Gifted education has served the educational community as a leader in curriculum designed for promoting excellence in our nation's classrooms. The apparent lack of equitable opportunities for entrance into gifted programs for certain segments of the school population have, justifiably, brought criticism of elitism. Inappropriate identification procedures create underrepresentation in programs. This paper describes a gifted program that identified students after entry into the program. Students are judged suitable for gifted education only after they have had the opportunity to develop and exhibit behaviors within a gifted classroom environment. The result has been student opportunities and achievements that span the chasm between excellence and equity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdlerM. (1982). Paideia proposal. New York: Macmillan.
2.
AwayaA. (1995). Redefining gifted education: A response to excellence and equity concerns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
3.
BuchananN.WoernerB.BigamN.CascadeC. (1997). Developing talent in high school students: An integrative model. Roeper Review, 19, 208–212.
4.
CallahanC. M. (1996). A critical self-study of gifted education: Healthy practice, necessary evil, or sedition?. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 148–163.
5.
CohenL. M. (1990). Meeting the needs of gifted and talented minority language student (ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education EC Digest #E480 No. ED 321485). Available <http://ericec.org/digests/e480.htm>.
6.
ColemanL. J. (1995). The power of specialized educational environments in the development of giftedness: The need for research on social context. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 171–176.
7.
CoxJ.DanielN.BostonB. O. (1985). Educating able learners: Programs and promising practices. Austin: University of Texas Press.
8.
DavisG. A.RimmS. B. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
9.
FeldmanD. H. (1999). A developmental, evolutionary perspective on gifts and talents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 159–167.
10.
FordD. Y.ThomasA. (1997). Under achievement among gifted minority students: Problems and promises (ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education No. EC Digest #E544). Available <http://ericec.org/digests/e544.htm>.
11.
GallagherJ. J. (1996). A critique of critiques of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 234–249.
12.
GallagherJ. J. (1991). Issues in the education of gifted students. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 111–141). Boston: Simon & Schuster.
13.
GwiazdaR. (1983). The Peter Pan proposal. Harvard Education Review, 53, 384–388.
14.
HenigR. M. (1994, October 23). Dumbing down. New York Times Magazine, 34, 36.
15.
HofstadterR. (1963). Anti-intellectualism in American life. New York: Knopf.
16.
HowleyC. B.HowleyA.PendarvisE. D. (1995). Out of our minds: Anti-intellectualism and talent development in American schooling. New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
JatkoB. P. (1995). Using a whole class tryout procedure for identifying economically disadvantaged students in three socioeconomically diverse schools. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 83–105.
18.
Kahuku High and Intermediate School. (1991). Self-study for continued accreditation. (Available from Kahuku High School, 56–490 Kamehameha Hwy, Kahuku, HI 96731).
KozolJ. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools. New York: Harper-Collins.
21.
LupartJ. L.PyrytM. C. (1996). “Hidden gifted” students: Underachiever prevalence and profile. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 36–53.
22.
MakerC. J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem, needed changes, and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41–50.
23.
MartinD. E. (1996). Towards an understanding of the Native Hawaiian concept and manifestation of giftedness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
24.
National Association for Gifted Children. (1997). Using tests to identify gifted students, Public policy statement. (Available from the National Association for Gifted Children, 1707 L Street, NW, Suite 550, Washington, DC 20036).
25.
PassowH. A.FrasierM. M. (1996). Toward improving identification of talent potential among minority and disadvantaged students. Roeper Review, 18, 198–202.
26.
RenzulliJ. S. (1998). A rising tide lifts all ships: Developing the gifts of all students. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 104–111.
27.
RenzulliJ. S.PurcellJ. H. (1996). Gifted education: A look around and a look ahead. Roeper Review, 18, 173–178.
28.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1991). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for the development of creative productivity. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 111–141). Boston: Simon & Schuster.
29.
ReyesE. I.FletcherR.PaezD. (1996). Developing local multidimensional screening procedures for identifying giftedness among Mexican American border population. Roeper Review, 18, 208–211.
30.
RichertE. S. (1991). Rampant problems and promising practices in identification. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 81–96). Boston: Simon & Schuster.
31.
SlaninaA. M. (1996). Factors that impact transitions between a regular-educational program and a gifted program: The perceptions of four African American males. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 54–83.
32.
SternbergR.ZhangL. (1995). What do we mean by giftedness? A pentagonal implicit theory. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 88–94.
33.
TannenbaumA. J. (1998). Programs for the gifted: To be or not to be. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 3–36.
34.
TomlinsonC. A. (1996). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity?. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 155–174.
35.
TomlinsonC.CallahanC. M. (1992). Contributions of gifted education to general education in a time of change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 183–189.
36.
TreffingerD. (1991). Future goals and directions. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 441–447). Boston: Simon & Schuster.
37.
TreffingerD. J.FeldhusenJ. F. (1996). Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 181–193.
38.
U.S. Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
39.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (1997). Excellence as a standard for all education. Roeper Review, 20, 9–12.
