Researchers investigated the impact of a professional learning intervention focused on teaching teachers to increase rigor, challenge, and engagement to reveal talent in low-income learners. The professional learning intervention’s goal, to improve teachers’ ability to recognize student ability and talent through use of proven high-level curricular and instructional strategies, focused teacher learning on culturally responsive teaching, fundamental principles of learning, and specific curriculum. Researchers hypothesized teacher perceptions of students’ abilities would shift from a deficit view to a strengths-based one. Results indicated that teacher beliefs were positively impacted after one year and that those impacts leveled off over time. Specifically, teachers’ perceptions of student potential and the importance of talent development improved. Engagement in professional learning predicted positive change in classroom support, organization, and instruction. Finally, the professional learning intervention positively impacted teacher efficacy related to engaging, instructing, and managing learners.
BonneL.JohnstonM. (2016). Students’ beliefs about themselves as mathematics learners. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 20(2), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.001.
3.
BrackenB. A.VanTassel-BaskaJ.BrownE. F.FengA. (2007). Project Athena: A tale of two studies. In VanTassel-BaskaJ.StambaughT. (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on promising students of poverty (pp. 63–67). National Association for Gifted Children.
4.
BrophyJ. (1988). Research linking teacher behavior to student achievement: Potential implications for instruction of Chapter 1 students. Educational Psychologist, 23(3), 235–286. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2303_3
5.
CarrawayK. (2014). Transforming your teaching: Practical strategies informed by cognitive neuroscience. W.W. Norton.
6.
ChinM. J.QuinnD. M.DhaliwalT. K.DhaliwalA. K.LovisonV. S. (2020). Bias in the air: A nationwide exploration of teachers’ implicit racial attitudes, aggregate bias, and student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 49(8), 566–578. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20937240
7.
ColemanM. R.Shah-ColtraneS. S.HarradineC.TimmonsL. A. (2007). Impact of poverty on promising learners, their teachers, and their schools. In J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (pp. 59-61), 59–67. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED494579.pdf
8.
ColemanM. R.Shah-ColtraneS.HarrisonA. (2010). U-STARS∼PLUS: Teacher’s observation of potential in students: Individual student form. Council for Exceptional Children.
9.
CurbyT.W.StuhlmanM.GrimmK.MashburnA.Chomat-MooneyL.DownerJ.HamreB.PiantaR.C. (2011). Within-day variability in the quality of classroom interactions during third and fifth grade: Implications for children’s experiences and conducting classroom observations. Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 16–37. https://doi.org/10.1086/660682
10.
Darling-HammondL.HylerM. E.GardnerM. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
11.
Darling-HammondL.WeiR. C.AndreeA.RichardsonN.OrphanosS. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession (Vol. 9). National Staff Development Council.
DixonF.YsselN.McConnellJ.HardinT. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529042
DoppeltY.SchunnC. D.SilkE. M.MehalikM. M.ReynoldsB.WardE. (2009). Evaluating the impact of facilitated learning community approach to professional development on teacher practice and student achievement. Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(3), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140903166026
16.
DuckworthA. (2016). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. Scribner.
FordD. Y. (2015). Culturally responsive gifted classrooms for culturally different students: A focus on invitational learning. Gifted Child Today, 38(1), 67–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514556697
23.
FordD. Y.GranthamT. C.WhitingG. W. (2008). Culturally and linguistically diverse students in gifted education: Recruitment and retention issues. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290807400302
24.
FordD. Y.MooreJ. L.IIIMilnerH. R. (2005). Beyond culture blindness: A model of culture with implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 27(2), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190509554297
FryerR. G. (2013). Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City public schools. Journal of Labor Economics, 31(2), 373–407. https://doi.org/10.1086/667757
27.
GavinM. K.CasaT. M.AdelsonJ. L.CarrollS. R.SheffieldL. J. (2009). The impact of advanced curriculum on the achievement of mathematically promising elementary students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(3), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986209334964
28.
