Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010 ✤ pp. 714–739

Mentoring for
Talent Development,
Creativity, Social
Skills, and Insider
Knowledge:
The APA Catalyst Program
Rena F. Subotnik
Ashley M. Edmiston
Lucas Cook
Michael D. Ross
American Psychological Associationt

Background on Talent Development

Talent Development and Mentoring
The mentoring component of the American Psychological
Association Catalyst Program, and the Pinnacle Model uponwhich it was built, was derived from Bloom’s (1985) model oftalent development in six domains Ð two in the arts (sculpture
and piano performance), two in sports (tennis and swimming),
and two in the academic realm (mathematics and neuroscience).
According to Bloom and his associates, optimal instruction
for talent development takes place in three stages. During thefirst stage, young people are guided to fall in love with a topic,
714

Copyright © 2010 Prufrock Press, P.O. Box 8813, Waco, TX 76714

The mentoring component of the American Psychological Association
Catalyst Program, and the Pinnacle Model upon which it was built, wasderived from Bloom’s (1985) model of talent development. According
to Bloom and his associates, optimal instruction for talent development
takes place in three stages. During the first stage, young people are
guided to fall in love with a topic, idea, or discipline. The second stage
involves instruction in the skills, knowledge, and values of the domain.
In the third and final stage, the talented young person learns to apply hissage, and to explore original problems. The Catalyst Program is a yearlong program designed to support the transition from the second to thethird stage of Bloom’s talent development model though instruction by
renowned masters in science and the arts and places a premium on thementor/scholar relationship in guiding participating adolescents in theirscientific interests and career aspirations. For the Catalyst Scholars, connecting to their team Master was the thread through which the Scholars
integrated their experience with chemistry, creativity, and insider knowledge. Catalyst participants came to the program having already “usedup” any resources they had available to them in their school or in other
out-of-school programs, and sought more intense involvement with acareer path they had tentatively committed themselves to. In the courseof the experience, they refined their goals, learned what it takes to be
successful, and made powerful and lasting friendships and contacts thatshould prepare them optimally to be future innovators.

Subotnik, R. F., Edmiston, A. M., Cook, L., & Ross, M. D. (2010). Mentoring for talentdevelopment, creativity, social skills, and insider knowledge: The APA Catalyst Program.
Journal of Advanced Academics, 21, 714–739.

summaryor her passion and technical mastery to create a unique style and mes-

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

idea, or discipline. The second stage involves instruction in theskills, knowledge, and values of the domain. In the third andfinal stage, the talented young person learns to apply his or her
passion and technical mastery to create a unique style and message, and to explore original problems. The Catalyst Program isdesigned to support the transition from the second to the third
stage of Bloom’s talent development model though the guidanceof renowned masters in science and the arts.
The concept of mentoring goes back at least 2000 years toHomer, who in his epic poem The Iliad, describes the goddessAthena disguising herself and calling herself Mentor to act as ateacher and guardian to Odysseus’ son Telemachus. Mentoring in
the modern era is wonderfully described by Zuckerman (1977),
who highlighted the professional and intellectual networks provided to American Nobel laureates by their mentors (many ofwhom were laureates themselves), as well as the guidance provided
in identifying the most promising scientific research questions.
Like other departments of culture, science has its own
esthetic. Among the elite scientists, the prize criteria of
scientific taste are a sense for the “important” problem
and an appreciation of stylish solutions. For them, deep
problems and elegant solutions distinguish excellent science from the merely competent or commonplace. Thisrequires good modeling and intuition and develops during interaction with mentors. (Zuckerman, 1977, p. 127)
Mentoring programs in schools often focus on short-term rolemodeling, designed to motivate and inspire. However, mentoring in the case of Zuckerman’s (1977) example and the Catalyst
Program involves long-term commitments in which mentors
choose their mentees as potential protégés. The relationshipcomprises not only role modeling, but intellectual “sparring,”
connections with important members of a field, and sometimes
emotional support (Jacobi, 1991).

716

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

Talent Development and Psychosocial Skills
The Catalyst Program encourages the development of psychosocial skills for participating adolescents as they transition
between the acquisition of expertise and scholarly productivity
described in the Scholarly Productivity/Artistry (SP/A) model oftalent development (Subotnik & Jarvin, 2005). SP/A was developed in response to 5 years of research at three elite conservatories
of music and later applied to the development of mathematicaltalent (Subotnik, Pillmeier, & Jarvin, 2009). As a developmental model, it focuses on transformations of abilities into competencies, and competencies into expertise and beyond to SP/A.
Each transition is enhanced by growth in the psychosocial skills
unique to each transition period. During the transition between
the acquisition of expertise and scholarly productivity, talented
young people begin to challenge their teachers’ ideas with theirown, understand that they need to promote themselves to people
who can help them, make an effort to be a good colleague, takecreative risks, and learn to restore their self-confidence when it
diminishes in challenging contexts.
Some adolescents are highly adept socially and exhibit resilience and incremental views of intelligence and talent; many more
can benefit from interventions that provide instruction in social
skills, reinforcement of self-confidence and resilience, and support
for psychological strength when coping with challenging and competitive environments (Good & Dweck, 2006; Subotnik, 2002).

