Choices gifted women made in education, personal life, and career: A qualitative study in the Netherlands

ABSTRACT

From a developmental perspective, gifted girls could benefit from the life experience shared by gifted women about what influenced them to make life choices. This study focuses on Dutch gifted women to explore what were facilitating or hindering factors in making those decisions in education, personal life, and career. Interviews with 10 participants, from ages 18 to 62, provided in-depth descriptions of participants’ personal experiences. They clearly stated what they wanted to achieve and how, whether it was in school, career, or in personal life. Overall, this study is in line with previous research. When making career choices, gifted women valued intrinsic motivation, differentiation, and the quality of the work. When they made choices, significant adults, a supportive partner, and active behaviours in seeking guidance were helping factors whereas the feeling of being different, lack of suitable education, and others’ judgment were hindering factors. Some implications are also given.

KEYWORDS:

• Gifted
• women
• gender
• talent development
• career choice
• life choice

Introduction

From a developmental perspective, young gifted individuals can benefit from gifted adults’ life experiences. For gifted girls, it is noticed that having the same gender role models as references is important. Thus, providing insightful perspectives from gifted women is in need. However, traditionally, the concept of eminence is gender-biased and focuses on males. As Leslie et al. (2015) found in their research, eminent people are usually expected to emerge from male-dominated fields such as physics and architecture. Thus, there seems to be more male eminent people than female eminent people. However, as eminence is not only found in those fields, if society expands the scope and recognizes that eminent people can be found in all domains, there should be more female eminent people by now. It is important to realize that gifted women, no matter the domain, are always compared under a masculine lens (Rutherford, 2020). Moreover, since the Dutch education system is different from other countries, Dutch gifted women’s experiences can provide add-on and unique perspectives about this population or indicate different factors that influence the development of gifted women in the Netherlands. Altogether, the above reasons guide this study to explore Dutch gifted women’s life experiences further.

Literature review

Gender bias

Ceci and Williams (2011) concluded that the underrepresentation of women in science-oriented fields were perhaps due to sex discrimination in the past and to preferences and choices nowadays. It is noticed that gendering in science is due to historical work and its ongoing effects of sex discrimination. Choices gifted women make nowadays, according to Rutherford (2020), are still influenced by these effects. Due to using male-defined norms in the past, it made scientific methods, practices, models, and theories deeply gendered. According to Niepel et al. (2019), lower participation of gifted women in STEM fields also has to do with the lower self-concept of mathematical skills in female students as opposed to male students. No eminence has been sought in female dominated fields, such as nursing, teaching, or social work (Leslie et al., 2015). Cravens (1992) shined some light on the period of 1920–1950, and concluded that in those years the failure of gifted women to achieve eminence was never questioned. Even though experts assume that IQ is almost equally divided between men and women (Blinkhorn, 2005; Dykiert et al., 2009), Kerr and McKay (2014), Reis (2003), and Rimm (2014) found that the choices gifted women make in their education, career, and relationships are different from gifted men. What makes these gifted women choose differently from men? Based on the research, gifted boys and gifted girls seem to be more alike than they are different in intelligence, creativity, and in their friendship choices (Gross, 1989; Hyde & Linn, 2006; Jen & Moon, 2015). Kerr et al. (2012) found that gifted girls’ interests are more like those of gifted boys than to those of average girls. Furthermore, Kerr and Sodano (2003) found that, in their adolescent years, the career aspirations between gifted girls and gifted boys are more alike than different.

