association for 71–84). Oxford: Pergamon. 82, 38–46. Supervision and Curriculum Westberg Peters, L. (2003). Earthshake: Rohrkemper, M., & Como, L. (1988). Development. Poems from the ground up. New Success and failure on classroom Tomlinson, C., Kaplan, S., Renzulli, J., York: Greenwillow. tasks: Adaptive learning and class- Purcell, J., Leppien, J., & Burns, D. Wildsmith, B. (2000). The owl and room teaching. The Elementary (2002). The parallel curriculum: A the woodpecker. England: Oxford School Journal, 88, 297–326. design to develop high potential and University Press. Schnur, J. O., & Lowrey, M. A. (1986). challenge high-ability learners. Winebrenner, S., & Devlin, B. (2001). Some characteristics of young Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Cluster grouping of gifted students: gifted readers. Early Child Press. How to provide fulltime services Development & Care, 26, 191–198. Van Tassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. on a part-time budget: Update Starko, A. J., & Schack, G. D. (1989). (2001). An analysis of gifted educa- 2001. Arlington, VA: ERIC Perceived need, teacher efficacy, tion curriculum models. In F. A. Clearinghouse on Disabilities and teaching strategies for the Karnes, & S. M. Bean (Eds.), and Gifted Education. (ERIC gifted and talented. Gifted Child Methods and materials for teaching Document Reproduction Service Quarterly, 33, 118–122. the gifted. Waco, TX: Prufrock No. ED451663) Swanson, D. (1997). Welcome to the Press. Yolen, J. (1987). Owl moon. New York: world of owls. New York: Walrus Vosslamber, A. (2002). Gifted readers: Philomel Books.

gifted child today 65