Creative Link Between Science and Art
At the highest levels in each field, scientists seek aesthetic solutions to scientific problems and artistic path breakers shake up ideasthat have taken hold in their community (Root-Bernstein, 2003a,
2003b). Root-Bernstein (2008) has written extensively about interdisciplinarity as it relates to creativity. He maintains that the art
and science communities are made up of creative polymathic (multitalented) individuals, and that serious involvement with artistic
endeavors on the part of scientists predicts scientific success. More

Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

717

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

specifically, he compares Nobel-prize-winning scientists’ degreeof engagement in arts avocations with those of members of the
National Academy of Science, British Royal Society, members of
Sigma Xi (a scientific honor society), and the general U.S. public.
“Nobel laureates were almost three times as likely to have arts andcrafts avocations as Sigma Xi members and the U.S. public, and
50% more likely to have such avocations than the Royal Society or
National Academy of Science members” (Root-Bernstein, 2008, p.
290). This connection, Root-Bernstein (2008) hypothesized, may
be related to scientists seeking effective communication of new andoften radical ideas.
Braun (1997) provided historical examples of how expertisein the arts inspired an invention or other moment of scientificcreativity. ‘Frequency hopping’ is the term used to describe therandom changing of radio frequencies used in torpedo guidance,and refers to
broadcasting a signal . . . over a seemingly random series ofradio frequencies, switching from frequency to frequency
at split second intervals. A receiver hopping between frequencies in sync with the transmitter can pick up themessage, while any eavesdropper will hear only random
blips. (Braun, 1997, p. 5)
If an attack submarine stayed on one weapon delivery frequency
or varied in a predictable pattern, the commands to the weapon
could be easily jammed by an enemy. Actress Hedy Lamarr’s
first husband was an armaments manufacturer, and she becamefamiliar with some of the technological challenges of the business. She collaborated with composer and concert pianist George
Antheil to invent what is now known as frequency hopping basedon their understanding of music theory and structure.
As a result of his experience with the mechanics of humanphysiological functioning, ventriloquist Paul Winchell received
a patent for an artificial heart that once kept a transplant patient
alive for 65 hours until the patient could get a donated organ.
These brief examples illustrate how musicians, actors, and other
718

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

creative individuals can directly influence and contribute to scientific advancement based on their own specialized knowledge
and tendency to “think outside the box.”

Insider/Tacit Knowledge
As previously mentioned, Zuckerman (1977) reported thatmentors of Nobel laureates were successful at passing along an
extremely salient piece of tacit knowledge to their menteesÐ how
to generate the most important scientific questions. Even before
reaching the advanced graduate level, talented and committed
young people get socialized into the science enterprise as they learn
the logic of inquiry and evaluating evidence (Gaston, 1989). Theirsocialization often takes place in the course of apprenticing withactive researchers as undergraduates (Bowman & Stage, 2002) or,as in the case of the Catalyst Program, as early as high school.
Many high school students who are outstanding achievers inmathematics and science have not experienced persistent failurein their path through school. An apprenticeship with a Masterscientist exposes them for the first time to both the exciting anddeflating patterns of success and failure that are part of the life
in a laboratory or research institute. Students who have not been
actively involved in science fairs will not have practiced defending
their creative work to others who question their methods, conclusions, or even the purpose of the study. Preparing for these kindsof challenges is an important component of being socialized into
the culture or science, a chance to “try on for size” a career as ascientific researcher.

Talent Development at the American
Psychological Association
The Center for Gifted Education Policy
The Center for Gifted Education Policy (CGEP) resides in
the American Psychological Association’s Education Directorate.
Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

719

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

Its mission is to generate public awareness, advocacy, clinicalapplications, and cutting-edge research ideas that will enhance
the achievement and performance of children and adolescentswith special gifts and talents in all domains, including the academic disciplines, the performing arts, sports, and the professions. The Center was first created and funded by the American
Psychological Foundation in order to bring more attention to
the topic of giftedness, particularly to psychological scientists
and practitioners. Since 2004, CGEP has been supported by theAmerican Psychological Association (APA) and grants from theJack Kent Cooke Foundation, The Camille and Henry Dreyfus
Foundation, and the National Science Foundation. Although
CGEP pursues its mission through several programs and initiatives, CGEP’s current direct services project is the Catalyst
Program, a mentorship program for adolescents talented in thechemical sciences.

