The low number of gifted students identified in disadvantaged and culturally diverse groups has been, and continues to be, problematic. Why has this problem persisted? Why do we know, think we know, and need to know about resolving identification issues? This paper provides responses to these questions and proposes a possible solution. A profile system is presented that describes a viable way to utilize data from test and non-test sources to identify these children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbbotJ. (1982). An anthropological approach to the identification of Navajo gifted children. In Identifying and educating the disadvantaged gifted/talented. Selected proceedings from the fifth national conference on disadvantaged gifted/talented. Los Angeles, CA: The National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and the Talented.
2.
BaldwinA. (1984). The Baldwin identification matrix 2 for the identification of the gifted and talented: A handbook for its use. New York: Trillium Press.
3.
BaldwinA.WoosterJ. (1977). Baldwin identification matrix inservice kit for the identification of gifted and talented students. Buffalo, NY: D. O. K.
4.
BernalE. (1974). Gifted Mexican American children: An ethnoscientific perspective. California Journal of Educational Research, 25, 261–273.
5.
BernalE. (1982). Identifying minority gifted students: Special problems and procedures. In Identifying and educating the disadvantaged gifted/talented. Selected proceedings from the fifth national conference on disadvantaged gifted/talented. Los Angeles, CA: The National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and the Talented.
6.
BlackshearP. (1979). A comparison of peer nomination and teacher nomination in the identification of the academically gifted, black, primary level student. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
7.
CronbachL. (1984). Essentials of psychological testing (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
8.
DavisP. (1978). Community-based efforts to increase the identification of the number of gifted minority children. Ypsilanti, MI: Eastern Michigan College of Education. (ED 176 487).
9.
DeHaanR.HavighurstR. (1961). Educating gifted children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
Education Amendments of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95–561, 92 Stat. 2143 (1978).
11.
FeuersteinR. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers. Baltimore: University Park Press.
12.
GibbonFitz C. (1975). The identification of mentally gifted “disadvantaged” students at the eighth grade level. Journal of Negro Education, 43(1), 53–66.
13.
FrasierM. (1980). Programming for the culturally diverse. In JordanJ.GrossiJ. (Eds.), An administrator's handbook on designing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 56–65). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
14.
FrasierM. (1983). A comparison of general traits and behaviors attributed to the gifted with traits and behaviors attributed to the gifted disadvantaged. Unpublished manuscript, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
15.
FrasierM. (1990 April). The equitable identification of gifted and talented children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, Massachusetts.
16.
GallagherJ.KinneyL. (1974). Talent delayed-talent denied: The culturally different gifted child. A conference report. Reston, VA: The Foundation for Exceptional Children.
17.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic.
18.
GayJ. (1978). A proposed plan for identifying black gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22(3), 353–360.
19.
GordonE.WilkersonD. A. (1966). Compensatory education for the disadvantaged. Programs and practices: Preschool through college. New York: College Entrance Board.
20.
HagenE. (1980). Identification of the gifted. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
21.
HessR.HollowayS. (1982). Family and school as educational institutions. Review of Child Development Research, 7, 179–222.
22.
HilliardA. (1976 June). Alternatives to I. Q. testing: An approach to the identification of gifted “minority” children (Final report). Sacramento, CA: California State Department of Education, Sacramento Division of Special Education. (ED 147 009).
23.
JohnsonS.StarnesW.GregoryD.BlaylockA. (1985). Program of assessment, diagnosis, and instruction (PADI): Identifying and nurturing potentially gifted and talented minority students. The Journal of Negro Education, 54(3), 416–430.
24.
KitanoM.KirbyD. (1986). Gifted education: A comprehensive view. Boston: Little, Brown.
25.
LaRoseB. (1978). A quota system for gifted minority children: A viable solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 394–403.
26.
MakerC.SchieverS. (Eds.), (1989). Critical issues in gifted education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
27.
MercerJ.LewisJ. (1978). Using the system of multicultural pluralistic assessment (SOMPA) to identify the gifted minority child. In BaldwinA.GearG.LucitoL. (Eds.), Educational planning for the gifted (pp. 7–14). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
28.
PassowA. (1982). The gifted disadvantaged: Some reflections. In Identifying and educating the disadvantaged gifted/talented. Selected proceedings from the fifth national conference on disadvantaged gifted/talented. Los Angeles, CA: The National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and the Talented.
29.
RogoffB.MorelliG. (1989). Perspectives on children's development from cultural psychology. American Psychologist, 44, 343–348.
30.
SternbergR. (1986 February). Identifying the gifted through I. Q.: Why a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Roeper Review, 8(3), 143–147.
31.
TorranceE. (1977). Discovery and nurturance of giftedness in the culturally different. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
32.
TreffingerD.RenzulliJ. (1986 February). Giftedness as potential for creative productivity: Transcending I. Q. scores. Roeper Review, 8(3), 150–154.
