The Career Development of Gifted Students

  • Jae Yup JungEmail author


The focus of this chapter is on the career development of gifted students, a group whose exceptional abilities may mean that they have the greatest potential among the various student groups to produce achievements that have a substantial impact on others in society. After an examination of the unique set of issues that influence the career development of gifted students (e.g., areas of ability, personal interests and values, multipotentiality, perfectionism, a need for intellectual stimulation, expectations of others, career prestige, income, expectations relating to gender role, and living up to one’s potential), attention is directed to the manner in which these highly capable students commonly approach their careers. Thereafter, the career aspirations of these students are discussed, including a repeatedly identified preference for traditional, unoriginal, and investigative-type careers that involve analytical, intellectual, and scholarly activities. The chapter concludes with a discussion of two career theories that may be among the most relevant to understanding the career development of gifted students (i.e., the theory of circumscription and compromise and the theory of work adjustment), multiple empirically verified models of the career decision-making processes of gifted students, and prospects for the career development of gifted students in the future.


Gifted High ability Career Career development Career decision Career decision-making 


  1. Achter, J. A., & Lubinski, D. (2005). Blending promise with passion: Best practices for counseling intellectually talented youth. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 600–624). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Achter, J. A., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (1996). Multipotentiality among the intellectually gifted: “It was never there and already it’s vanishing”. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 56–76.Google Scholar
  3. Achter, J. A., Benbow, C. P., & Lubinski, D. (1997). Rethinking multipotentiality among the intellectually gifted: A critical review and recommendations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 5–15.Google Scholar
  4. Achter, J. A., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Eftekhari-Sanjani, H. (1999). Assessing vocational preferences among gifted adolescents adds incremental validity to abilities: A discriminant analysis of educational outcomes over a 10-year interval. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 777–786.Google Scholar
  5. Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, 3–30.Google Scholar
  6. Casey, K. M., & Shore, B. M. (2000). Mentors’ contributions to gifted adolescents’ affective, social, and vocational development. Roeper Review, 22, 227–230.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, C. P., & Wong, J. (2013). Career counseling for gifted students. Australian Journal of Career Development, 22, 121–129.Google Scholar
  8. Chudzikowski, K. (2012). Career transitions and career success in the “new” career era. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 298–306.Google Scholar
  9. Creed, P. A., Patton, W., & Prideaux, L. A. (2006). Causal relationship between career indecision and career decision-making self-efficacy. Journal of Career Development, 33, 47–65.Google Scholar
  10. Dawis, R. V. (2005). The Minnesota theory of work adjustment. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 3–23). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  12. Di Fabio, A., Palazzeschi, L., Asulin-Peretz, L., & Gati, I. (2013). Career indecision versus indecisiveness: Associations with personality traits and emotional intelligence. Journal of Career Assessment, 21, 42–56.Google Scholar
  13. Dixon, F. A., Lapsley, D. K., & Hanchon, T. A. (2004). An empirical typology of perfectionism in gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 95–106.Google Scholar
  14. Dries, N., Van Acker, F., & Verbruggen, M. (2012). How ‘boundaryless’ are the careers of high potentials, key experts and average performers? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 271–279.Google Scholar
  15. Emmett, J. D., & Minor, C. W. (1993). Career decision-making factors in gifted young adults. Career Development Quarterly, 41, 350–366.Google Scholar
  16. Ferriman, K., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 517–532.Google Scholar
  17. Fiebig, J. N. (2008). Gifted American and German adolescent women: A longitudinal examination of attachment, separation, gender roles, and career aspirations. High Ability Studies, 19, 67–81.Google Scholar
  18. Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C., & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 449–468.Google Scholar
  19. Gagné, F. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  20. Gagné, F. (2009). Building gifts into talents: Detailed overview of the DMGT 2.0. In B. MacFarlane & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Leading change in gifted education: The festschrift of Dr. Joyce Van Tassel-Baska. Waco: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gati, I., Krausz, M., & Osipow, S. H. (1996). A taxonomy of difficulties in career decision making. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 510–526.Google Scholar
  22. Gittins, R. (2017, December 13). Robots aren’t stealing jobs: truth behind claim scaring pants off our graduates. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from:
  23. Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579.Google Scholar
  24. Gottfredson, L. S. (2002). Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription, compromise, and self-creation. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 85–148). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  25. Gottfredson, L. S. (2003). The challenge and promise of cognitive career assessment. Journal of Career Assessment, 11, 115–135.Google Scholar
  26. Gottfredson, L. S. (2005). Applying Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise in career guidance and counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 71–100). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Greene, M. J. (2006). Helping build lives: Career and life development of gifted and talented students. Professional School Counseling, 10, 34–42.Google Scholar