School influence: stereotypes, choices and support

Kerr et al. (2012) found that gender stereotypes influence how teachers may treat the two genders differently. Such gender stereotypes lead to internalization of those stereotypes and to long term negative consequences of achievement (Matheis et al., 2019; Steele et al., 2002). Therefore, gifted students oftentimes fail to fulfil their true potential. Many studies have shown that the development of gifted children (boys and girls) is greatly influenced by gifted programs, acceleration options, school environment (e.g., Gagné, 2009; Renzulli, 2005; Renzulli & Reis, 2014; Renzulli et al., 1983; Sternberg & Davidson, 2005; VanTassel-Baska, 2019; Worrell et al., 2019), partners and parents (Gagné, 2009; Worrell et al., 2019; Yewchuk et al., 2001). One factor that stands out in research is the need for like-minded peers (e.g., Rogers, 2007; Vogl & Prekel, 2014; Worrell et al., 2019). Interacting with like-minded peers has a positive effect on self-esteem. These peers are often found in gifted programs (Renzulli, 2005). In practice, Eccles (2011) and Matheis et al. (2019) found that gender stereotypes in teacher expectancy have been found to have an effect on students’ academic interests and performance. On a broader scale, gendered practices in all stages of school education have been found to influence the performance and achievement of gifted girls (Kerr et al., 2012). Girls achieve at the same level or higher in science and math in secondary school (Gallagher et al., 1997; Ugulu, 2020), and Schneeweis and Zweimuller (2012) showed that choices made in secondary school for science-oriented studies are not made often. Even if those gifted girls chose a STEM area as a major, Yu and Jen (2019) found that when STEM gifted girls came to universities, the further in their education (i.e., higher classes) the lower the career self-efficacy and science learning interest they had. Willard-Holt (2008) found that if gifted girls chose a teaching career, people in their environment would tell them it is a waste of their potential. In Willard-Holt’s study, it remained unclear whether these discouragements were based on level of education, cognitive challenges, or prestige of the profession. Intrinsic motivation is a factor that is found in many studies. For gifted individuals, passion or meaningfulness (Fredericks et al., 2010; Pollet & Schnell, 2017) is very important in education as well as in career (Vötter & Schnell, 2019). Passion and intrinsic motivation are linked. They help students in achieving better and they are positively associated with engagement (Froiland & Worrel, 2016). With motivation, perfectionism plays a role as well; especially when perfectionism in gifted girls ensures commitment to achieve at high standards or if they have close attention for detail. On the other hand, if perfectionism becomes obsessive it will hinder gifted girls in achieving high (Gaerlan-Price et al., 2021). Gifted girls need competition, as stated by Skelton et al. (2010) and Tweedale and Kronborg (2015), to achieve at their best. These researchers also found that there is a lot of pressure from parents, teachers, and themselves to do so. Teachers that have strong supportive bonds with their students, help them achieve their goals and when they provide additional opportunities, like mentoring or coaching outside regular classes, gifted girls will achieve even better (Tweedale & Kronborg, 2015). This all underlines the need of gifted girls for specific guiding and counseling from preschool to university to challenge themselves more and to raise their insights (Hollinger & Fleming, 1992; Kerr, 1985; Kerr & McKay, 2014; Kommer, 2006; Rimm, 2005). According to Maree (2019) this counseling at the end of adolescent years is necessary because it enhances sense of self-identity and career-identity. With the paradigm shift on the definition of giftedness from the research of Ziegler et al. (2012), there is also a change in gifted programs. The programs are more adaptive and more focused on creativity and not on grade results (Gajda et al., 2017). In the Netherlands research was conducted on these programs in primary schools. The conclusion was that the system is already more inclusive, which means that more gifted children are included in gifted or adaptive programs in the Netherlands (Houkema et al., 2018).

Career choices

Research indicates that women in their 20ʹs have to make choices regarding career, study, children, and partner-relationship (Kerr & McKay, 2014; Khilji & Pumroy, 2019; Reis, 1998). In this period, women are known to choose differently from men (Lubinski et al., 2014; Reis, 1998; Rimm, 2014). Women tend to choose motherhood and partner relationship over a career at high positions in work, politics, or research (e.g., Reis, 2003; Rimm, 2005, 2014). Many women around 30 have yet to achieve the educational, career, and lifestyle aspirations they identified in earlier years (Hollinger & Fleming, 1992). However, there is still a lot of gender role stereotyping in women’s career development (Yewchuk et al., 2001). Now, though, according to the global gender gap report from the World Economic Forum (2020) the gender gap in participation in frontier roles in most Western countries is closing. Various studies have found that when gifted women have their children grown up, around the age of 50, they tend to fulfil their aspirations in doing research or having a career (Khilji & Pumroy, 2019; Lubinski et al., 2014; Reis, 2003; Rimm, 2014). But in recent research about highly creative women by Reis and Hollinger (2021) a slightly different pattern was found. These women did not put things on hold or were not hindered by personal relationships or having children to achieve eminence in their field. They mentioned challenges in fulfilling these achievements but did find the time to focus on their creative work.

Purpose of this study

Altogether, previous studies show that there are still needs to investigate, what factors influence gifted girls’ choices (in career, school, personal life) and to know, from their perspective, which helps fulfil their specific needs in education and helps them develop their talent in any domain. Moreover, previous studies did not include the Dutch population. The Netherlands is in the top 20 of economic developed countries, the Dutch school system is unique and the availability of funds or scholarships for university is not applicable here. The influence of schools is different to other countries. Even more, the Dutch culture is different from other countries, especially about standing out of the crowd (Lange de, 2015), but there are also differences in income, work-life balance and having more educational years (Hull, 2018). Therefore, there may be a factor that influences the development of gifted women in the Netherlands, which is worth exploring further. Thus, this study particularly focuses on Dutch gifted women and these two research questions guided the design:

1. What choices did gifted women make in their education, career, and personal life in the Netherlands?

2. What helped or hindered gifted women to make personal decisions in their lives (e.g., career, education, relationships)?