Pinnacle: The Foundational Talent Development Model
The Catalyst Program, and its earlier iterations, were derived
from the APA Pinnacle Model, conceived in 2000 by Martin
Seligman, a key founder of the field of positive psychology.
Seligman envisioned a mentoring program that supported andpromoted optimal human performance in a number of important fields for the most talented young students in the U.S. With
this vision in mind, CGEP developed a year-long program thatteamed (a) a MasterÐ an eminent scholar or performer in the arts,
sciences, or the professions; (b) an AssociateÐ a rising star in thesame field, usually a graduate or postdoctoral student; and (c) aScholarÐ a highly gifted high school student with demonstrated
interest and talent in that field. The goal of the Pinnacle Model
was to bring together developed and developing talent in order to:• publicize the talent development needs of gifted
adolescents;• provide an opportunity for highly gifted adolescents tolearn from and be guided by mentors in their fields ofinterest;
720

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross•••

plan investigations that would serve as a basis of mentoring relationships;
discuss in a safe forum the joys, psychological stresses,
and expectations associated with talent development atthe very highest levels; andestablish a venue for fertilization of ideas about talentdevelopment across disciplines.

The Pinnacle Model has been implemented seven times by
various funders for various populations of gifted students in the
U.S., and has attracted the participation of two Pulitzer Prize winners (Amy Goldstein, Washington Post and Alex Jones, Shorenstein
Center, Harvard University); an Emmy Award winner (Philip
Scheffler, 60 Minutes); two Nobel laureates (Joshua Lederberg,
Rockefeller University, and Barry Blumberg, Fox Chase Center);three New York Times bestselling authors (Faye and Jonathan
Kellerman, Janette Turner Hospital); distinguished social scientists(Martin Seligman and Carol Dweck); an artist whose work is displayed in major museums in the United States and England (Sam
Maitin); and renowned modern composers who are key faculty
members at the Tanglewood Composer’s Institute and the New
England Conservatory (Michael Gandolfi) and the Juilliard School(Andrew Thomas). Additional Masters have included: a conductorof the Pennsylvania Ballet Orchestra (Beatrice Affron); a Juilliard
choreographer (Stephen Pier); seven National Academy of Sciences
members (Paul Barbara, Carolyn Bertozzi, Louis Brus, Francis
DiSalvo, Daniel Nocera, William Klemperer, and Cumrun Vafa);
one member of the National Academy of Engineering (Matthew
Tirrell); as well as other distinguished scientists from top-ranked
programs (Ronald Andres, Martin Head-Gordon, Tom Muir,
Giacinto Scoles, and Stephen Sibener).
The Pinnacle Model focuses on optimal performance andthe psychosocial support from colleagues and advisors needed
to meet challenges of developing talent over time. According
to Bloom (1985), young people with potential talent need: (a)peers to engage with at their level; (b) instruction in rules andtechniques associated with their areas of passion; and (c) guid-Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

721

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

ance to transform interest in a topic into a great performanceor idea. Pinnacle Masters and Associates provide participating
youngsters with content expertise; values of the field or subject;and opportunities to engage with people of all ages with similar interests. Other teachable skills promoted by the Pinnacle
Model include being a good teammate and dependable colleague,
accepting praise graciously, and encouraging peers when they do
not succeed at a difficult task (Jarvin & Subotnik, 2006).

The Catalyst Project
The Catalyst Program, based on the Pinnacle Model, hasbeen funded by The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation andis designed as an out-of-school program for adolescents with deep
interests in and commitment to chemistry. The Catalyst Program
immerses participants in the talent development of young scientists by combining intensive exploration in a specific discipline by
way of intergenerational advice and consultation, as well as interdisciplinary creative stimulation. The Pinnacle Model includes
one Scholar per team; however, the Catalyst version of the model
includes three to five Scholars per team to increase the impact ofthe program and provide peer support for the participants. Whatfollows is a description of the Catalyst Program in more detail.
Each component parallels and builds upon the Pinnacle Model.
Participants. Each of four Catalyst chemistry teams consist of a
Master, who leads and mentors a group of one or two Associates
and three to five Scholars. Masters are selected based on theireminence in the field, willingness to mentor talented adolescents,and openness to engage in interdisciplinary discussion and activity. Associates are invited by each Master based on their promising career status as well as their ability to communicate well about
their field of interest. From the perspective of the high school age
scholars, the Associates serve as more proximal role models thanthe Masters and provide a more accessible expert to work withon their project during the academic year following the Summit.
The Scholars are 14± 17-year-old adolescents, most typically ris722