  28. Gross, M. U. M. (2006). Exceptionally gifted children: Long-term outcomes of academic acceleration and nonacceleration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 404–429.Google Scholar
  29. Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Psychodynamics of normal and neurotic perfectionism. Psychology, 15, 27–33.Google Scholar
  30. Hartung, P. J., Porfeli, E. J., & Vondracek, F. W. (2005). Child vocational development: A review and reconsideration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 385–419.Google Scholar
  31. Harvey, B., Pallant, J., & Harvey, D. (2004). An evaluation of the factor structure of the Frost multidimensional perfectionism scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 1007–1018.Google Scholar
  32. Hawkins, C. C., Watt, H. M. G., & Sinclair, K. E. (2006). Psychometric properties of the Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale with Australian adolescent girls: Clarification of multidimensionality and perfectionist typology. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 1001–1022.Google Scholar
  33. Herr, E. L. (2003). The future of career counseling as an instrument of public policy. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 8–17.Google Scholar
  34. Herr, E. L., & Cramer, S. H. (1996). Career guidance and counseling through the lifespan: Systematic approaches (5th ed.). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  35. Hewitt, P. L., & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and association with psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456–470.Google Scholar
  36. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  37. Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ Stanford-Binet: Origins and development. Yonkers: World Book.Google Scholar
  38. Höpfl, H., & Atkinson, P. H. (2000). The future of women’s career. In A. Collin & R. Young (Eds.), The future of careers (pp. 130–143). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Jung, J. Y. (2012). Giftedness as a developmental construct that leads to eminence as adults: Ideas and implications from an occupational/career decision-making perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 189–193.Google Scholar
  40. Jung, J. Y. (2013). The cognitive processes associated with occupational/career indecision: A model for gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36, 433–460.Google Scholar
  41. Jung, J. Y. (2014). Modeling the occupational/career decision-making processes of intellectually gifted adolescents: A competing models strategy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, 128–152.Google Scholar
  42. Jung, J. Y. (2017). Occupational/career decision-making thought processes of adolescents of high intellectual ability. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 50–78.Google Scholar
  43. Jung, J. Y. (2018). Occupational/career amotivation and indecision for gifted and talented adolescents: A cognitive decisionmaking process perspective. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 28, 143-165. Google Scholar
  44. Jung, J. Y. (2019). The career decisions of gifted students and other high ability groups. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Jung, J. Y., & Evans, P. A. (2016). The career decisions of child musical prodigies. In G. E. McPherson (Ed.), Musical prodigies: Interpretations from psychology, music education, musicology and ethnomusicology (pp. 409–423). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Jung, J. Y., & McCormick, J. (2011). The occupational decision: A cultural and motivational perspective. Journal of Career Assessment, 19, 75–91.Google Scholar
  47. Jung, J. Y., & Young, M. (2017). Occupational/career indecision for economically disadvantaged high school students of high intellectual ability: A mixed methods cognitive process model. Psychology in the Schools, 54, 718–735.Google Scholar
  48. Jung, J. Y., McCormick, J., Gregory, G., & Barnett, K. (2011). Culture, motivation, and vocational decision-making of Australian senior high school students in private schools. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 21, 85–106.Google Scholar
  49. Kelly, K. R., & Cobb, S. J. (1991). A profile of the career development characteristics of young gifted adolescents: Examining gender and multicultural influences. Roeper Review, 13, 202–206.Google Scholar
  50. Kerr, B. A., & Colangelo, N. (1988). The college plans of academically talented students. Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 42–48.Google Scholar
  51. Kerr, B. A., & Sodano, S. (2003). Career assessment with intellectually gifted students. Journal of Career Assessment, 11, 168–186.Google Scholar
  52. Kher-Durlabhji, N., Lacina-Gifford, L. J., Carter, R. C., & Lalande, L. K. (1997). A career in teaching: Comparing views of gifted and talented adolescents. Journal for Secondary Gifted Education, 9, 21–27.Google Scholar
  53. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122.Google Scholar
  54. Leung, S. A. (1998). Vocational identity and career choice congruence of gifted and talented high school students. Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 11, 325–335.Google Scholar
  55. Leung, S. A., Conoley, C. W., & Scheel, M. J. (1994). The career and educational aspirations of gifted high school students: A retrospective study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 298–303.Google Scholar
  56. Littleton, S., Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. (2000). The future of boundaryless careers. In A. Collin & R. Young (Eds.), The future of careers (pp. 101–114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Lofquist, L. H., & Dawis, R. V. (1991). Essentials of person-environment-correspondence counseling. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  58. Lubinski, D. (1996). Applied individual differences research and its quantitative methods. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 187–203.Google Scholar
  59. Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2000). States of excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 137–150.Google Scholar
  60. Makel, M., Kell, H. J., Lubinski, D., Putallaz, M., & Benbow, C. P. (2016). When lightning strikes twice: Profoundly gifted, profoundly accomplished. Psychological Science, 27, 1004–1018.Google Scholar