Method

This is a qualitative study, with an abductive approach (Alvesson & Skoldberg, 1994) and the grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 2007) as guidance. By doing so, this study gives the opportunity for depth of exploration into the participants perceptions and experiences and relate them to the context (Creswell, 2007; McKenzie & Knipe, 2006). This multiple case study provides in-depth description of participants’ personal experiences to come to a multidimensional understanding of the participants’ motivation and experiences. The primary method of data collection was semi-structured interview, in which a set of questions (see Appendix) was followed, with the opportunity to further elaborate on the answers provided by the participants, as Lichtman (2010) explained.

Theoretical framework

As they were mentioned earlier, both, the abductive approach (Alvesson & Skoldberg, 1994) and the grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 2007), influenced the overall research design, coding process, and interpretation. Corbin and Strauss (2007) explained that grounded theory is a “theory that was derived from data, systematically gathered and analysed through the research process” (p. 12). We conducted this study without any specific model but a more exploratory approach. In fact, this study started with a real-life observation from the first author’s practical experience: The life choices that were made by two gifted women she was acquainted with generated the original research interest. As Dubois and Gadde (2002) pointed out, with or without a prior theory, a closer examination of this starting point leads to the conclusion that this phenomenon warrants further exploration. Both the abductive and the grounded theory approach then provide unique means of developing a theory by utilizing in-depth insights of empirical phenomena and their contexts. Following them, we took the grounded theory to filter relevant factors and to combine them to overarching themes using a coding strategy. Moreover, we embraced that abductive research is derived from lay language. The research team, a practitioner and a researcher, worked together to understand and interpret the answers of the participants in scientific data (Blaikie, 2009; Ong, 2012).

Participants

The participants were ten gifted Dutch women from ages 18 to 62. We chose to include participants from different ages because women have different experiences and have to make different choices depending on their stage of life (Reis, 2003; Rimm, 2014). Having participants from different ages helps to capture these nuances. By purposive sampling, 10 gifted women were found from or via the personal and professional network of the first author. This network has access to schools (primary, secondary, higher education, and gifted education), and high ability communities (e.g., Mensa, ECHA).

Selection criteria

To be included in this study, the participant is female and meets at least one of the following four criteria: 1)The participant had high intellectual ability as shown by a total IQ score of 130 or higher (Pereira Da Costa, 2019; Renzulli, 2005), 2) The participant accelerated at least one year in school (e.g., early admittance in primary, secondary or university; Brody et al., 1990; Olsewski et al., 1990; Worrell et al., 2019), 3) The participant had a PhD degree, 4) The participant won prizes on a high academic level (e.g., cum laude graduation, prize for best scientist, prize for specific research national and international). For an overview of the participants’ profiles, see, Table 1.

Table 1. Profile of the 10 participants.

Participants^1	Age	Criteria	Career (Area) and Current Status
1	18	Acceleration Academic prize	Medicine student, bachelor
2	22	Acceleration Academic prize	STEM area, doing research
3	34	Academic prize	Medicine student, major
4	38	IQ>130 PhD	Psychology, working in the field of psychology
5	43	IQ>130	Child/Youth counseling
6	43	IQ>130	Double major in English Language and Teaching, working in education
7	46	PhD Academic prize	Medicine area
8	47	Acceleration	STEM area, working in education
9	62	IQ>130 Academic prize	Double major in mathematics and Dutch Language, has own company
10	62	IQ>130	Working in education and Arts

The higher the number, the older the participant.

Data collection and analysis

Every participant was interviewed once. All interviews were conducted by the first author, the length ranged from 25 to 60 minutes. The information was transcribed directly after the interview and sent for conformation to the participant. When participants confirmed their transcripts, they gave permission by consent form to use the data anonymously in this research. All participants agreed with the transcript of their interview. Meanwhile, the authors kept theoretical memos to describe the initial thoughts about the interview data, reflect on the potential biases, and incorporate ongoing research of the literature (Corbin & Strauss, 2007; Ong, 2012). The coding process via memo writing and color-coding was an analytical process considered essential in the grounded theory approach. The memos provided detailed information of the authors’ reflective thoughts and feelings. This is considered an iterative process (Blaikie, 2009) and provides the opportunity to gain a broad understanding of the various factors that have contributed to the individual’s needs and development, leading up to their particular choices. Analysis of the interviews began directly after transcription of all interviews. Important statements were filtered from every interview, resulting in a list of statements per participant. Statements were color-coded by theme. All statements were compared within and between interviews. As such, three main themes were established and discussed.

Ensuring trustworthiness

We adopted several strategies to reduce potential biases. First, the first author, a school teacher who works with gifted children in primary and secondary school, conducted all interviews in person and transcribed them as well. This provided depth and understanding of externally observable “behaviour” and internal “states” in context (Peterson, 2019). Second, all 10 participants were from the first authors’ personal and professional network and the first author was acquainted with two of them beforehand as mentioned earlier. Although the relationships helped in some cases of the interaction, there may also be potential bias. Thus, there was guidance from a supervisor (i.e., a researcher in social sciences and giftedness) and a second reader (i.e., a researcher in social sciences and psychology). They did not know any of the participants and both had a different perspective to the research conducted. The three researchers discussed the analysis process and that ensured that bias was balanced (Fossey et al., 2002).

