Abstract
While research on underrepresented gifted students, such as those from low-income, minority, and linguistically diverse backgrounds, has informed identification strategies, little is known about their applicability to refugee students. Refugee children face unique challenges, including trauma, interrupted education, and acculturation stress, necessitating tailored approaches. This study examined equitable identification practices for gifted refugee students through a systematic review and comparative thematic analysis. The study synthesized findings from 26 empirical studies, identifying best practices such as universal screening, culturally responsive assessments, and nontraditional identification methods. Comparative thematic analysis reveals five core themes: identification practices, adaptations for equitable evaluation, identification challenges, impacts on student well-being, and limitations of existing methods. Findings highlighted that, while existing equitable practices can inform refugee student identification, additional modifications are required to address the distinct barriers these students face. The study emphasized the need for culturally and contextually relevant identification frameworks that recognize the diverse expressions of giftedness among refugee students. Policy and practice implications include adopting multimethod assessments, teacher training on gifted refugee identification, and developing flexible identification criteria to ensure inclusivity and fairness.
Plain Language Summary
Refugee students often have talents that go unrecognized because traditional ways of identifying gifted students do not consider their unique life experiences. This study reviewed 26 research papers to explore how schools can better identify gifted refugee students. The findings show that many strategies used for other underrepresented groups, like children from low-income families or those learning a new language, can also help refugee students. These include using different types of assessments, considering cultural backgrounds, and training teachers to look for signs of giftedness beyond just test scores.
However, refugee students face additional challenges such as disrupted education, trauma, and adjusting to new environments. Because of this, schools need to adapt current practices to better fit refugee students’ needs. The study recommends using flexible and fair ways to identify gifted students, including tools that reflect a wide range of abilities. It also calls for policies that ensure refugee students are not left out of gifted education programs. This research helps educators and decision-makers understand how to make gifted education more inclusive and fair for all students, especially those who have been displaced from their home countries.
Keywords
Introduction
Over the past several years, a growing body of research has highlighted the challenges associated with identifying and supporting gifted refugee students (Al-Hroub, 2022, 2023a; Alodat & Almomani, 2019; Alodat & Gentry, 2022; Alodat & Momani, 2018). Gifted education literature addressed the identification issue of underrepresented gifted students from ethnic minorities, low-income families, or migrant communities (Ford & Young, 2017; Hodges & Gentry, 2021; Long et al., 2023). Still, the question arises: Are gifted refugee students similar to these groups of students in terms of identification challenges? In other words, can best practices for identifying gifted students who are immigrants, minorities, racially or ethnically diverse, economically disadvantaged, and/or English Learners (Card & Giuliano, 2016; Gubbins et al., 2020; Liu & Waller, 2018; Mun et al., 2020) also be applied equitably to refugee and displaced children who have been forced to flee their homelands due to war or natural disasters?
To explore best practices for identifying gifted refugee students, it is essential to first address gaps in the literature regarding the definitions and characteristics of gifted refugee students. Research suggests that while there are overlaps with other underrepresented gifted students, broad categorizations of underrepresented gifted groups fail to capture the complexities within these groups, leading to inequitable identification practices (Hodges et al., 2022). Gifted refugee students, for example, face distinct challenges, including interrupted schooling, trauma, and acculturation stress (Custodio & O’Loughlin, 2017; d’Abreu et al., 2019), which necessitate tailored approaches to identification and support for gifted students (Alodat & Momani, 2018). Evidence-based practices must be adapted to consider gifted refugee students’ unique psychological, social, and personal characteristics, ensuring that identification procedures are equitable and inclusive (Antoun, 2022).
Previous research has described gifted refugee students as vulnerable due to their unique circumstances (Alodat & Almomani, 2019; Alodat et al., 2024). However, it remains unclear whether established best practices in gifted education, such as those designed for underrepresented populations, are sufficient to meet the needs of these students. The need for equitable identification processes should extend beyond traditional measures, including cognitive abilities, creativity, academic achievement, social-emotional characteristics, and artistic talents (Cao et al., 2017; Johnsen, 2017). Conventional methods often fall short in addressing the unique needs of gifted refugee students, as they may overlook the barriers these students face in educational settings (Alodat & Gentry, 2022). Other scholars advocate for adopting nontraditional identification methods, such as nonverbal assessments, 1 observational techniques, and culturally responsive checklists; however, there is no guarantee that these methods both minimize the biases inherent in traditional measures and adequately capture key dimensions of giftedness, such as academic ability, creativity, and problem-solving (Hodges et al., 2018).
Adapting identification practices for gifted refugee students requires building on the extensive body of research addressing the underrepresentation of culturally, linguistically, and socioeconomically diverse students in gifted education. Although the literature on gifted refugee students remains limited, studies focusing on underrepresented groups offer valuable insights into how systemic barriers, such as linguistic bias, restricted access to screening tools, and cultural misalignment, can distort the identification process (Ford, 2014; Peters & Engerrand, 2016). These lessons highlight the need to reevaluate traditional identification systems in ways that are not only inclusive but also responsive to the distinct psychosocial and educational needs of refugee students. As such, this study aimed to bridge this gap by examining how established best practices for underrepresented gifted populations can inform the development of equitable identification models for refugee students, particularly those facing displacement, trauma, and disrupted educational trajectories.
Background
In a time when over 122 million people worldwide are forcibly displaced, there is an urgent need to better understand the legal definitions, characteristics, and unique needs of this population (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], 2024). Asylees and refugees are distinct yet interconnected terms that describe individuals forced to flee their home countries due to persecution, conflict, or violence (Graf et al., 2023). According to the UNHCR, an asylum seeker has left their country and is seeking international protection but whose refugee status has not yet been legally recognized (UNHCR, 2022). Refugees, on the other hand, are individuals who have been formally recognized under international law as being unable or unwilling to return to their home country due to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion (Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951).
