Research in the field of gifted and talented has significantly shifted in recent years to focus on broader conceptualizations of the construct, including performing arts, creativity, and leadership. Yet, it is not clear how states conceptualize and identify students as gifted and talented given the last review of state gifted and talented regulations (i.e., laws) was conducted more than a decade ago, and organizational policy documents were limited in scope. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to review state gifted and talented definitions and identification procedures and to compare findings with prior research. Furthermore, we reviewed policies for identifying underrepresented populations in gifted and talented education. Results showed that there is considerable variability in how states define gifted and talented (i.e., categories included in gifted definitions) and how they identify gifted and talented. In this review, states included broader categories in gifted and talented definitions (e.g., creativity, performing arts) and allowed for a wider variety of assessment procedures compared with prior reviews. However, compared to 2012, this study’s findings showed that fewer states included general policies for the identification of traditionally underrepresented students as gifted and talented. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
AcarS.SenS.CayirdagN. (2016). Consistency of the performance and nonperformance methods in gifted identification: A multilevel meta-analytic review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(2), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216634438
BanksJ. A.BanksC. A. M. (Eds.) (2019). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (10th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
4.
BorlandJ. H. (2017). The construct of giftedness. In RenzulliJ. S.DelcourtM. A.Hertberg-DavisH. L. (Eds.), Charting a new course in gifted education (pp. 6–20). Routledge.
5.
CallahanC. M.RenzulliJ. S.DelcourtM. A.Hertberg-DavisH. L. (2017). Considerations for the identification of gifted and talented students In CallahanC. M.RenzulliJ. S.DelcourtM. A.Hertberg-DavisH. L. (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education (pp. 85–93). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315639987-8
6.
CoronadoJ. M.LewisK. D. (2017). The disproportional representation of English language learners in gifted and talented programs in Texas. Gifted Child Today, 40(4), 238–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217517722181
7.
DaiD. Y. (2020). Assessing and accessing high human potential: A brief history of giftedness and what it means to school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 57(10), 1514–1527. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22346
8.
FlemmingA. S. (1960). The philosophy and objectives of the National Defense Education Act. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 327(1), 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271626032700116
FordD. Y. (2012). Gifted and talented education: History, issues, and recommendations. In HarrisK. R.GrahamS.UrdanT.RoyerJ. M.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook (Vol. 2; pp. 83–110). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-004.
11.
FrasierM. M.GarciaJ. H.PassowA. H. (1995). A review of assessment issues in gifted education and their implications for identifying gifted minority students. University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
12.
GranthamT. C. (2003). Increasing Black student enrollment in gifted programs: An exploration of the Pulaski county special school district’s advocacy efforts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(1), 46–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700106
13.
HodgesJ.TayJ.MaedaY.GentryM. (2018). A meta-analysis of gifted and talented identification practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752107
14.
JollyJ. L.RobinsJ. H. (2022). The Marland report: A defining moment in gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 45(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532211064366
LakinJ. M. (2018). Making the cut in gifted selection: Score combination rules and their impact on program diversity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752099
17.
LeeH.SewardK.GentryM. (2022). Equitable identification of underrepresented gifted students: The relationship between students’ academic achievement and a teacher-rating scale. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(3), 400–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X221088816
18.
LeeL. E.RinnA. N.Rambo-HernandezK. E. (2024). What happens after nomination? Evaluating the probability of gifted identification with the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking. Gifted Child Quarterly, 68(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862231222886
19.
LubinskiD.WebbR. M.MorelockM. J.BenbowC. P. (2001). Top 1 in 10,000: A 10-year follow-up of the profoundly gifted. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 718–729. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.718
20.
LuriaS. R.O’BrienR. L.KaufmanJ. C. (2016). Creativity in gifted identification: Increasing accuracy and diversity. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13136
21.
MarlandS. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to congress by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Government Printing Office.
22.
MatthewsD. J.DaiD. Y. (2014). Gifted education: Changing conceptions, emphases and practice. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 24(4), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2014.979578
23.