Results

The combined interviews painted a clear picture regarding the various aspects that were relevant to gifted women’s development. They all had different experiences in school and in their careers, but there also were similarities, which are elaborated on below. All participants described a clear focus on what they wanted to achieve, whether it was in school, career, or in personal life. All themes and statements were discussed within the context of the two research questions, what choices were made and what were hindering or helping factors. The themes are illustrated with some representative statements of the participants:

Motivation and diversity

When making career choices, the participants said that intrinsic motivation was important and mentioned the importance of having creative or different job options as well as the quality of the work they did abductive in education and career. All 10 participants expressed the value of intrinsic motivation in what it could do for their development. They stated that doing things that make you happy or that you are very interested in is easy, because you already are motivated, even if it is hard to do.

[At the Gymnasium] I already knew I wanted to study medicine, therefore I needed that Betà course. I really had to work hard, but because my dream to study medicine was so big, I just did it. If maths or science was hard, I just spent a bit more time until I understood. (participant 7)

Seven gifted women articulated intrinsic motivation was the key for achieving in what they did. They described it as being a choice to get the best out of themselves. It was up to them to seize the opportunity and go for it. In their opinion, intrinsic motivation came from choosing what made you happy. “I always stayed true to myself and my interests. Otherwise, I would not have had the motivation to pursue the things I wanted to do or to see it through … I always did the things that made me happy … ” (participant 2)

However, three other participants did not find intrinsic motivation always to be a choice. They sometimes experienced the opposite, because they were hindered in making the choices they wanted and were forced to make different choices, or they were afraid and felt insecure to make certain choices.

I had some very talented brothers and sisters. My mother always told me how great they were. As I was the oldest in the family, I was not allowed to pursue my talent, I had to take care of my siblings. (participant 10)

All 10 participants stated that having different and creative options was necessary to keep going and not get bored. Most of them needed to change jobs regularly because once they had to repeat things in their daily job, they wanted to do something else. “I like to work a lot when I like what I am doing, but there is always that moment of saturation and then the challenge disappears. Then I drop it and try something new.” (participant 10) The same experiences happened in school; some looked for escapes outside of school, like in sports or arts. Six participants had a thriving career in sports or arts during school and achieved high in that too, at regional, national, and international levels. “I did gymnastics and music as something to challenge myself, but also to clear my head. Gymnastics and music also teach you a lot, it challenges you in other ways. You are constantly learning new elements and techniques.” (participant 2)

The other important factor they mentioned was quality, doing things to high standards. Seven participants said they thought quality in doing the things you do is also important. The perseverance to try and aim for excellent quality was not because someone told them or expected it of them, but because they chose to do that. “I chose a goal for myself: I wanted to graduate cum laude. I missed out on several things. It slowed down my dancing career and my social life but it was worth it.” (participant 1)

Seven participants expressed they felt the need to gain full understanding of school subjects and took the effort to make it their own and to perfection. That happened in school, career and even sports and arts. “My standard was way higher than that of the teachers, so when I really understood the curriculum, I got very high grades. That [those grades] was not my goal, but it happened.” (participant 9)

Peers and relationships

When making choices in peer and romantic relationships, the understanding of their talent and a matched capacity where are important. The participants clearly stated that having talks at a higher level and feeling that the other understands you were very important. All 10 participants valued the need for like-minded peers. The problem for eight of them was that it was not easy finding these peers. Seven only met peers at university and felt they had missed out on that experience in secondary and primary school. “I felt at home for the first time when I entered university, because of the students and the people who work there” (participant 8).

When talking about partners, one stated

I made sure I had gifted people around me: my husband, my sons, they even found gifted wives … Having a sparring partner is crucial to me. I have to have conversations at a high level. I need someone who I can trust to understand me … I worked with similarly gifted people. We are still friends, but I miss the conversations we had on a regular basis. (participant 9)

She was not the only one that mentioned that, four out of ten talked about this as being very important to them, almost crucial for doing the things they wanted in their career. Also having a like-minded partner or close friend made them feel more appreciated and less different from others.

Helping factors when making decisions in education and career

When making life decisions, the participants identified significant adults (i.e., parents, teachers), a supportive partner, and active behaviors in seeking guidance as helping factors. These factors played an important role in these gifted women’s lives. For example, having supportive parents made a difference. Six participants named their parents as the ones who identified their talent. Four of these parents were gifted themselves, as stated by the participant.

My mother identified me as gifted. In 6th grade, I fell ill and she told the doctors that it was not a physical illness, but that I was bored at school. So she took me to a psychologist and he told my mother that that is not possible. But when he performed an IQ test, he told my mother she was right. (participant 9)

The parents were the ones that stimulated their children to pursue the things they wanted. This was mentioned by nine of the participants. “My parents stimulated me. They always said: we will support you in everything, no matter how crazy and no matter the costs” (participant 3). The mothers were mentioned by four participants as the ones that helped them at school when there were barriers and they could not develop to their potential and two participants mentioned it was their father that did those things. One mentioned it was both parents.

