The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 27 (2) 5 DOI: 10.21505/ajge.2018.0012 ! Tensions with the Term ‘Gifted’: New Zealand Infant and Toddler Teachers’ Perspectives on Giftedness Andrea Delaune University of Canterbury Abstract There is much contention surrounding the term ‘gifted’ within Aotearoa New Zealand and international literature. Five teachers who were identified as exemplary teachers of gifted infants and toddlers by surveyed gifted and early childhood communities participated in this study. Whilst the majority of the community members used the term ‘gifted’ comfortably, the minority of teachers within the study were not confident to do so. Their reluctance to use the term gifted is examined through the power/knowledge dynamic drawing from the theory of Michel Foucault. This study found that giftedness was normalised or abnormalised according to the perspectives of the teachers, promoting particular ways of viewing the child. There was found to be a significant disconnect between the teachers’ and communities’ usage of the term ‘gifted’ which holds implications for their ‘exemplary’ designation. Introduction Current literature, both internationally and within Aotearoa New Zealand, expresses contentions between differing concepts of giftedness (Ambrose, Tassel-Baska, Coleman, & Cross, 2010; Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2012; Tapper, 2012; Ziegler, Stoeger, & Vialle, 2012). Moltzen (2011) contends “we are further than ever from developing a universally accepted definition of giftedness and talent” (p.31). Likewise, conceptions of infants and toddlers are diverse. Infants can be conceptualised as innocent and vulnerable, and also as needy, demanding, and requiring a highly structured routine to conform with normative expectations (Nyland & Rockel, 2007). In the realm of toddlerhood, dominant discursive images of the ‘unpredictable toddler’ recur within research studies, inadvertently developing this image into a normative ‘truth’ (Cipriano & Stifter, 2010; Garner & Dunsmore, 2011; Neppl et al., 2010; Szabó et al., 2008). Yet there are other images which press against these images, such as the ‘confident and competent’ child of the early childhood curriculum, Te Whāriki (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 1996, 2017). Alongside these diverse images, consideration should be given for the consistent presentations of the gifted young child within educational research (see Allan, 2001; Gottfried, Gottfried, & Guerin, 2006; Harrison, 2004). Yet, despite this information, the image of the gifted infant and toddler is arguably a conceptual space which is underrepresented and under-theorised within curriculum policy (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 1996, 2017). Despite the consistent presentations of young children’s gifted characteristics, these representations run against the image of the ‘unpredictable’ developmental trajectory of infancy and toddlerhood. Furthermore, the utilisation of the term ‘gifted’ within educational literature in early childhood education is sparse. This paper will argue that the utilisation or rejection of the term gifted constitutes power relationships between teachers, parents, and children. At the outset of this paper, the Foucauldian theoretical underpinnings for the research will be outlined, then a small section on discourses of giftedness within Aotearoa New Zealand will be discussed to contextualise the present study. The methodology for the study will be outlined, followed by the findings and a discussion section. The paper will conclude with a section which will serve to reconcile the contextual information and the findings into final arguments. Theoretical Framework The theories of Michel Foucault (1926-1984) were concerned with the location of power within society. Foucault (2001a) explains: “If I were asked what I do…we try to bring to light what has remained until now the most hidden, the most occulted, the most deeply invested experience in the history of our culture – power relations” (p. 17). Foucault (2000) rejected the once prevalent notion of power as a direct action between autocratic individuals or factions and subjugated individuals in order to approach power as a relationship. Within Foucauldian theory, power is not located within one individual which is denied or taken from another. Instead it is located within “a certain concerted distribution of bodies, surfaces, lights, gazes; in an arrangement whose internal mechanisms