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

ing seniors. The program also includes three Masters in various
artistic disciplines. The artists are integral to the Catalyst experience as they model creative exploration and problem solving inseparate yet complementary media.
Chemistry Masters volunteer for this project not only becauseof their commitment to raising the next generation of talented
chemical scientists, but because of the chance the project provides
to mingle with outstandingly creative Masters from artistic disciplines. Associates, adult rising stars, find the Summit rewarding
because it offers an opportunity to teach, spend intensive timewith their mentor, and to meet other chemists who will serveas excellent contacts in the future. And, like the Masters, theAssociates welcome the occasion to become acquainted with andbe stimulated by interactions with outstanding artists.
The Summit. During a week in late June to early July, Masters,
Associates, and Scholars delve into domain-specific and interdisciplinary discussion and project planning. Although the artist
Masters do not mentor high school students individually, they
provide lectures and demonstrations to everyone in the Catalyst
community and participate actively in all aspects of the program.
The Summit site is selected for its proximity to arts venues
and distance from distractions of Masters’ daily responsibilities.
Five of the seven iterations of the Pinnacle Model summit, including Catalyst, have been conducted at Williams College, in theBerkshire Mountains of Massachusetts. The campus is ideal as aninterdisciplinary venue in that it houses two outstanding art museums, a library of historic documents, and a professional theater.
Tanglewood Music Festival, Jacob’s Pillow Dance Festival, andShakespeare and Company are all within an hour of the College.
Each day of the Summit includes team meetings (where theChemistry Master, Associate, and Scholars generate the beginnings of a yearlong project), Masters’ lectures or demonstrations,round-table discussions, and cultural and recreational activities.
The objective of the team sessions is to establish a yearlong mentoring relationship based on an original research project. Masters
and Associates share the work they are doing in their laborato-

Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

723

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

ries, explore Scholars’ own interests, and find commonalities to
explore. The objective of the round-table discussions is to focus
on frank considerations of the insider or tacit knowledge it takes
to attain career success. Some round-table discussion topics haveincluded dealing with failed experiments, extrinsic and intrinsic
rewards of scientific research, or addressing conflicts with parental expectations (e.g., wanting to be a researcher instead of a doctor or engineer). Other planned activities are designed to elicit
creative connections among and across disciplines, and focus ondeveloping support and friendships among talented adolescentsand adults. For example, Arts Composition Master Andrew
Thomas prepared the group for Tanglewood performances bydiscussing the structure of the pieces to be performed and thepieces’ creative contribution to the music literature.
The Mentoring Project. In order to facilitate regular interactions
among team members during the academic year, Scholar candidates must live within geographical proximity to the Master withwhom they will be working. A pool of Scholar candidates is solicited from talent searches, local specialized high schools, and othergifted programs in the area. Each of these sources is provided with
an application developed in consultation with each Master.
The application is designed to show that the students demonstrated interest and experience in advanced chemistry reflects
the particular attributes and experiences each Master is seeking
in potential Scholars (see Figure 1 for sample questions from a
Master’s application to Scholar candidates). Essay questions relate
to the Master’s area of expertise and topics that may end up beinga basis for a group or individual project. Masters seek to elicit from
Scholar candidates how they address material they may not have
yet encountered, with opportunities to reveal interest and curiosity. The Masters then select their Scholar participants based on
responses to the application and sometimes a follow-up interview.
Following the Summit, Masters and their Associates maintain a relationship with the Scholars on their team through visits,
telephone calls, or e-mail correspondence. By the end of the next
academic year, each Scholar is expected to complete a project dis724

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross
Please respond to each of the following questions in not more that 1-2
paragraphs:
1. Please list and briefly describe hobbies or interests you pursuethat relate in any way to science.
2. Please list any honors or awards you have received that are in
any way connected to science. It would be helpful if you could
provide the date and a brief explanation for each. If you haveone, please attach a Curriculum Vitae.
3. Have you completed any projects in any subject that haveextended beyond one semester? If so, please describe.
4. Do you enjoy working with your hands, if so, can you describe
an effort you have made to build something to meet a need?
5. Write a brief letter of introduction to Dr. XX (bio provided), including information about what attracts you to this program, what
you would like to learn from this mentorship in science and what
you would like to accomplish over the course of the Catalyst
summit and post-summit experiences. you can also include thefollowing information—What are your career dreams? Do you
envision yourself as a research scientist, engineer or physician?
If so, is there a particular subspecialty or area in science thatyou are most interested in? What appeals to you about work in
the clinic, laboratory or research institute?
6. If you consider yourself a hands-on experimentalist please
describe briefly why and what role (if any) you think theory
should have in science. Vice versa if you are oriented toward
theory—please describe why and what the role of experimental science is as you see it in furthering the progress of humanknowledge.

Figure 1. Questions from a sample application.

cussed and/or developed during the Summit, under the guidanceof the team’s Master and/or Associate.
Scholars, Masters, and Associates return to the Summit thefollowing year to display the Scholars’ projects and interact withmembers of the incoming cohort. Some sample Catalyst projects
include: Antibiotic Susceptibility of E. coli Mutants Deficientin the Production of Reduced Sulfur, The Absorption of the
Alzheimer’s Beta-amyloid Protein Under Spatial Constraints
Using Scanning Probe Microscopy Techniques, and Explorationof Nanoparticles as a Means to Fight Cancer. Return of the preVolume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010725

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

vious cohort creates a growing community of individuals who
continue to help one another by providing connections, information, recommendations, and creative collaborations that allow
for continued development of talent, successful career planning,support, and encouragement.