For some a specific teacher was a helping factor, because that teacher was the one that made a difference in their educational life, pointed them to special programs or they felt this teacher understood their needs best and helped them in making choices. “I always find it difficult to make choices, my teacher at the gymnasium helped me with that, choosing the right subjects, but also what to study” (participant 2).

For eight participants who have a partner, their partner was encouraging them to pursue the things they wanted, in study and career. “My husband is okay with everything I want to do. When I want to change something, he always says: go for it” (participant 8). Their partners made it possible for them to do so, because they helped at home with the children and the housekeeping, but also gave them the freedom to explore possibilities and develop their talents.

My partner always supported me. He always said, do what you need to do, we will see how it works out and how we will manage at home. He always said it is okay. He never said: do you have to go away again? Or, when I called to say I would be a bit later, he never said, that is a problem. He always said I understand. (participant 7)

Five participants did search for guidance actively. Among them, four looked for coaching during their career as an adult and one looked for support in secondary school. However, eight participants stated that they would like to have had guidance during their secondary school time or in university. “If there would have been someone who could coach me, I am sure I could have done so much better” (participant 5).

Although not everyone took action, eight participants expressed a need for guidance in knowing who they are, in making even better choices or more fitting ones. Two of the participants did not express a need for guidance.

When making life decisions, gifted women tried to keep life in balance

Career choices made were various. Eight participants stated that in knowing things at home were under control, they were able to work long hours or make a career that takes time. That varied from finding childcare or having a housekeeper to having family that provided a stable home.

I really like to work and to develop new things, and I think I will be a better mother if I can develop myself. My husband helps a lot, I have a housekeeper and my parents help out with the children if necessary. That way I can do what I need to do. (participant 7)

Not only stated the participants that it is important to have a stable home, but sometimes women chose to keep things on hold and pursue them later. This applied to having children, “I wanted children before I was 25, but because of my career I did not have the time then … ”(participant 3) or finding a partner or even slowing down school or starting studying later in life if that was what it took to develop yourself even more. “I started studying again when I was over 40 … It challenged me a lot” (participant 8). Seven participants did put things on hold at a specific time in their life. Because of school career choices, five said they missed out on things during secondary school, but it was their choice to do so. This had to do with choosing to do well in school, getting high grades (cum laude graduation) or time they needed for their challenging outside school activities. The things they missed out on were mostly social activities: meeting friends, going out, and parties. The other five participants made time for social events and did not have the feeling they missed out on things. “Extensive sports training and school do match up. The parties and holidays suffer from it, but you can make up for that later” (participant 6).

Hindering factors in making life decisions

When making life decisions, the participants identified the feeling of being different, lack of suitable education and others’ judgment as hindering factors.

One main hindering factor that was mentioned was the feeling of being different. Six participants stated several times that they felt different from others because of their talent. “They think you are weird, and from their perspective, you are. You are different in a way, but they do not want you to be, they want you to be the same as them” (participant 9).

They, most of the time, adjusted to the situation or environment they were in at that time.

In education, you do not have a choice but to adjust. But that does not mean that you get to know yourself. In the end, you need to know who you are to know which way you want to go and what choices you need to make. (participant 5)

Eight participants, except the youngest two, said they did not have suitable education, which meant in their opinion; they were not challenged in their school days, not in primary school, “I could only do more things, not more challenging things. It was like that everywhere. Only doing more, not make it more difficult … I always hoped it would be better in the next school, but it never was” (participant 4), in secondary school, “During my entire secondary school period I was in survival mode” (participant 6) or at university. Most of them just made the best out of it. Sometimes it had to do with the simple conclusion that there was nothing to choose from. Three participants were in circumstances that there was no option in going to another school. “Back then? In those days, there was nothing to choose. I am very grateful that I had a mother that saw my potential and tried everything in her power to change things in school for me” (participant 9). The other seven participants did have those choices and made the choice to go to the school they or their parents thought would be most suitable for them. This was applicable for five of the participants and they changed schools.

Six participants experienced the opinion of others as negative. They stated that what other people thought and said influenced what they did. Three mentioned the pressure from others to adjust to common standards. “I really struggled with the fact that friends commented about the career switch I made from consultant to teacher. It feels so stupid that you feel so vulnerable about what other people say” (participant 8).

They felt the pressure to adjust to the way things are normally done instead of living according to their possibilities. These are expectations that are normal in society and therefore normal for other people.

Another subject concerning the opinion of others was what men said and did. Four participants made statements about this subject. In school, they had a problem with boys in their class or male-teachers. “In secondary school, when I did science, you were a special case, because when you are a girl you must think subjects like science or maths to be difficult and giggle about it and ask for help, not provide help” (participant 9).