GayG. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
GranthamT. C.FordD. Y.DavisJ. L.Frazier Trotman ScottM.DicksonK.TaradashG.WhitingG. W.CottonC. B.FloydE. F.CollinsK. H.AndersonB. N.FoxS.RobersonJ. J. (2020). Get your knee off our necks: Black scholars speak out to confront racism against Black students in gifted and talented education. The Consortium for Inclusion of Underrepresented Racial Groups in Gifted Education. https://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/I-URGGE-Anti-RacistGiftedEducation-June2020.pdf
31.
GrissomJ. A.ReddingC. (2016). Discretion and disproportionality: Explaining the underrepresentation of high-achieving students of color in gifted programs. AERA Open, 2(1). 233285841562217. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415622175
32.
GuryanJ.KimJ. S.ParkK. H. (2016). Motivation and incentives in education: Evidence from a summer reading experiment. Economics of Education Review, 55(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.08.002
GutshallC. A. (2013). Teachers’ mindsets for students with and without disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 50(10), 1073–1083. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21725
35.
GutshallC. A. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ mindset beliefs about student ability. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 12(3), 785–802. https://doi.org/10.25115/ejrep.34.14030
36.
GutshallC. A.KellyC. L. (2021). Developing teachers in the talent development model. In SwansonJ. D.Van SickleM. (Eds.), Talent development in school: An educator’s guide to implementing a culturally responsive talent identification and development program (pp. 203–216). Prufrock Press.
37.
HammondZ. L. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Sage.
38.
HarradineC. C.ColemanM. R. B.WinnD. C. (2014). Recognizing academic potential in students of color: Findings of U-STARS∼PLUS. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213506040
39.
HarrisonA. (1986). A developmental checklist. East Carolina University.
HornC. V. (2015). Young scholars: A talent development model for finding and nurturing potential in underserved populations. Gifted Child Today, 38(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514556532
43.
HornC. V. (2019). Serving low-income and underrepresented students in a talent development framework. In Olszewski-KubiliusP.SubotnikR. F.WorrellF. C. (Eds.), Talent development as a framework for gifted education (pp.129–152). Prufrock Press.
44.
HowardT. C. (2010). Why race and culture matter in schools: Closing the achievement gap in America’s classrooms. Teachers College Press.
45.
KahnemanD. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
46.
KellyC. L.BrockL. L.SwansonJ. D.RussellL. (2022). Teacher engagement scale for professional development. Manuscript submitted for publication.
47.
KimK. H.VanTassel-BaskaJ.BrackenB. A.FengA.StambaughT.BlandL. (2011). Project Clarion: Three years of science instruction in Title I schools among K-third grade students. Research in Science Education, 42(5), 813–829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9218-5
48.
KohnA. (1999). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise, and other bribes. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
49.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American children. Jossey-Bass.
50.
LichtensteinM. (2021). Talent development and culturally responsive teaching. In SwansonJ. D.Van SickleM. (Eds.), Talent development in school: An educator’s guide to implementing a culturally responsive talent identification and development program (pp. 155–186). Prufrock Press.
51.
LittleC. A.AdelsonJ. L.KearneyK. L.CashK.O’BrienR. (2018). Early opportunities to strengthen academic readiness: Effects of summer learning on mathematics achievement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738052
52.
LittleC. A.FengA. X.VanTassel-BaskaJ.RogersK. B.AveryL. D. (2007). A study of curriculum effectiveness in social studies. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302722
53.
MeeceJ. L.AndermanE. M.AndermanL. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258
54.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2012). MPlus: Statistical analysis with latent variables–User’s guide. Muthén & Muthén.
NoddingsN. (2005). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
57.
Olszewski-KubiliusP.ClarenbachJ. (2012). Unlocking emergent talent: Supporting high achievement of low-income, high-ability students. National Association for Gifted Children.
58.
PajaresM. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003307
59.
PetersonE. R.Rubie-DaviesC.OsborneD.SibleyC. (2016). Teachers’ explicit expectations and implicit prejudiced attitudes to educational achievement: Relations with student achievement and the ethnic achievement gap. Learning and Instruction, 42(1), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.010
60.
PiantaR. C.KarenM.ParoL.HamreB. K. (2008). Classroom assessment scoring system (CLASS) manual, K–3. Paul H. Brookes.
