GIFTED EDUCATION: Under-representation of minority groups

1. GIFTED EDUCATION:Under-representation of minority groups SAC Research Symposium – 2007 Presented by Elena Webb EDF 5705, Dr. Marta Cruz

2. Abstract: Giftedness exists in every cultural group and across all economic strata (USDE, 1993). In different cultures, it may include the concepts of spatial, musical, environmental, and other types of intelligences. However, the most common definition of giftedness, used in American schools, focuses exclusively on analytical and linguistic skills. This narrow interpretation of intelligence, as well as inadequate efforts toward fair representation of minority groups in gifted education, have lead to “the most segregated programs in our public schools” (Ford, D, 2005). The proposed presentation addresses the possible causes of under - representation of language and ethnic minority groups in Gifted Education programs, and presents an overview of specific identification tools (checklists, IQ tests, observation protocols, etc) used to recognize giftedness in those students.  

3. The presentation addresses the following questions: • 1. What are some of the current definitions of giftedness, and what definition do educators commonly rely on, when testing and placing students in Gifted Education programs?  • 2. What undermines educators’ ability or desire to recruit minority students?   • 3. What state and district regulations have been created to insure a more equitable representation of minority groups in Gifted Education programs?   • 4. What tools do educators in Palm Beach county use to identify giftedness in minority students, and how do these tools compare to methods, used to recognize giftedness in mainstream students?

4. Five Propositions for Educators(Ford, D., 2005) • Inadequate efforts toward fair representation have lead to “the most segregated programs in our public schools” (p. 380). • Gifted education is a need – not a privilege. • Giftedness exists in every cultural group and across all economic strata (USDE, 1993). • The definition of giftedness is socially constructed and highly subjective. “This subjectivity contributes to segregated gifted education in numerous and insidious ways” (Ford, p. 380). • All decisions of educators should be made with the learners’ best interests in mind.

5. Some anecdotal records on the topic: The psychologist from the Multicultural department administered the test despite the fact that the student was feeling sick. The ESE coordinator did not accept a second (repeat) referral for gifted screening of an ELL student. It took four months for someone from the Multicultural department to administer the screening. Naturally, it happened in May, when thestudent was ready to move to middle school. But why wasn’t the student referred for testingearlier? Parents decided to keep their gifted children with a mainstream teacher Because they were confident she would address their learning needs in a mainstream classroom.

6. DEMOGRAPHICS OF GIFTED EDUCATION PROGRAMS ______________________________________________________________ STUDENT CATEGORY SCHOOL POPULATION % GIFTED ED. % _______________________________________________________________ WHITE, NON-HISPANIC 62.1 75.53 AFRICAN AMERICAN 17.2 8.40 HISPANIC 15.6 8.63 ASIAN AMERICAN 4.0 6.57 NATIVE AMERICAN/ALASKAN 1.2 0.87 NATIVE ________________________________________________________________ Sources: Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights Survey (1998): www.demo.beyond2020.com/ocrpublic/eng.; National Center for Educational Statistics. (2001). Common Core of Data (CCD), State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary Education, 1999-2000.

7. Giftedness - Definitions • The federal government defines "gifted and talented" students, children, or youth as those ...who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. • No Child Left Behind Act, P.L. 107-110 (Title IX, Part A, Definitions (22) (2002); 20 U.S.C. Sec. 7802 (22) (2004)) National Association for Gifted Children: www.nagc.org To find out how the definition of a “gifted child” evolved, visit http://www.riage.org/gifteddef.html

8. State definition of “gifted” "Gifted - one who has superior intellectual development and is capable of high performance”. Criteria for eligibility: A student meets criteria under (a) or (b) of this rule. _________________________________________________________ a) The student demonstrates: 1. Need for a special program. 2. A majority of characteristics of gifted students according to a standard scale or checklist 3. Superior intellectual development as measured by an intelligence quotient of two standard deviations or more above the mean.   _________________________________________________________ b) The student is a member of an under-represented group and meets the criteria specific in an approved school district plan for increasing the participation of under-represented groups in gifted programs. For the purpose of this rule, under-represented groups comprise: a. limited English proficient          b. low socio-economic status. (Florida Admin. Code Ann. r. 6A-6.03019)

9. RECRUITMENT BARRIERS • The first step in addressing such underrepresentation is to focus on recruitment • Definition of recruitment: activities related to (1) screening, (2)identification and (3) placement of students in gifted education. What undermines educators’ ability (or desire?) to recruit minority students? Donna Y. Ford: DEFICIT ORIENTATION