Some of the most significant refugee movements in history occurred during the last century, including the displacement of millions during World War II, the displacement resulting from the partition of India in 1947, the displacement of Palestinians in 1948 and 1967, the displacement caused by the Vietnam War in the 1970s, and other displacement movements globally (Banko et al., 2022). In the 21st century, the Iraqi War in 2003, the Syrian crisis, and the Libyan revolution in 2011 produced millions of refugees in the Middle East (Marc & Laurie, 2017). These events underscore the global scale of forced displacement and the urgent need for coordinated international responses to address the challenges faced by asylum seekers and refugees (UNHCR, 2022).
Refugee students face significant limitations in accessing and succeeding in education due to systemic, social, and individual barriers (Dryden-Peterson, 2016). In some cases, such as Syrian refugees in Jordan and Lebanon, many face interrupted or limited educational opportunities, economic hardship that compels children to work, child protection and safety risks, and restrictive policies and administrative barriers (Buckner et al., 2018). In other cases, such as Syrian and Iraqi refugees in Turkey, Australia, Canada, and various European countries, language barriers, requiring students to learn in a language different from their own, pose additional educational and social challenges (Collins et al., 2018; Gömleksiz & Aslan, 2018).
Different obstacles in refugee education stem from cultural and socioeconomic factors, often shaped by the economic conditions of host countries and refugee-specific policies. These policies may include restrictions on school enrollment, limited access to public education for undocumented refugees, or a lack of integration programs and language support services. In countries that share the same language, religion, or cultural customs with incoming refugee populations, such as Jordan and Lebanon, the most significant concerns tend to be related to safety, overcrowded classrooms, and financial strain on families and public services (Alodat & Gentry, 2022; Alodat & Momani, 2018). In contrast, in more developed countries, such as those in Europe, Australia, or North America, language barriers and cultural differences often pose more substantial challenges to the integration of refugee students (Collins et al., 2018). Across all contexts, however, refugee students commonly face psychological disorders, trauma, bullying, and discrimination—factors that can severely affect their mental health and academic performance (Betancourt et al., 2017; Ellis et al., 2019; Graham et al., 2016).
These challenges could mask the high abilities and giftedness of refugee students. Current identification models, including nontraditional ones, may not apply to students with these unique characteristics, resulting in the underrepresentation of gifted refugee students. Addressing these barriers requires reevaluating identification frameworks, considering the experiential attributes of refugee students, and ensuring their potential is recognized and nurtured.
Gifted Refugee Students
The term “giftedness” traditionally refers to a high level of talent across multiple domains, including academic ability, creativity, leadership, and artistic talent (Johnsen, 2021; VanTassel-Baska, 2021). It is essential to recognize that giftedness exists in all socioeconomic, cultural, and racial groups, including among individuals who face significant adversities (Peters, 2022). Giftedness is not limited to a single definition or context but reflects diverse potential expressions that may emerge under supportive and enriching conditions (Pfeiffer, 2015).
Scholars and practitioners in gifted education increasingly argue for a broader, more inclusive understanding of giftedness (Sternberg, 2023). This shift involves redefining giftedness to encompass diverse abilities and experiences, particularly those rooted in nontraditional contexts; hence, expanding the definition of giftedness is not merely theoretical but a practical necessity for educational equity (Kuo, 2022). Educators must adopt dynamic and adaptive frameworks that allow for the identification of latent potential, particularly in marginalized populations (Dai, 2021).
While valuable in addressing the needs of the most talented students, traditional gifted education programs often employ narrowly focused approaches to identification (Johnsen, 2022). These approaches aim to eliminate barriers for those who excel within predefined constructs of giftedness but risk excluding students who do not fit conventional profiles (Mun et al., 2021). For example, refugee students often display extraordinary problem-solving skills, emotional intelligence, and creative thinking from navigating challenging life circumstances (Alodat & Momani, 2018). However, these traits may not align with conventional criteria for giftedness, which tend to emphasize academic performance and cognitive ability (Sternberg, 2023).
Gifted refugee students possess unique characteristics that reflect both their exceptional cognitive and creative abilities as well as their adaptive responses to forced displacement and adversity (Alodat & Momani, 2018; Antoun, 2022). These characteristics include emotional sensitivity, resilience, and coping strategies, traits shaped by their lived experiences navigating trauma, relocation, and cultural transitions (Al-Hroub et al., 2023). This resilience often manifests in their ability to adapt to new environments, persevere through adversity, and approach challenges with resourcefulness (Falk et al., 2022). In addition, many gifted refugee students demonstrate heightened emotional intelligence, such as empathy and the capacity to understand diverse perspectives, which may stem from their exposure to complex social and cultural contexts (Al-Hroub et al., 2023; Kerr, 2017).
In addition to resilience and emotional intelligence, gifted refugee students often display creativity and resourcefulness (Alodat & Gentry, 2022). These traits may arise from navigating unfamiliar systems or limited resources, fostering a unique capacity for original thinking and innovative problem-solving. Many also exhibit high intrinsic motivation, driven by a desire to succeed academically or contribute to their families and communities (Al-Hroub, 2023b). Gifted refugee students may excel in unconventional ways, such as demonstrating remarkable linguistic skills, artistic talent, or a deep understanding of cultural nuances (Alodat & Gentry, 2022). However, their abilities can be masked by factors such as language barriers, educational disruptions, or trauma, underscoring the importance of adopting inclusive and culturally responsive approaches to identify and support these students.