61.
PluckerJ.HardestyJ.BurroughsN. (2013). Talent on the sidelines: Excellence gaps and America’s persistent talent underclass. University of Connecticut, Center for Education Policy Analysis.
RobinsonA.AdelsonJ. L.KiddK. A.CunninghamC. M. (2017). A talent for tinkering: Developing talents in children from low-income households through engineering curriculum. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738049
64.
RyanR.DeciE. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
65.
RyanR.DeciE. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68
66.
StambaughT. (2007). Effects of the Jacob’s Ladder Reading Comprehension Program on reading comprehension and critical thinking skills of third, fourth, and fifth grade students in Title I schools [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, William & Mary].
67.
StambaughT.FechtS. D. (2021). Practical strategies for teaching through a talent development lens. In SwansonJ. D.Van SickleM. (Eds.), Talent development in school: An educator’s guide to implementing a culturally responsive talent identification and development program (pp. 25–50). Prufrock Press.
68.
StarckJ. G.RiddleT.SinclairS.WarikooN. (2020). Teachers are people too: Examining the racial bias of teachers compared to other American adults. Educational Researcher, 49(4), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912758
69.
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.WorrellF. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
70.
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.WorrellF. C. (2019). The talent development framework: Overview of components and implications for policy and practice. In Olszewski-KubiliusP.SubotnikR. F.WorrellF. C. (Eds.), Talent development as a framework for gifted education (pp.7–24). Prufrock Press.
71.
SwansonJ. D. (2006). Breaking through assumptions about low-come, minority gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620605000103
72.
SwansonJ. D. (2021a). Adding talent development to school and district services. In SwansonJ. D.Van SickleM. (Eds.), Talent development in school: An educator’s guide to implementing a culturally responsive talent identification and development program (pp. 281–292). Prufrock Press.
73.
SwansonJ. D. (2021b). One path to talent development: An instructional model for talent development. In SwansonJ. D.Van SickleM. (Eds.), Talent development in school: An educator’s guide to implementing a culturally responsive talent identification and development program (pp. 51–66). Prufrock Press.
74.
TomlinsonC. A.JarvisJ. M. (2014). Case studies of success: Supporting academic success for students with high potential from ethnic minority and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(3), 191–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214540826
75.
ToughP. (2016). Helping children succeed: What works and why. Random House.
van den BerghL.DenessenE.HornstraL.VoetenM.HollandR. W. (2010). The implicit prejudiced attitudes of teachers: Relations to teacher expectations and the ethnic achievement gap. American Educational Research Journal, 47(2), 497–527. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209353594
78.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2013). The integrated curriculum model. In CallahanC.Hertberg- DavisH. L. (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education considering multiple perspectives (pp. 315–326). Routledge.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.BrackenB.FengA.BrownE. (2009). A longitudinal study of reading comprehension and reasoning ability of students in elementary Title I schools. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(1), 7–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320903300102
81.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.FengA. X.BrownE.BrackenB.StambaughTFrenchH.McGowanS.WorleyBQuekC.BauW. (2008). A study of differentiated instructional change over 3 years. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(4), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208321809
82.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.JohnsonD. T.HughesC. E.BoyceL. N. (1996). A study of language arts curriculum effectiveness with gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(4), 461–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329601900405
83.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.QuekC.FengA. X. (2007). The development and use of a structured teacher observation scale to assess differentiated best practice. Roeper Review, 29(2), 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190709554391
84.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.StambaughT. (2006). Project Athena: A pathway to advanced literacy development for children of poverty. Gifted Child Today, 29(2), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.4219/gct-2006-202
YeagerD. S.DweckC. S. (2021). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies?American Psychologist, 75(9), 1269–1284. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000794
87.
YoonK. S.DuncanT.LeeS. W.Y.ScarlossB.ShapleyK. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.
88.
ZhangJ. F.KuusistoE.TirriK. (2017). How teachers’ and students’ mindsets in learning have been studied: Research findings on mindset and academic achievement. Psychology, 8(9), 1363–1377. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2017.89089