In university, especially in universities for technology, three participants found that male teachers and students approached and treated them differently than they did male students. “The university for technology was really a men’s stronghold, I still remember that teachers asked my boyfriend (now my husband), what he wanted with a girl like that” (participant 8). Even one of the younger participants found that gender is still an important factor in her work place now, “What is so striking in the work that I do now, I noticed the higher you get, the more men there are” (participant 2).

Recognition and peers are mixed factors, both helping and hindering

Recognition is a special factor, because eight of the participants saw this as a helping factor, but six of the participants saw this also as a hindering factor. The participants needed to be seen. They needed someone to recognize their potential. “It was very good of my parents that they let me find my own way. When I wanted to study maths, they stimulated that. In those days a girl that studied maths was strange, but they said, go for it” (participant 9)!

Many times, it was the parents who gave them recognition, as stated above. They explained the hindering factor in this as that they also struggled with the fact that they did not know they were gifted. Six of them said that the interview made them reflect on the fact that they were called gifted.

I never thought about myself as gifted. In hindsight, I realise, now that you are asking me these questions, that I am gifted. But I never wake up in the morning asking myself, “what am I going to do with my talent today”.(participant 7)

They concluded that there must be many girls that go through life not knowing that they are gifted. They also mentioned that people cannot see on the outside, that you differ so much from others. “I hope more people will come to realise that what is on the outside tells you nothing about the inside. I hope this will get through to society, so people will be milder in their opinions and be kinder” (participant 10). This was stated by eight participants. It was important to them that people would understand and recognize that in others.

Like-minded peers were mentioned both as helping and hindering factor, too. As it was mentioned previously, the participants stated that they chose to look for peers because it was important to them to have people around that understood them. Considering the theme of helping factors, eight of the participants said peers were helping because they felt they belonged, and it helped to make decisions because you could talk about things together at the same level. However, in some cases, the people who were anticipated to be peers turned against the participants. They thus experienced both the supporting side and the bullying side of “peers.”

Stimulating was finding friends that are as smart as you are. In multiple ways, I found someone in university that could challenge me in the curriculum, but also was there for me as a person. I thought they would be at the gymnasium too, but I was wrong. I found no real peers there, I was bullied by the ones I thought could be peers. (participant 4)

Discussion

Overall, the findings from this study are in line with those of previous research about life and career experiences of gifted women. It also suggests that suitable education is needed for gifted students (e.g., Gagné, 2009; Renzulli, 2005; VanTassel-Baska, 2019; Worrell et al., 2019) but that this is not always available.

We found Dutch gifted women felt that they were treated differently from gifted male students in school, which is in line with the findings of Kerr et al. (2012). The gender gap in STEM related study-fields and career choices was found several times (Ceci & Williams, 2011; Leslie et al., 2015; Niepel et al., 2019; Rutherford, 2020). The factor of guidance and/or coaching was an important theme for the participants. The lack of and the need for guidance or coaching was mentioned in most of the interviews, which is in line with the outcome of previous studies (Gevaert, 2018; Hollinger & Fleming, 1992; Kerr, 1985; Kerr & McKay, 2014; Kommer, 2006; Rimm, 2005). In the research conducted by Yewchuk et al. (2001), also emerges that parents and partners are very important stimulating facilitators as we found in this research with gifted Dutch women. However, one thing is noted that participants in our finding did put things on hold at a specific time in their life, which is similar as the previous studies but differently from the recent finding from Reis and Hollinger (2021). Two potential explanations are provided. First, the participants in Reis and Hollinger (2021) were identified as famous and very successful in their career as well as change agents in their field. In other words, they were extreme cases. Second, the culture difference may play a role. In the Dutch culture, being gifted is not something to talk about. Several women stated in their interviews that they didn’t want to stand out or wanted to be named gifted. In Dutch culture it is discouraged to stand out from the crowd (Lange de, 2015).

When making a career choice, intrinsic motivation is important for gifted women

As could be expected, intrinsic motivation is important to gifted Dutch women. All participants expressed the choice for intrinsic motivation, meaning that they made choices according to the way it made them feel (Skelton et al., 2010; Tweedale & Kronborg, 2015). If they felt that a choice would make them happy or was of their interest, they went for it, drive, as Yewchuk et al. (2001) called it in their research result on Finnish and Canadian eminent women. All of them made it clear that this was a very important factor in their whole life: in school, in choosing friends, looking for career opportunities, or choosing outside school activities. Fredericks et al. (2010) explained what passion can do for students’ achievement and development. What the participants described has everything to do with passion. Intrinsic motivation is a choice you make to pursue the things that make you happy, are of interest to you, things you are passionate about, or targets you want to reach. The participants chose this way because they wanted to be motivated intrinsically. Intrinsic motivation is positively associated with engagement and achievement (Froiland & Worrel, 2016). According to Ryan and Deci (2000), intrinsic motivation is the highest form of autonomous motivation. With that, students enjoy learning, but it is more than that, they also find learning important.