Best Practices for Identifying Underrepresented Gifted Students
The identification of gifted students has historically been shaped by methods and criteria that inadvertently favor specific demographics, often neglecting those from underrepresented populations such as culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students, economically disadvantaged students, and students with disabilities (Callahan, 2005; Ford & Young, 2017; Hodges et al., 2018; Hodges & Gentry, 2021; Liu & Waller, 2018). One of the most impactful strategies for addressing underrepresentation is universal screening. Unlike referral-based systems, which rely heavily on teacher or parent nominations and are prone to bias, universal screening ensures that every student has an equal opportunity to be assessed for giftedness (Card & Giuliano, 2016). Research has demonstrated that universal screening significantly increases the identification rates of underrepresented students, particularly those from minority and low-income backgrounds (L. E. Lee & Peters, 2022). For instance, when universal screening was implemented in a large, diverse district, the proportion of identified Black and Hispanic students in gifted programs increased markedly compared to traditional methods (Card & Giuliano, 2016).
Another critical component of best practices involves using culturally responsive and multifaceted assessments. Traditional standardized tests, which are often culturally and linguistically biased, fail to capture the diverse abilities of underrepresented students (Wood & Laycraft, 2020). Culturally responsive assessments, such as nonverbal ability tests and performance-based measures, provide alternative ways to evaluate students’ potential without disadvantaging those from nonmainstream backgrounds (Shaunessy et al., 2004; Worrell, 2017). In addition, incorporating multiple data points, such as portfolios, teacher observations, and self-nominations, allows a more comprehensive understanding of students’ abilities and reduces the risk of overlooking giftedness in unconventional forms (Johnsen, 2008; VanTassel-Baska et al., 2021).
Broadening the definition of giftedness is another pivotal step in creating a more equitable identification process (Johnsen, 2018). Traditional definitions of giftedness have primarily centered on academic achievement and cognitive ability, often at the expense of recognizing talents in creativity, leadership, the arts, or athletics (VanTassel-Baska, 2021). Expanding these definitions is essential for promoting equity and acknowledging the diverse ways giftedness manifests across cultural and experiential backgrounds. However, this broader conceptualization should not be interpreted as a call to create separate classes for each style or type of giftedness; instead, it supports the development of inclusive educational environments that use flexible instructional models to nurture a range of abilities within general education settings.
Beyond assessment tools and processes, addressing the structural barriers perpetuating underrepresentation is essential (Siegle et al., 2016). One of these barriers is establishing policies that allocate resources and ensure that the identification process is culturally sensitive and responsive to the needs of underrepresented groups (Mun et al., 2020). In addition, professional development programs for teachers that focus on cultural competence and the characteristics of giftedness in underrepresented groups can significantly enhance the accuracy of referrals (Swanson et al., 2021). Training programs that emphasize the identification of creative and leadership potential, alongside traditional academic indicators, have been shown to increase the identification rates of underrepresented gifted students (Hemingway, 2022). Similarly, early identification, particularly in preschool and early elementary years, is vital for nurturing potential before systemic barriers or adverse circumstances diminish it (Long et al., 2023).
Despite their promise, the efficacy of these practices in identifying gifted refugee students remains an open question. Refugee students face challenges that may obscure their abilities and complicate the identification process. Are these practices truly effective in recognizing the potential of gifted refugee students, or do they require further adaptation to address the specific barriers this population faces?
Study Purpose
While there is a considerable body of research on best practices for identifying underrepresented gifted students, studies specifically addressing the unique challenges of identifying gifted refugee students are exceedingly rare. Refugee students, though part of the underrepresented category, face additional layers of complexity due to their experiences of displacement, trauma, and cultural dislocation, which are not adequately addressed in existing research.
The lack of direct research in this area is particularly concerning in the context of the global displacement crisis, which has left millions of forcibly displaced children worldwide with limited access to quality education (UNHCR, 2024). Among these children, many possess exceptional talents and potential that go unrecognized due to systemic challenges unique to their circumstances (Alodat et al., 2024). The limited focus on these challenges in the existing literature highlights the urgent need for targeted inquiry into practices that can effectively and equitably identify giftedness in refugee students.
This study aimed to fill the literature gap by exploring how existing best practices for identifying underrepresented gifted students can inform the development of strategies tailored to the specific needs of gifted refugee students. Hence, this study aimed to address these questions:
Method
Research Design
This study employed systematic review and comparative thematic analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of existing identification practices for underrepresented gifted students and their applicability to gifted refugee students. Given the scarcity of direct research on gifted refugee populations, this review synthesizes evidence from studies on various underrepresented groups. By analyzing these studies, the review identifies best practices that may be adapted to support the equitable identification of gifted refugee students.
Systematic review provides a rigorous and transparent framework for synthesizing research, ensuring replicability, and minimizing bias in study selection and interpretation (Moher et al., 2009). Comparative thematic analysis examines qualitative patterns across studies to identify common challenges, adaptations, and effective strategies for identifying gifted students from marginalized backgrounds (Nowell et al., 2017).
In this study, systematic review and comparative thematic analysis facilitate the examination of identification practices for underrepresented gifted students and their relevance to refugee students, highlighting transferable strategies and unique challenges faced by this population.
Data Collection
The data collection process followed a structured, multistage approach to ensure a rigorous and comprehensive synthesis of studies on best practices for identifying underrepresented gifted students. Given the limited direct research on gifted refugee students, the review examined identification strategies used for other underrepresented populations to assess their relevance and adaptability for refugee students. The process involved systematically searching, screening, and analyzing studies to extract key data on identification methods, their effectiveness, and potential modifications needed for equitable identification of refugee students. By employing a systematic approach, this study enhances the reliability and replicability of findings, ensuring that insights are drawn from a diverse range of empirical studies while minimizing bias in study selection (Moher et al., 2009).
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Studies were included if they met the following criteria:
Published between 2000 and 2024 to capture contemporary developments in gifted identification practices.
Published in English to ensure consistency in data analysis and accessibility to a broader body of literature. While the researcher is proficient in Arabic and English, the scarcity of Arabic-language studies on this topic necessitated limiting the review to English sources.
Peer-reviewed journal articles, dissertations, and theses were included to ensure methodological rigor and scholarly credibility. Dissertations and theses were selected only when they demonstrated clear methodological transparency and direct relevance to the research questions. Their inclusion aligns with established practices in systematic reviews, particularly where peer-reviewed literature is limited, as these sources often provide rigorously supervised and original empirical data (Booth et al., 2016; Paez, 2017).
Investigated identification practices for underrepresented and/or gifted refugee students.
Presented empirical findings, ensuring the review is based on original research rather than theoretical discussions or conceptual analyses.
Studies were excluded if they:
Did not focus on identification practices for gifted students (e.g., studies solely examining gifted education policies or interventions).
Were literature reviews, meta-analyses, books, or book chapters, as these do not present original empirical data.
Were published in a language other than English, to maintain consistency in analysis and accessibility.
Lacked sufficient methodological or outcome details, limiting their contribution to the synthesis.
Examined the underrepresentation of gifted students as a descriptive variable without discussing identification processes.
Focused exclusively on gifted education interventions without addressing how students were identified.
This systematic selection process ensures that the review synthesizes high-quality empirical evidence relevant to equitable identification practices for underrepresented gifted students, focusing on implications for refugee populations.
Search Strategies
To identify relevant studies, a systematic database search was conducted using Google Scholar, ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest. The search strategy included Boolean operators and targeted keywords to refine results. The keywords used included the follow:
(gifted OR talented) AND (identification OR assessment OR evaluation) AND (underrepresented OR underrepresentation OR “under-represented” OR “under-representation” OR disproportionality OR unserved OR underserved OR “under-served” OR diverse OR refugee OR displaced).
Selection Process and Data Extraction
The study selection process adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines (Page et al., 2021) to ensure transparency, replicability, and methodological rigor (see Figure 1). The process included title and abstract screening, full-text review, and selecting studies that met the criteria.
Systematic Review Process.
The data extraction followed a structured approach to ensure consistency, reliability, and comprehensive synthesis of relevant findings. A standardized data extraction scheme was employed to code and organize information from each study. Two trained research assistants, both doctoral candidates specializing in Special Education and Educational Psychology, received structured training on the study’s coding protocol, including guidance on inductive and axial coding techniques, as well as pilot coding exercises, to ensure consistency. Using a predefined coding scheme, they extracted key information from each study, including study characteristics (e.g., authors, year, and country), participant demographics (e.g., population type, sample size, and underrepresented status), methods of identification, and significant findings. After the initial extraction, the research assistants collaborated with the author to review the results and discuss any discrepancies, ensuring accuracy and consistency. In the case of disagreement, an in-depth discussion was conducted until an agreement was reached. Table 1 shows the results of the systematic review.
Summary of the Included Studies’ Characteristics.
Note. Studies are organized chronologically by year of publication, from oldest to most recent.
Comparative Thematic Analysis
Based on Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach, a comparative thematic analysis framework was used to identify patterns and themes across studies. Studies were systematically reviewed using an inductive coding approach to extract findings related to identification methods. Open coding was first applied to identify recurring concepts, followed by axial coding to establish connections between themes. Thematic synthesis was then performed to group related findings into broader categories, ensuring that themes reflected both commonalities and contextual variations across different underrepresented populations. To assess the transferability of identification practices from underrepresented groups to refugee students, themes emerging from different populations were compared. This comparative approach helped identify practices that may be particularly effective for refugee students and gaps that require further adaptation.
Results
Descriptive Results
This systematic review identified 26 studies published between 2000 and 2024, with the majority conducted in the United States. Only two studies were conducted outside the United States, one in South Korea (see H. Lee et al., 2023), and one in Jordan (see Alodat et al., 2024). The studies predominantly examined underrepresented gifted populations, including students from CLD backgrounds, economically disadvantaged groups, and racial or ethnic minorities (Carman & Taylor, 2010; Naglieri & Ford, 2003; Sarouphim, 2002).
Various assessment methods were commonly utilized, including the DISCOVER assessment (Sarouphim, 2002, 2004), Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT; Naglieri & Ford, 2003; Shaunessy et al., 2004), HOPE Teacher Rating Scale (Pereira, 2011; Peters & Gentry, 2010, 2012), Raven’s Progressive Matrices, and Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT; Edmonds, 2015; Lewis et al., 2008; Lohman et al., 2008). Performance-based and nonverbal assessments were highlighted for their capacity to mitigate cultural and linguistic bias, thus identifying higher proportions of gifted students from underrepresented groups compared to traditional standardized tests. For instance, the DISCOVER assessment consistently demonstrated cultural fairness by identifying higher percentages of minority students (Sarouphim, 2002, 2004). Similarly, universal screening combined with teacher ratings and local norms effectively increased identification rates among African American and low-income students (Hemmler et al., 2022).
Comparative Thematic Analysis
This study used comparative thematic analysis to systematically examine recurring patterns and themes within the existing literature on gifted student identification. The process involved inductive and axial coding to identify conceptual relationships across studies. Initially, the research assistants independently generated 2,054 preliminary codes based on key ideas and recurring concepts found in the literature. These codes were then refined through axial coding, during which the team collaboratively grouped related codes, reduced redundancy, and identified higher-order categories. In-depth discussions between the research assistants and the author helped resolve discrepancies and ensure consistency in interpretation. This process resulted in 72 distinct primary codes and 215 subcodes, enabling the identification of meaningful themes related to equitable identification practices for gifted refugee students.