  61. Marland, S. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U. S. Commissioner of Education. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  62. Matthews, D. J., & Foster, J. F. (2005). Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education. Roeper Review, 28, 64–69.Google Scholar
  63. Maxwell, M. (2007). Career counseling is personal counseling: A constructivist approach to nurturing the development of gifted female adolescents. The Career Development Quarterly, 55, 206–224.Google Scholar
  64. Milgram, R. M., & Hong, E. (1999). Multipotential abilities and vocational interests in gifted adolescents: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Psychology, 34, 81–93.Google Scholar
  65. Miller, K., & Cummings, G. (2009). Gifted and talented students’ career aspirations and influences: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 6, Article 8.Google Scholar
  66. Missett, T. C., & McCormick, K. M. (2014). Conceptions of giftedness. In J. A. Plucker & C. M. Callahan (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 143–158). Waco: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
  67. Muratori, M. C., & Smith, C. K. (2015). Guiding the talent and career development of the gifted individual. Journal of Counseling and Development, 93, 173–182.Google Scholar
  68. Passaretta, G., & Wolbers, M. H. (2019). Temporary employment at labour market entry in Europe: Labour market dualism, transitions to secure employment and upward mobility. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 40, 382–408. Google Scholar
  69. Quinn, J. B. (1992). Intelligent enterprise. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  70. Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184.Google Scholar
  71. Renzulli, J. S. (1988). A decade of dialogue on the three-ring conception of giftedness. Roeper Review, 11, 18–25.Google Scholar
  72. Richardson, M. S. (2000). A new perspective for counselors: From career ideologies to empowerment through work and relationship practices. In A. Collin & R. Young (Eds.), The future of careers (pp. 197–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Rysiew, K. J., Shore, B. M., & Carson, A. D. (1994). Multipotentiality and overchoice syndrome: Clarifying common usage. Gifted and Talented International, 9, 41–46.Google Scholar
  74. Rysiew, K. J., Shore, B. M., & Leeb, R. T. (1999). Multipotentiality, giftedness, and career choice: A review. Journal of Counseling and Development, 77, 423–430.Google Scholar
  75. Sajjadi, S. H., Rejskind, F. G., & Shore, B. M. (2001). Is multipotentiality a problem or not? A new look at the data. High Ability Studies, 12, 27–43.Google Scholar
  76. Sampson, J. P., Jr., & Chason, A. K. (2008). Helping gifted and talented adolescents and young adults make informed and careful career choices. In S. I. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (pp. 327–346). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  77. Savickas, M. L. (2003). Special issue: Career counseling in the next decade. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 87–96.Google Scholar
  78. Schmidt, D. B., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (1998). Validity of assessing educational–vocational preference dimensions among intellectually talented 13-year-olds. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 436–453.Google Scholar
  79. Schuler, P. A. (2000). Perfectionism and gifted adolescents. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11, 183–196.Google Scholar
  80. Scott, A. B., & Mallinckrodt, B. (2005). Parental emotional support, science self-efficacy, and choice of science major in undergraduate women. The Career Development Quarterly, 53, 263–273.Google Scholar
  81. Snow, R. E., & Lohman, D. F. (1989). Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 263–331). New York: Collier.Google Scholar
  82. Sosniak, L. A. (1985). Learning to be a concert pianist. In B. S. Bloom (Ed.), Developing talent in young people (pp. 19–67). New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
  83. Sparfeldt, J. R. (2007). Vocational interests of gifted adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1011–1021.Google Scholar
  84. Stewart, J. B. (1999). Career counseling for the academically gifted student. Canadian Journal of Counseling, 33, 3–12.Google Scholar
  85. Storey, J. A. (2000). “Fracture lines” in the career environment. In A. Collin & R. A. Young (Eds.), The future of career (pp. 21–36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Störmer, E., Patscha, C., Prendergast, J., Daheim, C., Rhisiart, M., Glover, P., & Beck, H. (2014). The future of work: Jobs and skills in 2030. London: U. K. Commission for Employment and Skills.Google Scholar
  87. Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3–54.Google Scholar
  88. Sullivan, S. E. (1999). The changing nature of careers: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 25, 457–484.Google Scholar
  89. Tang, M. (2003). Career counseling in the future: Constructing, collaborating, advocating. The Career Development Quarterly, 52, 61–69.Google Scholar
  90. Tannenbaum, A. J. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21–52). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Tannenbaum, A. (2000). History of giftedness in school and society. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 23–53). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  92. Tannenbaum, A. J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 45–59). New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
  93. Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius, volume I: Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Verbruggen, M. (2010). Career counseling in the new career era. Review of Business and Economics, 55, 2–22.Google Scholar
  95. Vock, M., Köller, O., & Nagy, G. (2013). Vocational interests of intellectually gifted and highly achieving young adults. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 305–328.Google Scholar
  96. Watts, A. G. (2000). The new career and public policy. In A. Collin & R. Young (Eds.), The future of careers (pp. 259–275). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  97. White, N. J., & Tracey, T. J. G. (2011). An examination of career indecision and application to dispositional authenticity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78, 219–224.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations