Applying Frasier Four A’s to Promote Upstander Teachers for Academic Acceleration of Gifted Black Students

Abstract

Acceleration is an effective approach for many high ability students, and it can be especially beneficial for Black students. Upstander teachers are those who recognize educational crises and the problem of overlooked and underdeveloped gifts and talents of Black students in regular and gifted education programs. They proactively identify Black students’ intellectual and academic strengths and plan not only enrichment services, but accelerated pathways for Black students to be appropriately challenged. Too many Black students with gifts and talents succumb to boredom, underachievement, and atrophy when bystander teachers have low academic expectations of them and fail to recommend them for academically rigorous advanced and accelerated learning experiences. The purpose of this article is to present acceleration as a means of creating equitable opportunities in gifted education for gifted Black students using Frasier’s Four A’s framework: attitude, access, assessment, and accommodation. Specifically, the following questions are addressed: What are upstander attitudes toward acceleration and related policies? How can upstander teachers know if a Black student is a good candidate for acceleration and increase their access to acceleration? How can upstander teachers provide equitable assessments of Black students for acceleration? What can upstander teachers do to support acceleration programming that accommodates the needs of gifted Black students? Six tables provide an overview of acceleration types, a guide to promote equitable acceleration, and considerations for accelerating gifted Black students.

Keywords

gifted Black students acceleration upstander teachers equity Frasier’s Four A’s attitude access assessment accommodation National Association for Gifted Children equity and social justice statement

“Several states such as Ohio have developed acceleration policies that can be adjusted to address individual state or district needs.”

The job of a teacher is not done when the bell rings, the buses leave, and the halls are quiet. There are always more lessons to plan, papers to grade, or meetings to attend. Because of this, educators can have the tendency to become bystanders in the fight for equity in gifted and talented education (GATE), waiting for others to act instead of taking initiative to make positive change. In contrast, an upstander is a person who makes conscientious, deliberate, and immediate efforts to engage proactive behaviors and roles to address injustice (Grantham, 2011; Grantham & Biddle, 2014). Upstander teachers for Black students in gifted and talented education have a compelling personal and professional desire and need to promote positive change and not settle for the status quo of underrepresentation. For Black students in gifted and advanced programs, upstander teachers have the added task of ensuring that their students receive a more challenging curriculum within the regular education classroom. An increased number of researchers, practitioners and policy makers and community advocates are encouraging teachers who act as bystanders to under-representation and inequity in gifted education to act as upstanders and take an active role in combating injustices in their schools and communities (Grantham, 2011; Grantham & Biddle, 2014; Grantham & Collins, 2013; Luckey & Grantham, 2017).

Recently, the Board of Directors of the National Association for Gifted Children (2020) issued a call for equity and social justice in gifted education, particularly for Black students with gifts and talents:

All gifted students won’t matter until all Black gifted students matter, too. A society that values the development and education of each gifted student, regardless of race or class, is the only context in which every gifted child is truly valued. We acknowledge the injustices of structural and systemic racism and recognize the field of gifted education has historically been part of the problem by promoting these injustices, even if inadvertently. Some early researchers and thought leaders who influenced the field were involved with the eugenics movement, and early gifted identification and programming practices often became vehicles for de facto segregation. The field has made tremendous strides in addressing these historical injustices in recent years, but we have not made sufficient progress. (NAGC Board of Directors, 2020).

In essence, the Board of Directors has issued a clarion call for upstander educators and advocates of Black students to stand with NAGC. Gifted Black students need a greater number of upstander teachers to understand and support them and accelerate their learning experiences in schools. The purpose of this article is to present acceleration as a means of creating equitable opportunities in gifted education for gifted Black students, using Dr. Frasier’s 4 A’s (attitude, access, assessment, and accommodation) as a framework.

Academic Acceleration

Although not a new concept in GATE, acceleration of Black students is an underdeveloped and underutilized programming and services option in many schools. Acceleration is defined as “progress through an educational program at rates faster or ages younger than conventional” (Pressey, 1949, p. 2). It is an evidence-based practice and one of the ways that serving gifted students can occur in numerous ways. Assouline et al. (2015) distinguished between 20 distinct types of acceleration. (see Tables 1 –3).

Table 1.

PreK-Eighth Grade Acceleration Types and Advantages.