Using the comparative thematic framework, the author and research assistants analyzed the codes regarding the transferability and adaptability of identification practices from other underrepresented gifted groups to refugee students. Ultimately, the comparative analysis revealed five core themes: Identification Practices, Adaptations for Identification, Identification Challenges, Impact of Identification Practices, and Limitations of Identification Methods. Table 2 provides detailed examples and further categorization of these themes, along with their associated codes.
Examples and Categorization of Identified Themes and Associated Codes.
Identification Practices
The comparative thematic analysis identified two broad categories of identification practices for gifted students: traditional and nontraditional methods. Traditional identification methods, including standardized intelligence tests, achievement tests, and teacher, parent, or peer nominations, are commonly used but often criticized for cultural and linguistic biases. Lohman et al. (2008) illustrated this issue clearly: “ELL children scored .5 to .67 standard deviations lower than non-ELL children on the three nonverbal tests; and that none of the nonverbal tests predict achievement for ELL students very well” (p. 275). Similarly, Scott and Delgado (2005) emphasized the limitations of traditional standardized testing as they “Minority children tend to do poorly on intelligence tests that emphasize various verbally based abilities tests, which are often described as being culturally biased” (p. 207). Traditional standardized tests also often overlook culturally diverse forms of giftedness, leading to significant underrepresentation of economically disadvantaged students (Lewis et al., 2008). Edmonds (2015) explicitly noted, “There are concerns about the limitations of traditional ability tests during gifted identification because of the resulting underrepresentation of minorities, students of low SES, and ELs” (p. 28).
In contrast, nontraditional methods, such as nonverbal assessments, dynamic assessments, and culturally responsive measures, provided more promising alternatives. Performance-based assessments, such as Project STAR, were particularly effective in identifying gifted students who were economically disadvantaged or from minority backgrounds, who would not have qualified using traditional criteria. VanTassel-Baska et al. (2002) noted, “The performance assessment tasks of Project STAR resulted in finding an additional group of students who were 12% African American and 14% low-income children during the field test of the instrument” (p. 110).
In addition, nonverbal assessments such as the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) demonstrated a more equitable identification rate across diverse ethnic groups compared to traditional tests, although their effectiveness diminished when used in isolation (Naglieri & Ford, 2003; Shaunessy et al., 2004). Dynamic assessments further addressed this gap by evaluating students’ learning potential rather than acquired knowledge, effectively identifying giftedness in CLD populations (Lidz & Macrine, 2001). Moreover, performance-based assessments, such as the DISCOVER model, consistently identify higher proportions of minority and economically disadvantaged students compared to traditional assessments, affirming their potential to reduce underrepresentation effectively. For example, Sarouphim (2002) highlighted that, “DISCOVER assessment might help in reducing the problem of minority students’ under-representation in programs for the gifted, as 29.3% of the high school students who participated in this study were identified as gifted” (p. 30).
However, applying these nontraditional methods to refugee populations has uncovered unique challenges. The use of the HOPE Teacher Rating Scale (Arabic version) for Syrian refugee students, for instance, provided initial validation but faced critical issues with measurement invariance across demographic categories such as gender, age, camp status, and GPA groups (Alodat et al., 2024). This study emphasized that gifted refugee students’ abilities are frequently masked by barriers like interrupted education, trauma, and acculturation stress, requiring further adjustments to identification procedures to ensure equity and accuracy. Similar concerns were reported by Pereira (2011), who found variability and discrepancies in teacher ratings between ESL and general education teachers, noting that “ESL teachers’ HOPE Scale scores were significantly higher than the classroom teachers’ scores” (p. viii).
These comparative findings underscore a critical conclusion: while nontraditional methods have significantly enhanced equitable identification of gifted students from underrepresented groups, effectively applying these methods to refugee populations requires targeted modification. The complexity of refugee experiences, including interrupted education, language barriers, trauma, and cultural differences, necessitates careful consideration of current methods to identify and nurture gifted refugee students accurately.
Adaptations for Identification
The comparative thematic analysis identified significant adaptations necessary to identify gifted students from underrepresented and refugee populations in an equitable manner. These adaptations were organized into several critical categories, including academic achievement, adaptive identification, alternative assessments, and equitable assessments.
Regarding academic achievement, the review highlighted the strategic use of multiple measures, including achievement tests, academic measures, and comprehensive achievement data. These approaches aimed to address the limitations of relying solely on traditional standardized test scores, which often disadvantage students from CLD backgrounds. H. Lee et al. (2023) emphasized the effectiveness of combining academic achievement scores with teacher-rating scales to ensure more equitable identification, noting that such combined methods yielded more balanced identification outcomes, particularly for low-income and culturally diverse students.
Adapted identification processes, including modified referral systems, adjusted screening methods, and flexible cutoff scores, emerged as crucial for improving equitable representation. VanTassel-Baska et al. (2002) highlighted that standard rigid cutoffs could systematically exclude gifted minority and economically disadvantaged students. They advocated a “value-added” approach where performance-based assessments provided inclusive criteria, stating that “adaptations may need to be made in the screening and selection procedures implemented in school districts” (p. 110).
Alternative assessment practices, including culturally fair practices, cognitive function scales, and accurate identification processes sensitive to cultural contexts, were identified as particularly beneficial. Scott and Delgado (2005) underscored the effectiveness of using alternative assessments early on, noting, “administration of just a brief screen may serve to identify a subset of children, mostly minority children” (p. 199), demonstrating the utility of concise yet culturally responsive methods. Lohman et al. (2008) illustrated the limitations of single-method identification approaches, reinforcing the need for multimethod approaches to identification. Therefore, comprehensive, flexible, and context-sensitive methods that incorporate multiple forms of assessment and adapt culturally responsive practices are critical for accurately recognizing and nurturing giftedness in refugee populations.