Gifted women value differentiation and quality of the work in education and career

In the literature, many researchers mention the need for differentiation in education programs for gifted students (e.g., Gagné, 2009; Renzulli, 2005; VanTassel-Baska, 2019; Worrell et al., 2019). Students learn in different ways, they have their preferences in how they learn best and in what way they feel competent to achieve. Ideally gifted programs show this differentiation and students are engaged to try different things in different ways (Renzulli, 2005; Sternberg & Davidson, 2005). In the right gifted programs, the participants felt they were challenged and got motivated. If the gifted program was not diverse enough according to the participants, they did not join the program or they quit. From the research we know differentiation in education is necessary for gifted students. For some of the participants differentiation by means of a gifted program or adaptive education was not available. These participants did not have the same opportunities some of the others had. Therefore, chance, as Gagné describes in his model (Gagné, 2009), played an important role in all the participants’ lives; some of the participants had enough access to extra curriculum or had enough money to challenge themselves in extra activities, others lived in areas where no adaptive education was available or parents had no funds to pay for extra curriculum or challenging activities. The participants also mentioned the need for having different options in their career, job, or hobbies. There is not a lot of research about this topic related to gifted adults and the need for diversity in their career and job. But the research of Pollet and Schnell (2017) concluded that “meaningfulness” is very important to gifted adults, in life and in career. The participants expressed the need for meaningfulness in what they do. The other aspect the participants mentioned about having different options is flexibility and take control. If they could take control, they could look for meaningful and challenging aspects in their jobs. From the literature, we know that flexible working arrangements have positive effects on performance, commitment and job satisfaction (Menezes & Kelliher, 2016). The participants expressed the need for these flexible arrangements several times, and if these needs were not met, they looked for a different job. In education the need for flexible, adaptive arrangements is normal, like Renzulli et al. (1983) and Renzulli and Reis (2014) described. It still is an important way to teach gifted students, because they do not need to repeat the things they already master. At present, this theory is endorsed by the research of Worrell et al. (2019). This is the same for the participants in their jobs. If (gifted) education must be adaptive and personal, their career must be adaptive and personal too.

Looking at these two themes, there is a direct overlap. Looking for different or creative options has everything to do with intrinsic motivation. The participants have not mentioned it as such, but the themes about intrinsic motivation and the need for this differentiation are related.

The understanding of their talent and a match in peers capacity are important for gifted women

All gifted Dutch women participating in this study mentioned the need for peers. They expressed the need, but also the difficulty of finding them. Earlier research (e.g., Rogers, 2007; Vogl & Prekel, 2014; Worrell et al., 2019) indicated that interacting with like-minded peers has a positive effect on self-esteem. The youngest participants in this study, who stated that they found peers earlier than the other participants, attended pull-out classes in primary school and found like-minded peers in secondary school. Maybe this was due to the fact that in more recent years they had enough access to like-minded peers in primary and secondary school. Some of the older participants did have extra curriculum during primary and secondary school, but all said it was not fitted for them. This needs further research: maybe schools nowadays have a better way of grouping in gifted education, or maybe the paradigm shift in the definition on giftedness (Ziegler et al., 2012) contributes to programs being more adaptive and more focussed on creativity and not on grade results nowadays (Gajda et al., 2017). The primary school system in the Netherlands is already more inclusive, which means that more gifted children are now included in gifted or adaptive programs in the Netherlands (Houkema et al., 2018).

Limitations

There are several limitations in this study. First, there are 10 participants in this study. While their experiences provided meaningful insights about how gifted women made life choices, the generalization should be cautious. Second, since the first author was acquainted with two participants, we noted there may be potential bias and included a third researcher to examine the interpretation. Third, as we mentioned above, the education belief nowadays in the Netherlands is inclusive. Thus, more or less, the school experience of some of the participants is influenced by this educational system. In other words, the context, what the system offers, should be taken into account.

Implications for practitioners

The outcome of this research suggests that teachers and others in education should be aware of the need for differentiation. As several researchers pointed out in their work (i.e. Renzulli & Reis, 2014; Sternberg & Davidson, 2005; VanTassel-Baska, 2019; Worrell et al., 2019), differentiation is very important in the development of gifted children (boys and girls), it provides a range of options for these students to benefit from and enhance their motivation, like specific programs, acceleration, or outside school activities. Gifted students need education that provides different choices in learning strategies, but also different interesting topics. The topics should also be meaningful to the students (Pollet & Schnell, 2017). This way, intrinsic motivation and differentiation are combined. What still needs further exploration is this need for having different or creative options in career and job. The awareness of it should be created in companies. Companies should be open for flexible working opportunities, to increase motivation, satisfaction, and performance for their employees (Menezes & Kelliher, 2016).