Participant Follow-Up
Participating Scholars are monitored for progress towardmeeting Catalyst goals. Since Catalyst began in late 2007, twocohorts have completed the yearlong process. The universities
attended by Catalyst Scholar Alumni include: Boston University,
Brown University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Harvey Mudd
College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Pomona College,
Princeton University, Rice University, Stanford University, U.C.
Berkeley, U.C. San Diego, University of Pennsylvania, Wesleyan
University, and Yale University.
Each of the 23 Catalyst Scholars from the previous twocohorts was asked a series of questions regarding how the program had affected his or her interest in research science (see Table1). The first set of questions focused on their experiences at the
weeklong Summit and asked them to rate a list of skills andabilities that they felt were either enhanced, they already had, orthey felt were neither enhanced nor did they already have them.
Some of the Scholars indicated that they both came with a skill
and it was increased over the course of the summit, resulting insome of the totals being greater than 23.
The two factors that the Scholars found were most improvedby their experiences at the Summit were learning how to present their scientific ideas effectively and developing a deeper
understanding of the creative process. These factors are stressed
throughout the program as researchers present their complicatedscientific procedures and conclusions in terms that laypeople willfind understandable. Promoting creativity is one of the pillars of
the program, especially given that creativity is not often linked in
the minds of school-age individuals with the chemical sciences.
726

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

Table 1

Post Summit Responses
I came withthis to theCatalyst
SummitIncreased
during Summit

Neither camein with orincreased

I learn science fast

20

5

—

I’m open to being taught
new things in science

20

10

—

I enjoy receiving recognition
for my ideas and work inscience14

6

2

I’m persistent when it comesto science

18

6

1

I’m intrinsically motivatedto pursue my interests inscience15

12—

I know my strengths andweaknesses in science

9

15

2

I know how to present myscientific ideas effectively

10

17

1

I have good skills of
teamwork and collegiality

16

10

—

I have self-confidence

17

10

2

I am willing to takeintellectual/creative risks inscience913

2

I understand what makes forcreativity in science and
art

7

17

—

A follow-up survey was distributed to the Scholars after they
had completed their yearlong programs to explore the overall
effect of their experiences working alongside their Master andAssociates on a long-term project. The questions included thefollowing:
1. Where are you in school now? Include whether you’re inhigh school or university, what year, and your major.
2. Have you maintained contact with other Catalyst participants? From your team? From other teams? One of
the artists?
Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

727

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

3. Do you think the experience made you more or less likely
to go into the sciences in general? Into research science?
Into chemistry related research?

•
•
•
•
•

Please comment on the major benefits (or lack of) accrued
from your Catalyst experience with regard to each:
Deeper understanding and expertise in chemistry
Insights into being creative in chemical sciences
Insights into the creative process in general (by exposure
to artists)
Insider knowledge about how to be successful in yourcareer
Association with your Master

The purpose of these questions was to ascertain whether the students had acquired a better idea of how to be creative in chemistry, gained useful advice through the program on how to be
successful in achieving their career goals, achieved a deeper
understanding of chemistry, and had acquired more experienceon how to be creative in general.
At the time of the data collection, 8 were entering theirsenior year in high school and 15 were entering their freshmanor sophomore years in college. Of the college students, 10 had
declared (or planned to declare) a major in a STEM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math) field and the remaining 5
were undeclared. The STEM fields either declared or intended
to declare include:• 7-year accelerated medical/liberal arts program (a dual
degree in both medicine and psychology; 1 student)• Computer science (2 students)• Physics (2 students, 1 with a double major in math)• Engineering (1 student)• Dual degree in chemical engineering and materials science (2 students)• Intent to major in chemistry, math, or microbiology (1student)• Intent to major in one of the sciences (1 student)
728

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

The participants noted that the program had an effect on theirdecision to go into a scientific field by either solidifying a previous decision, convincing them to consider entering the field by
opening up the range of career possibilities, or by showing themthat the reality of a career of a research scientist was not a good
match for them.
Through exposure to the different areas of chemistry,
Catalyst helped me to make the decision to go into chemical engineering and materials science. Further, I was able
to use the advice and experiences I gathered from working
at [my Master’s] lab to help develop criteria for college
selection and make my ultimate decision. (2007 Scholar)
Seventeen of the respondents reported keeping in touchwith members of their team, either Masters, Associates, or other
Scholars. Of those 17, 14 responded that they kept regular contact
with Scholars not only in their own teams, but also other teams
via social networking sites such as Facebook.
One of the main goals of the Catalyst Program is to encourage students with a demonstrated interest in Chemistry to pursue
a research-based career by exposing them to advanced exploratory
opportunities at a young age. When asked about the impact of the
program on their decision to go into the sciences, into research science, and into chemistry-related research, 18 out of 23 responded
that the Catalyst Program made them more likely to go into thesciences, with 10 saying that it increased their interest in pursuingresearch opportunities at the undergraduate level, although notnecessarily in chemistry. Four students said that they had alreadycome with an interest in science and while the Catalyst Programprovided support for that interest, the program did not change theircareer or university plans. One student said that the experience wasenough to show her that she did not want to go down a research
path and that working in a lab was not for her.
I still plan to pursue science in my college major. Whilethe experience has been AMAZING, I think it has madeVolume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