Types of PreK-8 Acceleration	Descriptions^a	Advantages
Early admission to kindergarten or 1^st grade	Student enters kindergarten or first grade before reaching the minimum age according to state or district policy.	• Student begins and continues through their educational career with the same peer group.
Early admission to kindergarten or 1^st grade		• Can help student maintain previously developed peer group.
Grade skipping	Student is placed in higher grade than typical based on chronological age. Can occur at any point during the school year. Grade skipping by two or more years is considered radical acceleration.	• Can be done at any point in a student’s educational career.
Grade skipping		• Number of grades student is accelerated can be adjusted to meet the needs of the student
Subject-matter acceleration/partial acceleration	Student is placed in higher grade or with high grade materials for part of the day in one or more content areas.	• Accommodates students who excel in specific content areas.
Subject-matter acceleration/partial acceleration		• Allows student to socialize with both age and intellectual peers.
Combined classes	Class arrangement in which younger students have the opportunity to interact both academically and socially with older students. Sometimes results in later advanced grade placement.	• Allows student to socialize with both age and intellectual peers

Note. ^a(Southern & Jones, 2015).

Table 2.

High School and Postsecondary Acceleration Types and Advantages.

Types of High School and Postsecondary Acceleration	Descriptions^a	Advantages
Early high school or college graduation	Graduation from high school or college in three and a half years or less by increasing course load, participating in dual-enrollment, or taking correspondence coursework.	• Allows student who is ready for college level work to matriculate at an earlier age.
		• May allow student to take gap year.
		• Student can save money on tuition for postsecondary education.
		• Allows student more freedom in course options at higher levels.
Concurrent/dual-enrollment	Student takes a course at one level and is credited for a similar course at a higher level. Usually used at the middle and high school leveled to shorten the completion timeline high school or college.	• Students can save money on tuition for postsecondary education.
		• Can help students maintain previously developed peer group.
		• Allows student more freedom in course options at higher levels.
Advanced Placement	Student takes a course in high school that has the potential to result in college credit if they achieve a certain score on a standardized assessment.	• Allows students to learn content at a deeper level.
Advanced Placement		• Students can earn college credit, which may save money on tuition for postsecondary education.
International Baccalaureate	A specialized program offered at IBO authorized schools. Students complete requirements for an IB diploma and may receive college credit for performance on IB exams.	• Allows students to learn content at a deeper level.
International Baccalaureate		• Students can earn college credit, which may save money on tuition for postsecondary education.
Credit by examination	Student is given college credit for successfully completing a test or activity that verifies content mastery.	• Students can save money on tuition for postsecondary education.
Credit by examination		• Allows student more freedom in course options at higher levels.
Accelerated/honors high school or residential high school of college campus	Student attends a school specifically for gifted students. Students often complete high school graduation requirements in tandem with college coursework.	• Students are provided with structure and support for early entrance to college.
Acceleration in college	Student completes multiple undergraduate degrees in 4 years or less. May also earn a post-baccalaureate degree in the same time period.	• Student can enter graduate school or the workforce earlier.
Acceleration in college		• Student may have time to pursue multiple interests (i.e., multiple majors, study abroad)

Note. ^a(Southern & Jones, 2015).

Table 3.

Acceleration Types and Advantages at Multiple Levels.

Types of Acceleration at Multiple Levels	Descriptions^a	Advantages
Continuous progress	New content is given as previous content is mastered. Student should progress more quickly than chronological peers.	• Does not limit students to the pace dictated by the school year or traditional curriculum.
		• Can occur within the regular education classroom with larger groups of students.
		• Allows students to interact with others with similar abilities and interests.
Self-paced instruction	Student progresses through content at a self-selected pace. Student has exclusive control over the rate at which they progress through content.	• Provides more autonomy for the student.
Self-paced instruction		• Does not limit students to the pace dictated by the school year or traditional curriculum.
Curriculum compacting	Adjustment of curriculum based on preassessment to reduce introductory activities, drills, and practice. Learning time is reallocated to advanced content or enrichment activities.	• Does not limit students to the pace dictated by the school year or traditional curriculum.
		• Can occur within the regular education classroom with larger groups of students.
		• Allows students to interact with others with similar abilities and interests.
Telescoping curriculum	Curriculum is condensed to be learning in a shorter period of time than traditional. Results in advanced grade or subject placement for the student in the future.	• Does not limit students to the pace dictated by the school year or traditional curriculum.
		• Can occur within the regular education classroom with larger groups of students.
		• Allows students to interact with others with similar abilities and interests.
Mentoring	Mentors are paired with student to give advanced instruction in a specific content area. May result in additional course credit.	• Can be completed during the regular school day, outside of school time, or during the summer.
		• Exposes students to real world experiences.
		• Uses resources from outside the school environment.
Extracurricular programs	Participation in programs outside of the school setting or school year that result in academic credit.	• Can be completed during the regular school day, outside of school time, or during the summer.
Extracurricular programs		• Uses resources from outside the school environment.
Distance learning courses	Participation in coursework (correspondence, online, or televised) outside of normal school instruction.	• Can be completed during the regular school day, outside of school time, or during the summer
Early entrance in middle school, high school, or college	Student received advanced grade placement at least 1 year ahead of chronological peers.	• Allows student more freedom in course options at higher levels

Note. ^a(Southern & Jones, 2015).

The form of acceleration that educators are usually most familiar with is grade skipping, when a student is placed one or more grade levels ahead of their same-aged peers. For schools and teachers that enroll majority-minority or predominantly Black students, grade skipping can be a relatively simple and low-cost way of accelerating a gifted Black student. However, this method may not work for all Black students (see e.g., Grantham & Biddle, 2014 discussion on acting White), and as evidenced in Table 2, there are many other options. Depending on a Black student’s areas of strength, academic maturity and racial identity, acceleration may be necessary for one or more subject areas, and the amount of acceleration may or may not be the same in each subject area. Our experience as GATE researchers and instructors working in schools with large populations of Black students and as parents of children identified and accelerated in GATE education, upstander energy is key to overcome barriers of traditional ways of understanding and engaging gifted Black students. The key is to ensure that Black students have the opportunity to reach their maximum potential in every area of their academic, social, and emotional experience (Ford, 2013).

As one of the oldest ways of serving gifted students, acceleration has an abundance of research emphasizing its ability to provide students with both short and long-term positive outcomes (Assouline et al., 2015; Dare & Nowicki, 2018; Luckey & Grantham, 2017; Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018; McClarty, 2015). While in K-12, acceleration produces positive academic effects for students (Rogers, 2015). Research on social impacts often differs by type of acceleration, but overall researchers have seen no effect or only positive effects of acceleration on children’s social and psychological adjustment (Cross et al., 2015). Over the long-term, students who are accelerated attend more prestigious colleges, earn more advanced degrees, produce more patents, earn higher incomes, and have more publications than their nonaccelerated peers (Park et al., 2013; Wai, 2015).

Underrepresented Students in Advanced and Accelerated Programs

Although acceleration has been demonstrated to be an effective strategy for many high ability students, it can be especially beneficial for Black students. Unfortunately, high ability Black students are underrepresented in GATE, as they often suffer from the impact of cultural barriers in the identification and provision of gifted services (Ford, 2013).

Identification

Research has shown that Black students may exhibit giftedness in culturally specific ways, including heightened emotional expressiveness and sensitivity, improvisation, expressive body language, and humor (Frasier, 1997; Grantham & Collins, 2013; Torrance, 1973). Gifted Black students also experience cultural barriers when they encounter intelligence tests that have cultural bias (Ecker-Lyster & Niileksela, 2017) or teachers who are not familiar with various manifestations of giftedness and may not know what to look for (Trotman Scott & Moss-Bouldin, 2014).

Issues in the Provision of GATE Services

Even if students are identified and served in a GATE program, they may still suffer from common issues such as microaggressions (Stambaugh & Ford, 2015), being accused of “acting White” (Grantham & Biddle, 2014), deficit thinking, and stereotype threat (Ford et al., 2011). These issues can impact retention in gifted programs and influence students to miss out on advanced opportunities (Ford & Whiting, 2010). Researchers who study gifted education and practitioners who teach in gifted and advanced programming can use diverse strategies to meet the needs of Black students (Ecker-Lyster & Niileksela, 2017). However, some strategies involve more time and extra planning on the part of the teacher. For high ability Black students, teachers may also be charged with the more complex task of providing culturally responsive programming options. This is where acceleration can be especially beneficial for high ability Black students. Because of underrepresentation and other cultural barriers, acceleration can be used as a way of serving students that allows them to remain in a general education classroom while still receiving educational material that matches their needs. This is important as it can give students the ability to continue developing their racial identity and have less concern with race-related issues such as stereotype threat and “acting White” (Ford & Whiting, 2010).

