The American Psychological Association's Center for Gifted Education Policy (CGEP) reviewed the literature on current talent development models and conducted research on music conservatory students, high IQ students, and science-talented students as sources for a new developmental model called scholarly productivity/artistry (SP/A). The third stage of the SP/A model, where psychosocial dimensions of talent development play the most prominent role, serves as the framework for adolescent summer programs offered by CGEP. The authors argue that the psychosocial dimensions of talent development make gifted children and adolescents a promising population for consulting psychology.

We can count on Anders Ericcson and his colleagues to give us well written and articulated arguments that challenge our thinking. Since it is difficult to address the many points and sub-points of their extensive and meaty manuscript, we will limit our comments to two key issues that emanate from the piece: (a) the audiences that the authors address; and (b) the implications of their work for policy.

Today's forum was designed to tackle the needs of middle and high school students who have expressed or demonstrated interest in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). We present a survey of current activities available to targeted individuals, including how programs identify potential talent, as well as what the programs hope the outcomes of student participation will be. Our search is followed by implications for future research, policy and practice.

The goal of this chapter is to analyze the current U.S. approach to serving adolescents who are talented and interested in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). The first section of this chapter reviews the status of national government investments in STEM and contrasts it with private and local funding. The second section addresses key problems we view as obstacles to meeting national goals. Next we describe policy proposals that might be implemented in the future. We close by posing a challenge to our colleagues, the response to which could assist us in restoring the appeal of STEM careers for our talented youth, and perhaps offer insights into the obstacles and opportunities that exist in our colleagues' own nations.