729

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

me less likely to go into scientific research. That is OK
though because it gave me such a great insight into what
research entails and what kind of work I would be doingthat it made me decide against choosing it as a career.
(2008 Scholar)
Eleven of the Scholars commented specifically on how their
exposure to creativity both at the Summit and while working
in their Masters’ labs increased their insight into chemistry as acreative field, either forging a link that previously did not exist or
strengthening one that did.
I always thought of myself as a creative person, andthough I’ve always been interested in math and science, I
felt like these subjects did not give me enough avenues tobe creative. Catalyst showed me that the whole research
process is a reflection of an individual’s creativity whether
it be developing the problem to be tested or analyzing
how to prevent error. (2008 Scholar)
In response to questions about career advice they received
during the Catalyst Program, 5 Scholars reported that they did
not receive any personal advice for how to follow a career path
to become a research scientist and would have liked to (3 did
not respond). However, 15 reported that they received a clearer
impression or view of what constitutes a successful scientist andhow those skills could be put into practice.
I got a valuable preview of what would be facing me if I
chose this academic path, something which almost noneof my school peers have, some of whom seemed to havepicked their majors by throwing darts. (2007 Scholar)
Working so closely in a lab with graduate students and theprofessor, I received some great insights as to how things
work in the science side of academia, and I was treatedto a plethora of good advice about college and graduate
730

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

school in general as well as that which is specific to thefield of chemistry. The thing that we did not see much of
however (though I was relieved), was the political side ofacademia. In a later position, I received more information
about research from the perspective of administrators andthose running the lab, astonishing me with the infighting and challenges that are faced at higher levels. These
insights combined will undoubtedly help me in whatever
career I choose to enter. (2007 Scholar)

Talent Development and
Mentoring at Catalyst
The Catalyst Program places a premium on the mentor/scholar
relationship in guiding participating adolescents in their scientific interests and career aspirations. For the Catalyst Scholars,connecting to their team Master was the thread through which
the Scholars integrated their experience with chemistry, creativity, and insider knowledge. According to Steven Sibener, a 2008
Catalyst Master in physical chemistry (University of Chicago):
We will play a singular role acting as mentors for an
exceptionally gifted cohort of young scholars. Exposure
to our laboratories, graduate students, undergraduates,
and advanced instrumentation will emphasize that science is an open book, with many forefront questions tobe answered, and related important discoveries yet to be
made. The relationship developed over the year also gives
these students many mentors that span the path from highschool through university students to faculty, an invaluable resource for these young scholars. As a mentor, I act
as the point person in this relationship, exposing them
to forefront ideas in modern chemistry, and watching as
they move well beyond the typical curriculum of theirhigh schools. This road will undoubtedly lead to critical questions such as how one sifts through and chooses
Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010731

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

research problems given the broad palette presented to astarting research student. Hopefully the excitement generated by this will continue with them as they enter theirnext phase of scholarly pursuit in their chosen colleges
and universities.
Opportunities for intensive relationships with eminent scientists and artists like the Catalyst Program rarely present themselves until college, and even then, typically not before the junioror senior years. In his exploration of research mathematicians,
Gustin (1985) discovered that the majority of his gifted study
participants found high school to be lacking in challenging material and deficient of teachers who had the skills to be able tonurture their talents. Only when they got to university did theyfind professors who could offer advanced courses or lab experiences. In contrast, the Catalyst Program’s goal is to provide anenriched and advanced experience during the high school years
in order to solidify interest in science, show possibilities that exist
in research, and hopefully nurture a commitment to a STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) major andcareer interest in the field.

The Contribution of Psychosocial Skills
to Talent Development at Catalyst
By helping their Scholars gain confidence, providing a safe
forum for exploration, and offering emotional support, Catalyst
Masters are able to transcend young people’s exclusive focus
on academic expectations both from an established viewpoint(Masters) and from those who are entering the field as professionals (Associates). The team meetings and mealtime round-tablediscussions provide opportunities for discussions relating to issues
associated with giftedness as well as the expectations that comealong with it.
I think working/living/eating comfortably with [a mentor] of such high caliber has made me more comfort732

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

able interacting with people in general. I feel a lot more
comfortable asking questions or speaking my mind. Thiswas especially helpful during my college/med programinterviews. Generally one of the objectives during theinterview (other than evaluating my responses) was to see
how I acted in uncomfortable settings, so I met plenty ofslightly intimidating, unsmiling interviewers who asked
difficult questions. But I felt I had an easier time of it,
because I was so used to interacting with the science andart Masters. (2007 Scholar)
Catalyst Scholars network with individuals of all ages whoshare their interests in thinking creatively about science, arts,
domestic, and global issues. The frequency and intensity of interaction at the Summit provides the foundation for forming strong
personal relationships among participants, and the freedom totake intellectual risks during team meetings.