Four A’s: Attitude, Access, Assessment, and Accommodation

One of the most recognized researchers in gifted education of minority students, Dr. Mary Frasier, proposed four problems impacting the identification and education of gifted minority students: attitude, access, assessment, and accommodation (Frasier, 1997). By looking at acceleration through the lens of these four issues, upstander teachers can consider the relevant factors to the academic acceleration of Black students (Grantham & Ford, 2007). Through the lens of the four A’s, the following questions can be addressed:

1. What are upstander attitudes toward acceleration and related policies?

2. How can upstander teachers know if a Black student is a good candidate for acceleration and increase their access to acceleration?

3. How can upstander teachers provide equitable assessments of Black students for acceleration?

4. What can upstander teachers do to support acceleration programming that accommodates the needs of gifted Black students?

Attitudes Toward Black Students and Acceleration Policies

Frasier (1997) stated, “the most pervasive reasons for problems in identifying gifted minority students are related to attitudes about gifted potential in these groups” (p. 501). Frasier fully realized the benefits of positive teacher attitudes toward Black students’ abilities and acceleration because of her personal experience as a young scholar who earned admission as an early entrance college student at the age of 16 to South Carolina State University. Frasier believed, based on her own accelerated experience and on her years of experience in GATE, that if a teacher did not think Black students had the abilities, talents, and potential to be successfully placed in gifted programming, then the likelihood of their considering a Black student for academic acceleration was severely diminished.

Upstander educators consider their attitudes when developing acceleration policies, particularly in majority Black and low-income schools where gifted education services are often limited or non-existent (Plucker & Peters, 2018). Although examples of acceleration policies are available, it can be a time-consuming process. Upstander educators who choose to pursue the development of an acceleration policy must consider their attitudes about the importance of continuing the process through to the end. When developing acceleration policies, the policy has to be followed for all students, and should have language that mentions explicitly students who are culturally diverse, low-income, multi-lingual, and twice-exceptional (Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018; VanTassel-Baska, 2015). Having an intentional focus on equity and inclusion with an acceleration policy removes the temptation to wait on parents and other advocates of gifted Black students to bring up the possibility of acceleration. Instead, acceleration policies provide an undeniable avenue for upstander educators to consider acceleration as an option for all students.

Unfortunately, many districts do not have acceleration policies. Acceleration policies may be separate or within the gifted education policy but should specifically outline the process of pursuing acceleration for a student. Several states such as Ohio have developed acceleration policies that can be adjusted to address individual state or district needs. Also, acceleration experts have pinpointed several components that characterize an effective acceleration policy: (a) guidelines for accessibility, equity, and openness, (b) guidelines for the implementation of acceleration, (c) guidelines for administrative matters, (d) guidelines for preventing nonacademic barriers to the use of acceleration as an educational intervention, and (e) features that prevent unintended consequences (Colangelo et al., 2010; Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018).

Acceleration policies should address various types of acceleration because different forms of acceleration require different levels of involvement and coordination. Three main categories that need specific policy recommendations are early entrance, whole-grade, and single subject acceleration (Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018). A team should make decisions about any type of acceleration, the members of which should be spelled out in the policy (Johnsen et al., 2015; Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018). Through policy, strategies for acceleration can be integrated into gifted education services or function as a separate process. They can also be framed from a response-to-intervention perspective (Johnsen et al., 2015), using above-level assessments to assess students’ readiness for various types and levels of acceleration. In addition to the accountability that acceleration policies give teachers and schools, they also provide opportunities to better track accelerated students during their K-12 educational experiences. Policies provide data that “can be used to support research into best practices and to identify needs to target support to help ensure that students of all backgrounds have equitable access to advanced learning opportunities” (Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018, p. 14). This is especially important due to the lack of research specifically on the acceleration of students from underrepresented backgrounds (Lee et al., 2010).

In gifted education, there has long been discussion around underrepresentation, with Black students tending to be under-identified and underserved more than any other minority group (Ford, 2013). This reality provides an opening for discussion about acceleration policy, particularly in schools with large populations of underrepresented students. Good acceleration policies offer a way to serve high ability students outside of the full gifted identification process, meaning that a child being formally identified as gifted should not be a stipulation needed for acceleration to be considered (Lupkowski-Shoplik et al., 2018). Second, acceleration policy can keep students in a general education classroom that may represent a more diverse population of students, while still providing the student with an appropriate level of academic instruction (Toy, 2015). Since parents of Black students may not feel comfortable to begin a conversation about developing effective policies and practices around acceleration due to cultural barriers (Davis, 2010), upstander teachers need to be willing and able to start these discussions.