10. Recruitment Barriers: Deficit Thinking Definition: Deficit thinking occurs when educators interpret differences as deficits, dysfunctions and disadvantages (Ford, 2005, p. 381). Differences are interpreted in a negative way, and in addition to that, they become a student’s main trait, while positive traits become secondary. Gloud (1981/1995) and Menchaca (1997) , among others, showed how deficit thinking contributed to past and current beliefs about race/ethnicity and intelligence. They also unveiled prejudiced research methods of scientists studying intelligence. Those deliberate miscalculations “gave way to the prevailing belief that human races could be ranked on a linear scale of mental worth” (Ford, D., p. 382). As a result of these assumptions, first standardized test were developed. Although they claimed to measure intelligence, what they really tested was familiarity with mainstream US culture and English proficiency. These tests almost guaranteed low scores for immigrants and racial minorities.

11. Recruitment Issue 1: Screening In most schools, testing is initiated by teacher referral only. This policy often closes the door of opportunity for minority students, as they are seldom referred by teachers for screening. Most check-lists, that teachers and counselors are asked to complete, are written in a culture- insensitive mode (focus on sense of humor, verbal skills, presentation, etc) Research by Smith, Constantino and Krashen (1997) reveals that what we commonly consider “giftedness” has to do with the kinds of academic exposure students experience at home and in school (p. 383).

12. Recruitment Issue 1: Screening (continued) If the checklists ignore cultural diversity, and how giftedness manifests itself in other cultures, then gifted students from diverse groups will receive low ratings that do not capture their true strengths and talents. In 1993, the US Department of Education revised its definition of gifted students. It encouraged educators to look beyond academic performance to seek out children that perform at “remarkably high level of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment. These children … exhibit high performance capacity in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, possess an unusual leadership capacity, or excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor” (USDE, 1993, p. 3)

13. Recruitment Issue 2:Identification and Assessment There are dozens of ways to assess students’ abilities and talents: which ones are used to determine student placement in the gifted program? Gardner (1993) states that most European Americans value cognitive skills and academic ability over special, interpersonal, and musical abilities. Based on current practice, Ford concluded that educators use the tests that measure what society value the most. The tests are likely to test verbal and math skills, as well as abstract thinking. As many as 88.5 % of schools use norm-referenced tests to identify giftedness. By their definition, these tests ignore the skills and abilities that may be valued by other groups (creativity, interpersonal skills, navigation skills, estimating skills, etc.) _____________________________________________________________ Bottom Line: Racial and ethnic minority students are often placed at a disadvantage in the situations of gifted testing.

14. Identification and Assessment: Another Look at Cut-off Scores The most frequently used cut-off score is an IQ score of 130, two standard deviations from the mean of 100. In a nutshell, the practices of standardized tests and cut-off scores are more effective at identifying giftedness in white middle-class students, than in ANY other ethnic/racial group or in students of lower socio-economic standing.

15. Identification and Assessment:Recommendations Too much information is better than too little. • Multiple sources need to be considered: • School personnel, community members, • family members. • Data collection should be multimodal: • It should be collected verbally (interviews, • conversations) and nonverbally (writing, • observations, performances). • If the student does not speak English • fluently, the test administrator should • use an interpreter. • Examine tests for ethnocentrism, • and get rid of ethnocentric questions.

16. Recruitment Issue 3: Placement In US schools, giftedness is associated with consistent productivity and high Performance of students. However, plenty of “gifted underachievers” go through school or even drop out of school without being recognized as gifted. Some underachieve because they are unmotivated, others are procrastinators, yet others have learning disabilities. Unfortunately, to most teachers “gifted underachiever” or “gifted learning-disabled” are paradoxes. A child is more likely to be placed in a gifted program if s/he passed the test AND shows high academic achievement. If the GPA drops, many districts will remove such students from a program. Again, this one-dimensional perception of giftedness has severe consequences for students, expelled from gifted programs. Ford’s work with diverse student groups led her to believe that “Many students from racial, ethnic, and language minorities are likely to be gifted underachievers or potentially gifted students” (p. 387).