Creative Link Between Science and Art at Catalyst
A major draw of the Catalyst Program that sets it apartfrom other summer science programs is the connection it fosters between science and art. The experience provides relatively
intimate contact with various art forms in the context of resolving aesthetic contradictions for artists and idea contradictions forscientists (Perrine & Broderson, 2005).
Art Masters participate in the Catalyst Program by offering
presentations, demonstrations, and active contributions to discussion on every topic. The fields they represent include music composition, choreography, sculpture, journalism (not an art form but
an area that many Scholars are interested in), and culinary arts.
Although the idea is to enhance the Scholars’ creative approachto science, watching the fascination, admiration, and engagement
shown by the Master scientists for the artists models appreciation
for conceptions of creative thinking across disciplines.

Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010733

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

Before Catalyst, I hadn’t considered the fact that creativity ties together art and science. Now I feel like creativity
lies in recognizing patterns and striving to understandthem, or maybe break them. (2007 Scholar)
Communicating with the artists, as well as attending art
museums and performances, really juxtaposed the creativity required to produce great works of art with the systematic process used in the sciences. In the end I learned
that it was a lot of give and take on both sides, as science
required a lot of creativity to solve ever more complex
problems, while music and art sometimes relied on organizational methods to perfect their pieces. I realized thatto harness both to their fullest extent, one must create
a synergy between creativity and a systematic approach,whether in the arts or the sciences. (2008 Scholar)
Based on examples in the arts and sciences, Catalyst Scholars
observed how taking educated and calculated creative risks may
result in failureÐ or great discovery.

Insider/Tacit Knowledge at Catalyst
Highly academically talented students do not typically receive
the kind of insider knowledge provided to elite artistic performers
such as where to study and with whom, how to hold a successful interview, and how to promote oneself tastefully (Jarvin &Subotnik, 2006). The Catalyst Program, both through intergenerational exposure to scientific researchers and interaction withartists, offered a forum for sharing insider or tacit knowledge
associated with career success.
I learned that scientific research does not solely revolvearound science. It requires communication skills and creative thinking. One of things that I really liked about
the Catalyst program was the fact that it allowed me togain insider knowledge about pursuing a career in sci734

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

entific research. Catalyst for example allowed me to see
what pursuing a degree in chemistry would be like andwhere I could go from there once I finished my undergraduate education. Having connections, especially in thefield of science, is extremely useful for future opportunities. Knowing my Master and the other Catalyst people
I have met, and connections I have made by conducting
this research will be an incredibly useful resource for any
future endeavor. (2008 Scholar)
In the labs we saw what happened when an idea flopped,
how grad students would work with what they had,
tweaking and experimenting, and get something entirely
new and valuable out of what initially seemed to be a
failure. (2007 Scholar)

Implications for Out-of-School Programs
According to Brody (2006), programs for talent development
in STEM need to have both short- and long-term goals. She
identified the following elements as important to successful precollege programs focused on STEM:• Exposure to strong content knowledge in mathematics
and science based on academic instruction and hands-on
demonstration.
• Appreciation for the utility of STEM subjects in theworkplace.
• Role models working in STEM fields.
• Peers who share interests in STEM.
Thus far, the Catalyst Program has met its immediate goals
and the focus is shifting to the exploration of longer term impacts.
Its impact is being measured in terms of increased exposure tocontent, raised interest and confidence, and enhanced views of theutility of the discipline on the part of participants. In the longer
term, according to Brody, a program should be evaluated based
Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010735

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

on whether participants of the program enter STEM majors andcareer fields at a higher rate than nonparticipants. A long-term
aspiration of the Catalyst Program is that experiencing science
research at such an advanced level as an adolescent will generate
opportunities and possibilities that keep participants focused on
careers in STEM innovation and research.
Work continues on refining the Catalyst Program, most particularly with regard to Scholar and Master selection. Anotherimportant area for improvement is providing more preparationand training to Masters about the learning needs of adolescents.
Some Masters have not worked with undergraduates, much lesswith high school students. Even those Masters who host highschool students in their laboratories rarely spend intensive timesocializing them into the research domain.
Over the years, Catalyst Program organizers have become
more successful at identifying Scholars whose eyes are primarily
on research careers and not just an Ivy League letter of admission. And some Masters are more committed to their Scholars
than others. One way to deal with the latter problem is to selectScholars who live in the vicinity of the Masters’ universities, so
getting together is fairly easy. Also, Associates are encouraged totake an active role in mentoring the Scholars to take some of thepressure off of the Masters for day-to-day guidance. These twoprocesses have worked well, and the Associates have valiantly andgenerously stepped up to the plate.
Catalyst organizers have also gained the following insightsfrom pursuing this model that apply to out of school programsin general:• School based programs, even full time specialized
schools, cannot provide enough stimulation for young
people hungry to explore a scientific domain. These students need interaction of sufficient length and intimacy
with working scientists to provide advice, guidance, andsocialization into the field.
• The deeply engaged adolescent benefits from exposure
to different career stages afforded by intergenerational
teams. Interaction with top graduate students and post736