Black Students’ Access to Accelerated Experiences

Within gifted education, access refers to ways in which Black students become considered for gifted program placement (Frasier, 1997). Too often, educators hold low academic expectations for Black students, and teachers fail to refer Black students for accelerated experiences. Low expectations are compounded when educators lack the skills to recognize “gifted behaviors” in Black students in non-traditional ways. Frasier’s work highlights the reality that, when provided with common characteristics associated with typical and atypical gifted students, many educators still struggle to recognize these characteristics, particularly if Black students are underachievers, from low-income backgrounds, or speak non-standard English. Upstander teachers must consider the influence of culture and environment on the manifestation of gifts and talents in Black students, and the impact that these cultural differences can have on teacher referrals and students’ test performance.

Facilitating access to acceleration by making a referral is one of the most significant areas where upstander teachers have a positive impact. Because many types of acceleration can work in isolation or combination with each other, the responsibility falls in large part on the teacher to ensure that Black students who are exhibiting characteristics indicative of advanced academic abilities are referred. However, teachers who have not taken the time to become well versed about acceleration will be inadequately equipped to help Black students access acceleration. For Black students, there is limited information about access to acceleration (Lee et al., 2010). While the research indicates that Black students are equally as likely to experience whole-grade acceleration as White students, Black students may be accelerated more often to compensate for the fact that their schools often lack the resources to provide supplemental programming (Wells et al., 2009). This highlights the two-fold issues of acceleration and supplemental gifted programs. Both are necessary to serve gifted Black students adequately. Teachers need to understand the diverse manifestations of giftedness not only to identify Black students for services but also to identify them for acceleration opportunities.

To better understand and appreciate how students are referred for acceleration, educators can become aware of the core attributes of giftedness (Frasier et al., 1995). 10 core attributes of giftedness can provide the foundation to make a referral based on Traits, Aptitudes, and Behaviors (TABs) associated with giftedness. The TABs are:

1. Motivation: Evidence of desire to learn;

2. Interests: A feeling of intenseness, passion, concern, or curiosity about something;

3. Communication Skills: Highly expressive and effective use of words, numbers, symbols, etc;

4. Problem-solving ability: Effective, often inventive, strategies for recognizing and solving problems;

5. Memory: Large storehouse of information on school or non-school topics;

6. Inquiry: Questions, experiments, explores;

7. Insight: Quickly grasps new concepts and makes connections, senses deeper meanings;

8. Reasoning: Logical approaches to figuring out solutions;

9. Imagination/Creativity: Produces many ideas; highly original; and

10. Humor: Bringing two or more heretofore unrelated ideas or planes of thought together in a recognized, humorous relationship (Frasier et al., 1995)

Upstander teachers of Black students need to carefully study the TABs and look for these behaviors in the child’s performance at home and school that indicate unusual potential. Using the TABs, upstander teachers can keep records of these behaviors for referral purposes. Frasier recommended that the system not be elaborate or burdensome, but simply be used proactively. With advances in technology, digital folders, or cloud storage can be used to store Black students’ work samples. By keeping records of excerpts, photos, products, and reflections related to Black students’ activities, upstander teachers are ready to initiate and respond to acceleration referrals.

Assessment for Accelerated Experiences

Assessment of a student referred for gifted education services includes the process of appraising, estimating, or evaluating the presence of giftedness and to what degree (Frasier, 1997). Frasier and Passow (1994) outlined major critiques of assessment practices in gifted education that helped to guide the field of gifted education toward a new paradigm of identifying talent potential (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Adapting Frasier and Passow’s (1994) Critique of Traditional Identification Procedures to Black Student Assessment for Acceleration.

1. There exists no single accepted form of acceleration; therefore, a single assessment to accelerate Black students is not acceptable.

2. Academic achievement is an important indicator of giftedness but cannot be the sole determinant to accelerate and not to accelerate black students.

3. Cultural groups may differ in terms of how talents are recognized and accelerated; however, no cultural group has a monopoly on any talent potential that is worthy of accelerating.

4. The aptitudes, attributes, and characteristics that are associated with Black students’ talent potential are culturally imbedded.

5. The acceleration of Black students from upper-, middle-, or low-income backgrounds are not of a different order nor of a lower standard than White or other over-represented students.

6. The purpose of assessment for acceleration is to locate students who can be provided with appropriately differentiated accelerated experiences and opportunities.

7. Screening, identification, and the resulting placement of Black students in accelerated experiences can only be improved and enhanced if insights into the nature of talent potential and the contexts in which it is nurtured are understood.

8. For acceleration assessment purposes, the concept of “disadvantaged” has meaning only if it is understood, not in terms of deficiencies, but rather as differences.