17. Recruitment Recommendations: • Talent development philosophy • Changes in standardized tests • and assessment practices • Multicultural assessment preparation • Reconsidering policies and • Procedures • Culturally sensitive tests • (Ford, D., 2005)

18. Multicultural Education as a Way to Retain Students • The need “to create culturally responsive and responsible learning environments” • (Ford, 2005, p. 390) can be met with: • the implementation of Multicultural Gifted Curricula ( slide # 19) or • addressing multiple intelligences and differentiated instruction in mainstream • classroom (slide 20) • multicultural counseling • skill-based supports • ongoing professional development: understanding of cultures, examining stereo- • types and its effect on instruction, creating multicultural curricula, bringing in • appropriate instructional methods, culturally responsive assessment.

20. A different point of view: Giftedness through the lens of tracking Grouping students by academic ability is one of the fundamental practices in American schools. In fact, it goes back to the end of the nineteenth century, when the first tracked program was opened in St. Louis, Missouri. Educators admit that “the issue of ability grouping or tracking is the old one” (Tomlinson, 2006), yet it continues to be important to researchers who dwell on its negative long-term consequences. Ability grouping, or tracking, is defined as the sorting of students based on an assessment of their academic ability (Rubin, 2005)

21. “Winners” and “Losers” The overview of research, presented in four recent articles, shows that there are fewer arguments defending ability grouping than those opposing it. In fact, the articles revealed an important point: although higher-level tracking may give educational advantages to a select group of high-performing students, the majority of students in lower tracks are left at a disadvantage. “Tracking may in fact be a significant determining factor in polarizing some students’ attitudes about themselves as winners and losers” (Ansalone & Biafora)

22. Differentiated instructionwithin mainstream classrooms Some school districts across nation have begun detracking efforts, and they offer documented evidence of best practices for teachers, curriculum designers, school districts and institutions. Beth C. Rubin: Tracking and detracking: debates, evidence, and best practices for a heterogeneous world.Theory into Practice, Vol. 45. No. 1.

23. Support for Gifted Minority Students: Recommendations for Educators Cropper (1998) and Ford (1996) state that all gifted students may experience pressure to hide their abilities, but minority students tend to feel that pressure to a greater degree. Gifted minority students report feelings of inferiority, as well as the need to constantly choose between using their talents and fitting in. Providing gifted students with extra support is especially important in mathematics and science, where minority groups are especially underrepresented. http://www.nwrel.org/msec/just_good/9/ Meeting the Needs of Gifted Students: Differentiating Mathematics and Science Instruction. (Northwest Regional Education Laboratory)

24. Support for Gifted Minority Students: Self-reflection for Educators • Do you communicate high expectations? • Are you sensitive to the experiences and beliefs of people from different cultural groups? • Do you try to get to know all students and their cultures? • Do you consider the challenges that students may face in school? • Do you continuously and firmly encourage students to go to college? • Do you discuss the necessary coursework, tests, and other preparations with students and parents? • Do you make sure that the curriculum reflects a variety of cultures? • Do you help minority students connect with role models and mentors? (e.g. organize peer support groups for students with similar interests and abilities).

25. Self-reflection for Educators (cont.) • Do you enlist parental support in providing encouragement and high expectations? • Do you provide students with a variety of learning options? (e.g. create or select activities • that are engaging, active, and grounded in reality) • Do you listen to students' concerns, fears, and beliefs about their experiences and their education? (Cropper, 1998; Ford, 1996)

26. References: • Beth C. Rubin: Tracking and detracking: debates, evidence, and best practices for a heterogeneous world.Theory into Practice, Vol. 45. No. 1. • Carol A. Tomlinson: An alternative to ability grouping. PL, April 2006. • Robyn Zevenbergen: Grouping by Ability: a self-fulfilling prophecy?Australian Mathematics Teacher. 2002. • George Ansalone & Frank Biafora: Elementary school teachers’ perceptions and attitudes to the educational structure of tracking. Education, Vol. 125. No. 2. • Amy C. Brualdi , Multiple intelligences: Gardner's theory, ERIC/AE, September 1996. • Donna Y. Ford. Recruiting and retaining gifted students from diverse ethnic, cultural, and language groups. In Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives, J. Banks, Ed. 2005. • National Association for Gifted Children: www.nagc.org • Rhode Island Advocacy for Gifted Education: www.riage.org • Meeting the Needs of Gifted Students: Differentiating Mathematics and Science Instruction. (Northwest Regional Education Laboratory) http://www.nwrel.org/msec/just_good/9/

27. END OF SLIDE SHOW