Equitable assessment practices emerged as central adaptations, characterized by expanded opportunities, fair and inclusive identification processes, and flexible assessment methods explicitly tailored for marginalized populations. Hemmler et al. (2022) emphasized that methods successfully employed in other contexts could enhance equitable identification if adapted properly, advocating that schools should “employ and adapt methods that have been empirically verified to work in other contexts” (p. 5). Similarly, Strange (2005) supported the necessity of culturally sensitive adaptations by advocating for the “designing, adapting, modifying, and extending of instruments, strategies, and procedures that explicitly account for race, culture, caste, and socioeconomic status” (p. 63).
Hence, these adaptations underline the importance of flexibility and context-specific considerations in assessment procedures to ensure the equitable identification of giftedness among underrepresented populations, including refugee students. The comparative analysis revealed that, while general adaptations effectively support underrepresented populations broadly, gifted refugee students necessitate further tailored adjustments to address unique barriers such as interrupted education, trauma, and linguistic challenges.
Identification Challenges
The comparative thematic analysis revealed substantial identification challenges that affect gifted students broadly from underrepresented groups but disproportionately impact refugee students due to their distinct contextual complexities. Several key barriers were identified, including accuracy differences arising from cultural and linguistic biases in identification tools, systemic biases within educational policies, and barriers to accessibility and equity of resources.
Accuracy differences emerged significantly in the reviewed literature, indicating that standardized assessments often fail to measure giftedness in CLD populations accurately. Edmonds (2015) emphasized the inadequacy of standardized assessments, noting that “purely objective approaches are often challenged by practitioners. . . since research has demonstrated that minority subgroups and special populations underperform on these tests relative to their peers” (p. 24). Furthermore, Pereira (2011) stated explicitly that “one of the great barriers in gifted education for students from traditionally underserved populations is the identification process” (p. 44), underscoring the persistent inaccuracies inherent within current practices.
In addition, cultural and linguistic biases were explicitly addressed in several studies. Naglieri and Ford (2003) pointed out the ongoing challenges, stating, “Black, Hispanic, and Native American students consistently score lower than White students on traditional standardized tests” (p. 155), highlighting continued biases even in supposedly culturally neutral assessments. Similarly, Carman and Taylor (2010) identified socioeconomic status (SES) as another critical bias, stating that “SES has long been found to be positively related to performance on intelligence measures” (p. 77).
Policy gaps were a critical challenge, evident in the variability and inconsistency in gifted identification policies across states and districts. Pereira (2011) highlighted policy inconsistencies, stating, “The policies on identification for gifted programs are also not well defined and vary between and within states” (p. 45), further emphasizing the fragmented nature of gifted identification policies that can disadvantage underrepresented populations, particularly refugees who face additional layers of complexity due to displacement and disrupted education. Hemmler et al. (2022) further argued that addressing policy gaps requires reconsidering what giftedness can look like, suggesting that rigid and traditional conceptions of giftedness inherently disadvantage marginalized populations.
Accessibility to gifted programs was also heavily impacted by contextual and systemic factors, especially those related to resource allocation and equitable opportunities. Strange (2005) highlighted that “socioeconomic level is a large part of the inequity surrounding identification practices” (p. 5), particularly for economically disadvantaged and educationally disrupted students, conditions commonly experienced by refugee populations. Hemmler et al. (2022) argued that achieving equitable access requires employing multiple identification methods, stated that “Using multiple identification measures, universal screening, and local norms to capture these manifestations resulted in a greater number of rural Black students being identified for gifted education when they were otherwise missed by their districts’ identification procedures” (p. 19).
The comparative thematic analysis also revealed that gifted refugee students encounter specific, heightened barriers in accessing gifted programs due to their unique circumstances. Alodat et al. (2024) explicitly acknowledge that refugee students “already face a myriad of challenges, including a lack of basic needs such as safety, housing, and health services. . . [and] are at further risk for psychological and mental disorders and socioeconomic inequalities” (p. 252), all of which may substantially hinder their identification in gifted programs. They further emphasize the necessity for identification procedures that comprehensively consider refugee students’ “overall health, well-being, and safety,” noting that common issues among these students include psychological disorders, “low levels of self-efficacy, fear of failure, mistrust, and lack of experience” (p. 252). Although beneficial, such complexities underscore that existing adaptations employed for other underrepresented groups remain insufficient for addressing refugee-specific barriers.
In addition, gifted refugee students in contexts such as Jordan and Lebanon often face further limitations due to inadequate resources, administrative obstacles, and a lack of qualified personnel specifically trained to identify and support their talents. Alodat et al. (2024) noted that the educational environments in refugee camps significantly compromise gifted identification, reporting that “the lack of identification procedures in any gifted education programs within refugee camp schools severely limits opportunities for refugee students to participate in gifted programs” (p. 253). These limitations highlight the pressing need to develop identification practices that are sensitive to the resource constraints, administrative structures, and contextual realities of refugee settings and that are tailored to the educational and psychosocial profiles of gifted refugee students.
Impact of Identification Practices
The findings of the comparative thematic analysis highlight how identification practices can be adapted to better support the recognition of giftedness among disadvantaged student populations, including refugee students. The literature suggests that culturally responsive, multidimensional identification strategies are more inclusive and better aligned with the needs of underrepresented groups. For example, Peters and Gentry (2010) described the HOPE Scale as “a simple, psychometrically sound instrument to help with identification of underrepresented students for gifted education services” (p. 298), emphasizing its potential when adapted with appropriate revisions. These approaches offer promising guidance for the equitable identification of gifted refugee students, particularly in contexts where conventional assessments, such as standardized tests, may fail to capture their abilities due to cultural or experiential differences.
