Closing the Excellence Gap: Investigation of an Expanded Talent Search Model for Student Selection Into an Extracurricular STEM Program in Rural Middle Schools

Abstract

High-potential students from underresourced rural schools face barriers that reduce options for academic advancement, which widens the excellence gap between them and their more affluent, but similar ability peers. The goal of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of an expanded above-level testing model to identify high-potential rural students for an extracurricular math and science enrichment program. Results from our analyses indicated that a more inclusive talent pool differentiated among high achievers to find greater percentages (13%) of talented students compared with most gifted programs (3% to 5%) or Talent Search programs (5%). Overall, students’ math and science scores were related to a 75% and 50%, respectively, greater odds in being identified for the extracurricular program. Regardless of program participation, all talent pool students increased their math and science achievement; however, there were some significant gender differences.

Keywords

STEM rural excellence gap identification middle school age/developmental stage

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ACT. (2013). ACT Explore [Assessment instrument]. Iowa City, IA: Author.

ACT. (2016a). Understanding your ACT Engage results [Assessment supplement]. Iowa City, IA: Author.

ACT. (2016b). Development and validation of ACT Engage technical manual. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Adelman

(2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to degree completion from high school through college. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Assouline

S. G.

Flanary

Foley-Nicpon

(2015). Challenges and solutions for serving rural gifted students: Accelerative strategies. In Stambaugh

Wood

(Eds.), Serving gifted students in rural settings: A framework for bridging gifted education and rural classrooms (pp. 135-154). Waco, TX: Prufrock.

Assouline

S. G.

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(2012). The talent search model of gifted identification. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 45-59. doi:10.1177/0734282911433946

Benbow

C. P.

(1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169-183. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00049244

Benbow

C. P.

Lubinski

Shea

D. L.

Eftekhari-Sanjani

(2000). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning: Their status 20 years later. Psychological Science, 11, 474-480. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00291

Callahan

C. M.

Moon

T. R.

(2014). Status of elementary gifted programs. Charlottesville: National Research Center on Gifted and Talented, University of Virginia, Curry School of Education.

10.

Casillas

Allen

Kuo

Pappas

Hanson

M. A.

Robbins

(2011). Development and validation of Engage Grades 6–9: ACT research report series (2011-1). Iowa City, IA: ACT.

11.

Casillas

Robbins

Allen

Kuo

Y.-L.

Hanson

M. A.

Schmeiser

(2012). Predicting early academic failure in high school from prior academic achievement, psychosocial characteristics, and behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 407-420. doi:10.1037/a0027180

12.

Cogan

L. S.

Schmidt

W. H.

Wiley

D. E.

(2001). Who takes what math and in which track? Using TIMSS to characterize U.S. students’ eighth-grade mathematics learning opportunities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 323-341.

13.

Csikszentmihalyi

Rathunde

Whalen

(1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Eccles

J. S.

Barber

B. L.

Stone

Hunt

(2003). Extracurricular activities and adolescent development. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 865-889. doi:10.1046/j.0022-4537.2003.00095.x

15.

Gira

(2007). The challenge: Preparing promising low-income students for college. In VanTassel-Baska

Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners: Conference proceedings from the national leadership conference on low-income promising learners (pp. 69-74). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.

16.

Howley

Rhodes

Beall

(2009). Challenges facing rural schools: Implications for gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32, 515-536.

17.

Kena

Hussar

McFarland

de Brey

Musu-Gillette

Wang

. . . Barmer

(2016). The condition of education 2016 (NCES 2016-144). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

18.

Kim

(2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60, 102-116. doi:10.1177/0016986216630607

19.

Kittleson

Morgan

J. T.

(2012). Schools in balance: Comparing Iowa physics teachers and teaching in large and small schools. Iowa Science Teachers Journal, 39(1), 8-12.

20.

Kroesbergen

E. H.

van Hoojidonk

Van Viersen

Middel-Lalleman

M. M. N.

Reijnders

J. W.

(2016). The psychological well-being of early identified gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60, 16-30. doi:10.1177/0016986215609113

21.