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

•

•

•

doctoral fellows highlights the skills and knowledge thatdevelop over time to achieve expertise and then scholarly
productivity.
Deep pursuit of one domain should not exclude, and infact should incorporate, engagement with other domains.
The timing of the exposure is important, however, andshould be viewed as an enhancement rather than a distraction. Catalyst participants came to the program witha great deal of experience with science content, so exposure to the arts was refreshing, stimulating, and provided
new insights into the problem solving at hand.
Practical, insider, or tacit knowledge is important toshare. Young people are not necessarily capable of discovering tricks of the trade on their own. Some examples
of insider knowledge might be complex, like picking aworkable research topic or teasing out answers from data
most productively, or more mundane, like requesting
supplies or set-ups from laboratory technical staff.
Many academically gifted young people have not experienced real setbacks in their school life. Out-of-school
programs provide a safer environment than schools forpracticing recovery of self-concept, risk taking withunconventional problem solving, and learning to persist
in their pursuit of talent development through both goodand bad times.

Catalyst participants came to us having already “used up” anyresources they had available to them in their school or in other
out-of-school programs, and sought more intense involvementwith a career path they had tentatively committed themselves to.
In the course of the experience, they refined their goals, learned
what it takes to be successful, and made powerful and lasting
friendships and contacts that should prepare them optimally to
be future innovators. “Trying on” a life’s path is an exciting andpotent experience for adolescents transitioning to adult levels of
expertise and scholarly productivity.

Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010

737

THE CATALyST PROGRAM

References
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York,
NY: Ballantine.
Bowman, M. H., & Stage, F. K. (2002). Personalizing the goals of
undergraduate research. Journal of College Science Teaching, 32,
120± 125.
Braun, H. J. (1997). Advanced weaponry of the stars. Invention andTechnology, 12, 4± 10.
Brody, L. (2006, September). Measuring the effectiveness of STEM talent initiatives for middle and high school students. Paper presented at
the meeting of the National Academies Center for Education, in
collaboration with the American Psychological Association, U.S.
Department of Education, National Institutes of Health, National
Science Foundation, and National Commission on Teaching andAmerica’s Future, Washington, DC.
Gaston J. (1989). The benefits of Black participation in science. In W.
Pearson & H. K. Bechtel (Eds.), Blacks, science and American education (pp. 123± 136). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Motivational orientations thatlead students to show deeper levels of reasoning, greater responsibility for their academic work, and greater resilience in theface of academic difficulty. In R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik(Eds.), Optimizing student success in school with the other three R’s:
Reasoning, resilience and responsibility (pp. 39± 56). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age.
Gustin, W. C. (1985). The development of exceptional research mathematicians. In B. S. Bloom (Ed.), Developing talent in young people(pp. 270± 331). New York, NY: Ballantine.
Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success.
Review of Educational Research, 61, 505± 532.
Jarvin, L., & Subotnik, R. F. (2006). Understanding elite talent inacademic domains: A developmental trajectory from basic abilities
to Scholarly Productivity/Artistry. In F. Dixon & S. Moon (Eds.),
The handbook of secondary gifted education (pp. 203± 220). Waco, TX:
Prufrock Press.
Perrine, N. E., & Brodersen, R. M. (2005). Artistic and scientificcreative behavior: Openness and the mediating role of interests.
Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 217± 236.

738

Journal of Advanced Academics

Subotnik, Edmiston, Cook, and Ross

Root-Bernstein, R. S. (2003a). Sensual chemistry: Aesthetics asa motivation for research. International Journal for Philosophy ofChemistry, 9, 33± 50.
Root-Bernstein, R. S. (2003b). The art of innovation: Polymaths
and universality of the creative process. In L. Shavinina (Ed.),International handbook on innovation (pp. 267± 278). Oxford,
England: Pergamon Press.
Root-Bernstein, R. S. (2008). Arts foster scientific success: Avocationsof Nobel, National Academy, Royal Society, and Sigma Xi
Members. Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology, 1, 51± 63.
Subotnik, R. F. (2002). Adolescent pathways to eminence in science: Lessons from the music conservatory. In P. Csermely & L.
Lederman (Eds.), Science education: Talent recruitment and public
understanding (pp. 295± 304). Amsterdam: NATO Science Series.
Subotnik, R. F., & Jarvin, L. (2005). Beyond expertise: Conceptionsof giftedness as great performance. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E.
Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 343± 357).
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Subotnik, R. F., Pillmeier, E., & Jarvin, L. (2009). The psychosocial
dimensions of creativity in mathematics: Implications for giftededucation policy. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.),
Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp.
165± 180). Rotterdam: Sense Publications.
Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the UnitedStates. New York, NY: Free Press.

Authors' noteThis article and the Catalyst Program were supported by a grantfrom The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation.

Volume 21 ✤ Number 4 ✤ Summer 2010739