In addition, identification practices that include a holistic assessment of students’ abilities significantly influence students’ emotional and academic well-being. Hemmler et al. (2022) argued for broadening identification practices to “provide evaluators with more than one data point for consideration of students’ gifted potential or ability” (p. 5), thereby reducing biases inherent in single-method identification approaches. Giessman et al. (2013) highlighted the academic benefits of appropriately identified giftedness, showing that inclusive identification practices lead to greater predictive validity of students’ subsequent academic success. They emphasized that “dependence on a single measure is common but likened to putting all of the eggs in one basket” (p. 107), and thus support diverse students’ long-term educational outcomes.
Equitable identification practices have a notable positive impact on disadvantaged students’ academic opportunities and emotional health. Yet, gifted refugee students need further targeted research and tailored identification practices to address their unique challenges adequately. Alodat et al. (2024) articulated clearly that gifted refugee students experience compounded barriers beyond what is commonly addressed in existing identification strategies, noting that refugee populations face “psychological and mental disorders, socioeconomic inequalities,” and conditions like “low levels of self-efficacy, fear of failure, mistrust, and lack of experience” (p. 252). These conditions severely limit the potential effectiveness of traditional or even modified assessment approaches commonly used with other underrepresented groups.
While the existing identification practices positively impact general underrepresented gifted populations, the specific psychosocial and educational disruptions experienced by gifted refugee students require additional specialized identification procedures and targeted intervention programs to recognize and nurture their distinct talents effectively.
Limitations of Identification Methods
The comparative thematic analysis findings highlighted critical limitations associated with the methods used to identify giftedness among underrepresented students. While traditional and alternative identification methods aim to increase equity and inclusivity, persistent challenges remain related to comprehensive approaches, inherent differences, and perceptions of gifted potential and predictivity.
Multiple studies evidently needed a more comprehensive approach. Bell (2012) emphasized the limitations of relying heavily on traditional, standardized methods, stating that “Identifying a child as gifted based on standardized tests alone is failing to get to know the child as a whole” (p. 1), revealing significant limitations of conventional identification methods in providing inclusive and accurate assessments of giftedness.
Furthermore, Strange (2005) argued for broader consideration in identification practices, noting: Multiple methods for identifying disadvantaged children, such as teacher observations, ratings, and portfolios have been initiated . . . However, these strategies are vulnerable to the subjectivity of the assessors, who may or may not be knowledgeable of various manifestations of giftedness in children. (p. 48)
The analysis further revealed significant concerns regarding differences in identification rates and subjective biases stemming from language and cultural differences. Lewis et al. (2008) noted the limitations of nonverbal assessments, cautioning against overreliance on such measures, as “research is lacking investigating whether either of these nonverbal abilities tests is more effective in selecting for ethnically diverse gifted students than a more traditional measure of achievement” (p. 39). Similarly, H. Lee et al. (2023) underscored issues with current testing methods, emphasizing that “test bias negatively influences test results for students from low-income and/or diverse backgrounds” (p. 403), thus reinforcing the need for culturally sensitive identification procedures.
Regarding perceptions, the reviewed studies raised concerns about predicting and recognizing students’ potential. McBee (2006) highlighted that gifted identification processes relying predominantly on teacher referrals and standardized test scores systematically disadvantage specific student groups, particularly those from low-income or minority backgrounds, because “referrals were also the most common referral source” (p. 106), which could inadvertently overlook students whose potential may manifest differently due to cultural or linguistic factors.
While these limitations significantly impact the identification of underrepresented gifted students, gifted refugee students encounter additional complexity often not addressed adequately in existing research. Consequently, refugee students’ unique educational interruptions, trauma histories, and cultural and linguistic dislocation necessitate more nuanced and contextually adapted identification methods than those traditionally employed with general underrepresented populations (Alodat et al., 2024). The absence of suitable identification tools significantly impacts the recognition and development of gifted refugee students’ potential. This absence of culturally responsive and context-specific tools prevents accurate recognition of refugee students’ abilities and potential talents. Without appropriate identification processes, refugee students’ unique capabilities remain unnoticed and unsupported, severely limiting their academic growth and emotional well-being.
Discussion
This systematic review and comparative thematic analysis explored equitable identification practices for gifted refugee students, highlighting alignment and divergence from best practices established for other underrepresented gifted populations (Alodat & Gentry, 2022; Sternberg, 2023). The systematic review included 26 empirical studies published between 2000 and 2024, focusing on the U.S. context. Only two studies were conducted outside the United States, one from South Korea and one from Jordan. Many foundational studies were relatively dated, raising concerns regarding the applicability and relevance of their identification methods in current gifted education research. While recent studies (e.g., Alodat et al., 2024; H. Lee et al., 2023) indicate ongoing research and updates in equitable identification practices, this reliance on older studies emphasizes a critical gap in up-to-date empirical research.
The predominance of U.S.-centric research raises critical concerns about the international applicability of these identification methods, particularly for refugee students whose contexts differ significantly from typical minority populations in the United States. Despite extensive studies conducted on underrepresented populations such as Black, Hispanic, low SES, CLD, and English language learners within the United States, none explicitly included refugee students. This omission signifies a substantial research gap, as refugee students, such as Syrian refugees in Jordan and Lebanon, face additional unique barriers including trauma and disrupted education, barriers typically not addressed in studies focusing solely on ethnic minorities or economically disadvantaged students in stable educational systems.