MatthewsM. S.PetersS. J. (2018). Methods to increase the identification rate of students from traditionally underrepresented populations for gifted services. In PetersS. J.MatthewsM. S. (Eds.), APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 317–331). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-021
24.
McBeeM. T.PetersS. J.MillerE. M. (2016). The impact of the nomination stage on gifted program identification: A comprehensive psychometric analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(4), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216656256
25.
McClainM. C.PfeifferS. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28(1), 59–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2012.643757
NeberH. (2004). Teacher identification of students for gifted programs: Nominations to a summer school for highly gifted students. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 46(3), 348–359.
ÖzerkG. (2020). Academic boredom: An underestimated challenge in schools. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(1), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2020.177
31.
PetersS. J. (2022). The challenges of achieving equity within public school gifted and talented programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(2), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211002535
32.
PetersS. J.EngerrandK. G. (2016). Equity and excellence: Proactive efforts in the identification of underrepresented students for gifted and talented services. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(3), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216643165
33.
PetersS. J.GentryM.WhitingG. W.McBeeM. T. (2019). Who gets served in gifted education? Demographic representation and a call for action. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219833738
34.
PetersS. J.MakelM. C.Rambo-HernandezK. (2021). Local norms for gifted and talented student identification: Everything you need to know. Gifted Child Today, 44(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520985181
35.
PfeifferS. I. (2002). Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v19n01_03
36.
PfeifferS. I. (Ed.) (2008). Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77004-8
37.
Pitta-PantaziD. (2017). What have we learned about giftedness and creativity? An overview of a five-year journey. In LeikinR.SriramanB. (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond (pp. 201–223). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38840-3_13
38.
PluckerJ. A.PetersS. J. (2018). Closing poverty-based excellence gaps: Conceptual, measurement, and educational issues. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738566
39.
Rambo-HernandezK. E.BrigandiC.AminS.SpillaneN. (2023). Who gets identified? The consequences of variability in teacher ratings and combination rules for determining eligibility for gifted services for young children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 46(2), 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532231162612
40.
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (2017). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A focus on student creative productivity, strengths, and interests. In CallahanC. M.RenzulliJ. S.DelcourtM. A.Hertberg-DavisH. L. (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education (pp. 200–212). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142941002600303
RenzulliJ. S. (2018). A practical system for identifying gifted and talented students. In MatthewsM. C. (Ed.), Young gifted children (pp. 9–18). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429469008-2
43.
RichertE. S. (1987). Rampant problems and promising practices in the identification of disadvantaged gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(4), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628703100403
44.
RinnA. N.MunR. U.HodgesJ. (2022). 2020-2021 state of the states in gifted education. National Association for Gifted Children & the Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted.
45.
RogersK. R.MaxwellD.RobinsonS. R. (2018). Influences of academic success among low-income minority students: A qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis of student, educator, and parent experiences. School Social Work Journal, 43(1), 38–59.
46.
StephensK. R. (2018). Applicable federal and state policy, law, and legal considerations in gifted education. In PfeifferS. I. (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (pp. 163–182). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77004-8_11
47.
StephensK. R.KarnesF. A. (2000). State definitions for the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children, 66(2), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290006600206
48.
SternbergR.SubotnikR. (2000). A multidimensional framework for synthesizing disparate issues in identifying, selecting, and serving gifted children. In KellerK. A.MonksF. J.SternbergR. J.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed.; pp. 271–282). Pergamon Press.
49.
TaylorR.Kumi-YeboahA.RinglabenR. P. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions towards multicultural education and teaching of culturally & linguistically diverse learners. Multicultural Education, 23, 42–48.
50.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2014). Performance-based assessment: The road to authentic learning for the gifted. Gifted Child Today, 37(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217513509618
WoodV. R.LaycraftK. C. (2020). How can we better understand, identify, and support highly gifted and profoundly gifted students? A literature review of the psychological development of highly-profoundly gifted individuals and overexcitabilities. Annals of Cognitive Science, 4(1), 143–165. https://doi.org/10.36959/447/348
54.
WorrellF. C.ErwinJ. O. (2011). Best practices in identifying students for gifted and talented education programs. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 27(4), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2011.615817