Also important is the need for peers and attention to the difficulty in finding them in primary and secondary school. Grouping in gifted education can make a difference (Worrell et al., 2019). Although the two youngest participants did not have problems finding peers, there should still be focus on the problem, because they attended schools already with gifted programs and not all schools have the opportunity for students to meet like-minded peers that way. Schools should provide circumstances in which like-minded students can meet each other on a regular basis.

Suggestions for further research

As discussed earlier, there is not much research conducted on differentiation in career and job for gifted adults. The research completed into flexible working arrangements (Menezes & Kelliher, 2016) is, until now, not focussed on gifted adults, but on adults in general. The present study raises the question whether the need for flexible working arrangements would be even more applicable to gifted adults than to non-gifted adults because of the need for differentiation and meaningfulness mentioned by almost all the participants. Meaningfulness in everything they do is something to know more about. It is necessary to understand their well-being even better to know how to address this in an appropriate way (Pollet & Schnell, 2017; Vötter & Schnell, 2019). A theme that came up from the results that was surprising and not foreseen, was that six of the participants had or currently have a thriving career in sports. They mentioned the intrinsic motivation, and drive it gave them, and the need for differentiation in challenging themselves (Kornborg, 2021). Future research about a possible correlation between academically gifted and being excellent in sports could be interesting. Earlier research on high achieving sports women (and men) revealed that intrinsic motivation seemed to be a key factor to become eminent in sports (Cooper, 2019). In sports, other factors also play a role in achieving eminence. The research conducted on high achievement and eminence in sports is not yet specifically completed on women. Some of the research conducted on the topic in all athletes found similarities with what the participants expressed. Athletes need to focus on psychological qualities such as grit (Duckworth et al., 2007) and self-regulation (McCardle et al., 2019) as the participants mentioned in their statements as intrinsic motivation to pursue the things they want to achieve. Additionally, environmental factors like quality of the early developmental environment (Baker et al., 2019) and the role of parents are very important factors to achieve eminence in sports (Biles, 2016; Gladwell, 2011; Wilson et al., 2019).

Final thoughts

Overall, this research showed that the choices gifted Dutch women made and the factors that helped or hindered them in life are in line with the international research. They valued the same things, but unfortunately, they also faced many of the same problems no matter their current age. That suggests that not much has changed overtime. On the other hand, the two youngest participants mentioned that they felt the recognition they needed from adults and peers. They said that this was reflected in their education (i.e. need for differentiation, or at least to have different options, and belonging) and in their environment (i.e. school, home, and peers). This sounds promising.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ingeborg Veldman-de Jonge

Ingeborg Veldman- de Jonge is a teacher in primary school for 20 years and RITHA and ECHA specialist (Radboud University Nijmegen). She teaches in high-ability groups and pull-out classes for children aged 4-15. In the area of Nijmegen she helps schools to find ways to educate (potentially) gifted children in different ways. She also hosts a website for Dutch schools and children with challenging assignments for gifted children to do at home or in school. Her research interests are about gifted girls and women, academically and sport talented, and school development for the gifted.

Enyi Jen

Enyi Jen is a post-doctoral lecturer at Radboud University, The Netherlands. She teaches RadboudCSW International Training on High Ability (RITHA), which is a professional development program for ECHA-Specialist and ECHA-practitioner. Prior to her doctoral studies at Purdue University, she was a gifted education program coordinator and taught affective curriculum in a self-contained gifted high school STEM program in Taiwan. She has been coordinating talent development programs for Gifted Education Resource Institute at Purdue University for 5 years. Her research interests include talent development, social and emotional development of gifted learners, gifted women, qualitative method, and Design-based research.

Appendix

Interview questions

First, tell me a little about yourself (name, age, talent, etc)

1. Can you describe to me when, how and by whom your talent was discovered?

2. Tell me about your education (primary, secondary and more)

-Tell me, how did it match your abilities?

-In hindsight, if possible, what would you have chosen differently?

-Describe what or who was helping in a positive way during your education and why?

-And what or who had a negative impact (and why)?

-If so, what extra classes or activities did you attend because of your talent?

3. Tell me about your current situation, what are you doing at this moment? (work, education)

-Tell me about how that job or education is in line with your talent (if not, why)?

-Would you like it to be different? (why and what)

4. looking back, who or what in your environment (family, friends, clubs) had a positive influence on your talent development? What did he or she do to encourage you?

And who or what had a negative influence (and why)?

5. who was the most influencing person in developing your talent? (elaborate)

-In what ways do you think that person contributed to that? (give examples)

6. if any, how would the choices you made because of your talent development have been different if you hadn’t had this talent?

-Can you give an example?

-Looking back, if so, what did you missed out on because of your choices?

1. : If any, what opportunities did you get or did you create yourself to develop your talent? (give some examples)

2. : If you have the opportunity, what would you say to young girls with talent?

3. : If there is anything I should know about this topic, but I didn’t ask, please tell me …