Although identification methods such as the DISCOVER assessment, NNAT, and HOPE scale have shown validity in identifying underrepresented groups within the United States, their direct applicability and effectiveness for refugee students remain questionable due to intensified linguistic, cultural, and educational disruptions typically encountered by refugees. These findings highlighted the complexities and limitations of directly applying identification tools, initially validated in U.S. contexts, without significant contextual adaptations. Refugee students’ distinct experiences thus necessitate tailored identification methods to accurately and equitably capture their gifted potential.
Results from the review further revealed that nontraditional methods, including dynamic assessments, performance-based assessments, and culturally responsive tools, significantly improve the recognition of underrepresented gifted students. However, the gifted potential of refugee students often remains hidden due to inadequacies in existing standard assessments and a critical absence of tailored identification practices specifically designed to accommodate their distinctive contexts and experiences (Alodat et al., 2024).
Comparative thematic analysis findings revealed significant challenges that uniquely affect the equitable identification of gifted refugee students, underscoring the limitations of current identification practices in addressing their specific needs. These challenges reinforce the theoretical critique that traditional identification methods frequently fail to recognize diverse manifestations of giftedness, particularly among marginalized populations (Sternberg, 2023). Refugee students face compounded difficulties that extend beyond typical cultural and linguistic biases, underscoring the need to adopt comprehensive, multidimensional identification frameworks that are culturally responsive and contextually grounded. However, expanding the conceptualization of giftedness for refugee students should inform the development of inclusive, flexible practices that enable multiple forms of giftedness to be identified and nurtured within general education settings, particularly in resource-limited environments where integration and equity are crucial.
Moreover, the analysis highlighted critical educational policy and practice gaps disadvantaging refugee students. Traditional identification policies relying on standardized testing and rigid nomination processes systematically overlook refugee students, whose potentials often manifest uniquely through resilience, creativity, and adaptive problem-solving developed from life experiences (Alodat & Momani, 2018). Therefore, assessment methods and educational policies should explicitly incorporate multidimensional, context-sensitive approaches to accurately identify and support gifted refugee students’ unique abilities.
In addition, equitable identification practices significantly impact disadvantaged students’ emotional and academic well-being by validating their talents and fostering supportive educational environments (Hemmler et al., 2022; Peters & Gentry, 2010). Nevertheless, these benefits remain inadequately realized for refugee students due to the absence of identification methods specifically addressing their distinctive psychosocial and educational needs, such as trauma, language barriers, and cultural dislocation. This limitation highlights the critical importance of developing targeted intervention programs and identification methods tailored explicitly to refugee students.
Finally, the comparative thematic analysis demonstrated significant limitations in current identification methods, emphasizing their inadequacy in fully recognizing giftedness among refugee students. These findings align with theoretical perspectives suggesting that giftedness manifests diversely, especially across different cultural and socioeconomic contexts, challenging standardized and one-dimensional approaches (Sternberg, 2023). Prior studies consistently indicated that traditional standardized assessments frequently fail to effectively identify culturally diverse and disadvantaged students due to inherent biases and insufficient consideration of contextual factors (Edmonds, 2015; Lohman et al., 2008; Naglieri & Ford, 2003). The review emphasized the need to adopt comprehensive identification frameworks that explicitly address refugee-specific issues, such as interrupted education, psychosocial trauma, and socioeconomic disadvantages (Alodat et al., 2024; Sarouphim, 2002; VanTassel-Baska et al., 2002). Developing inclusive, multidimensional, culturally responsive methods is crucial for adequately capturing and nurturing the gifted potential of refugees and similarly marginalized populations.
Implications
The implications of this research span educational practice, policy development, and future scholarly inquiry. In practical terms, educators and policymakers should prioritize developing identification frameworks that are not only inclusive but also explicitly responsive to the unique experiences of refugee students. Such frameworks should incorporate comprehensive strategies, including universal screening, culturally responsive assessments, and multimethod approaches that reflect the complex educational, linguistic, and psychosocial backgrounds of displaced learners. Professional development programs must also enhance educators’ cultural and contextual competencies, enabling them to recognize diverse expressions of giftedness, particularly those that emerge from resilience, multilingualism, or leadership in the face of adversity.
From a policy standpoint, comprehensive and adaptive reforms are essential. A model policy framework could include mandates for inclusive identification criteria that account for interrupted schooling, trauma, and cultural differences, thereby ensuring a more comprehensive understanding of individuals’ experiences. This may involve implementing equity audits, adopting nonverbal or performance-based measures, and embedding culturally and linguistically appropriate tools into national and regional gifted education policies. These measures would ensure that identification systems not only avoid exclusion but also actively seek out hidden talent in refugee populations.
Future research should move beyond documenting barriers to actively constructing and evaluating new models of identification tailored to refugee students. Qualitative studies, such as ethnographies, life histories, or narrative inquiries, can provide deep insight into the lived experiences of gifted refugee students and the social and institutional dynamics that affect their identification. Longitudinal research is also necessary to evaluate the impact of specific identification practices on academic and social-emotional outcomes over time. Importantly, this study invites further exploration of hypothetical or pilot identification models that integrate insights from the underrepresentation literature and adapt them for refugee-serving contexts.
In conclusion, while current practices provide a foundation, gifted refugee students require more in-depth, intentional approaches. Ensuring equitable representation and holistic support for these students necessitates bold policy reform, the construction of inclusive identification models, and sustained research efforts aimed at transforming gifted education into a space of opportunity and empowerment for all learners, regardless of their displacement status.
Footnotes
Ethical Considerations
This research did not require IRB approval because it did not involve human subjects.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Open Access funding provided by the Qatar National Library.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Open Practices
The data analyzed in this study are not available for the purpose of reproducing the results. The code or protocol used to generate the findings report in the article is not available for purposes of reproducing the results or replicating the study. There are no other newly created, unique materials used to conduct the research.
Artificial Intelligence Use
The authors confirm that no generative AI tools were used in the development of this article.