Lapan

Aoyagi

Kayson

(2007). Helping rural adolescents make successful postsecondary transitions: A longitudinal study. Professional School Counseling, 10, 266-272. doi:10.5330/prsc.10.3.u6j3j64h48p27w25

22.

Lee

S. Y.

Matthews

M. S.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2008). A national picture of talent search and talent search educational programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 55-69. doi:10.1177/0016986207311152

23.

Lubinski

(2010). Spatial ability and STEM: A sleeping giant for talent identification and development. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 344-351. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.022

24.

Lupkowski-Shoplik

Swiatek

M. A.

(1999). Elementary student talent searches: Establishing appropriate guidelines for qualifying test scores. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 265-272.

25.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Percentage of persons ages 18-29 enrolled in colleges or universities, by age group, 4-category local, and sex [data file]. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/tables/b.3.b.-1.asp

26.

National Science Board. (2014, February). Science and engineering indicators 2014 (NAB 14-01). Arlington, VA: Author.

27.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2015). Talent searches and accelerated programming for gifted students. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

Van Tassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students (pp. 111-121). Iowa City, IA: Belin-Blank Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.

28.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Lee

S. Y.

(2004). The role of participation in in-school and outside-of-school activities in the talent development of gifted students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15, 107-123. doi:10.4219/jsge-2004-454

29.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Lee

S. Y.

(2011). Gender and other group differences in performance on off-level tests: Changes in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 54-73. doi:10.1177/0016986210382574

30.

Planty

Provasnik

(2007). High school course taking: Findings from the Condition of Education 2007. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

31.

Plucker

J. A.

Burroughs

Song

(2010, February 4). Mind the (other) gap! The growing excellence gap in K-12 education. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED531840

32.

Plucker

Giancola

Healey

Arndt

Wang

(2015). Equal talents, unequal opportunities: A report card on state support for academically talented low-income students. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.

33.

Plucker

Harris

(2015). Acceleration and economically vulnerable children. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

Van Tassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students (pp. 181-188). Iowa City, IA: Belin-Blank Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.

34.

Schafft

K. A.

Jackson

A. Y.

(Eds.). (2011). Rural education for the twenty-first century: Identity, place, and community in a globalizing world. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.

35.

Spencer

(2017, January 22). Not all towns are created equal, digitally: How a Colorado school district struggles to give its students a technology boost (The Hechinger Report). New York, NY: Teachers College at Columbia University. Retrieved from http://hechingerreport.org/not-all-towns-are-created-equal-digitally/

36.

Spielhagen

F. R.

(2006). Closing the achievement gap in math: Considering eighth grade algebra for all students. American Secondary Education, 34(3), 29-41.

37.

Stambaugh

(2015). Celebrating talent: Identification of rural gifted students. In Stambaugh

Wood

(Eds.), Serving gifted students in rural settings: A framework for bridging gifted education and rural classrooms (pp. 97-110). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

38.

Stambaugh

Wood

(Eds.). (2015). Serving gifted students in rural settings: A framework for bridging gifted education and rural classrooms. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

39.

Stanley

J. C.

(2005). A quiet revolution: Finding boys and girls who reason exceptionally well and/or verbally and helping them get the supplemental educational opportunities they need. High Ability Studies, 16, 5-14. doi:10.1080/13598130500115114

40.

Swiatek

M. A.

(2007). The talent search model: Past, present, and future. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 320-329.

41.

VanTassel-Baska

Hubbard

G. F.

(2015). Serving the rural gifted child through advanced curriculum. In Stambaugh

Wood

S. M.

(Eds.), Serving gifted students in rural settings: A framework for bridging gifted education and rural classrooms (pp. 155-178). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

42.

VanTassel-Baska

Hubbard

G. F.

(2016). Classroom-based strategies for advanced learners in rural settings. Journal of Advanced Academics. doi:10.1177/1932202X16656896

43.

Wyner

J. S.

Bridgeland

J. M.

DiIulio

J. J.

Jr. (2007). Achievementrap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503359