9. The problem of under-representation among accelerated Black students is intrinsically related to the more general problems of education and schooling of these populations. In other words, Black students in need of acceleration are more likely to be in schools and classes that are segregated or racially imbalanced and that have poorer facilities, fewer instructional resources, larger classes, fewer programs for the gifted, more inexperienced teachers, and other factors that contribute to limited or unequal opportunities for acceleration.

10. Since decisions to accelerate children are never more than predictions, wide nets should be cast in the early stages of selection to increase the power of those predictions.

11. The concept that accelerating talent potential is culturally imbedded and impacted by environmental factors applies to all populations. Focusing on improving talent identification and development in Black students for acceleration can lead to better insights about talent identification and its nature more generally.

12. Valid assessment procedures and strategies that would more effectively identify talent potential Black students for acceleration must deal with both the actual and perceived problems of traditional methods. They must encourage and support the efforts of Black communities to examine opportunities for acceleration within their own cultural and environmental contexts and provide the basis for recognizing talents, without apologies for difference, where these exist, in their expression and performance.

When thinking about Frasier and Passow’s guiding principles in light of acceleration, assessment becomes a critical topic. Several types of acceleration, such as Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), and credit by examination, involve some form of testing, even after the decision to accelerate has been made. These assessments can impact accelerated Black students; even if they meet the qualifications set for a specific type of acceleration, they are still left to face hurdles such as testing bias and stereotype threat in subsequent testing situations. This can prevent students from maximizing their acceleration experiences if those issues are not properly addressed (Ford et al., 2011).

Even before acceleration occurs, there are often assessments considered when determining a student’s readiness for acceleration. For example, the Iowa Acceleration Scale (IAS) is one popular tool that districts use for making decisions about whole-grade acceleration, and its framework can inform educators when making decisions about other forms of acceleration as well. The IAS lists five areas that should be considered when making decisions about acceleration: (a) academic ability, aptitude, and achievement, (b) school and academic factors, (c) developmental factors, (d) interpersonal skills, and (e) attitude and support. These five areas guide teachers, parents, and administrators to look at the child in a more holistic way (Assouline et al., 2009). However, the IAS also pinpoints specific tests to be used to score various sections of the tool. All of the allowable tests include a verbal component, which may lead to testing bias against Black and other underrepresented students whose strengths may be in nonverbal areas. In addition, there are four “critical items”—factors that can automatically render the student not to be recommended for acceleration: (a) the student’s IQ is less than one standard deviation above the mean, (b) the student would be accelerated into the same or higher grade than a sibling, (c) the student currently has a sibling in the same grade, and (d) the student does not want to be whole-grade accelerated (Assouline et al., 2009). When developing acceleration policies, these are important factors to keep in mind. If the eligibility or assessment processes yield inequitable outcomes in terms of who is found to be eligible for acceleration, then one has to question if the system is truly equitable.

The assessment procedures must be fair and systematic, ensuring that parents and caregivers in the Black community are aware of the policies and how they can be pursued. This calls for advocacy and requires attention from parents and teachers (see Table 5, Grantham, 2005). As upstander teachers, part of advocacy is being aware of various assessments that are used, and when there are multiple options available, determining which assessment is best suited for a particular Black student (Ford, 2013).

Table 5.

Advocate’s Guide for Evaluation of Equity in Acceleration Services.

Equity Domain to Evaluate	Questions to Pursue by Advocates
Statistical analysis of district and accelerated student enrollment by demographic variables	• What is the composition of the district’s student enrollment by demographic variables, including race/ethnicity, language, gender, and socioeconomic status?
	• What is the composition of the accelerated student population by demographic variables, including race/ethnicity, language, gender, and socioeconomic status?
	• Determine if Black students are statistically under-represented in acceleration. A statistically significant under-representation of Black students warrants a further, school-by-school, inquiry including statistical data/analyses regarding
	• Number (%) of students by demographic variable referred for evaluation to accelerate.
	• Number (%) of students by demographic variable determined eligible for acceleration.
	• Number (%) of students by demographic variable withdrawing from, or otherwise discontinuing participation in accelerated services.
Gifted education acceleration notice	• Is the notice of the acceleration policy, with respect to both content and method of dissemination, effective?
	• Does the notice clearly explain the purpose of acceleration, referral/screening procedures, eligibility criteria, and identifies the district’s contact person?
	• Is the notice provided annually to students, parents, and guardians, in a manner designed to reach all segments of the school community?
Acceleration referral/screening of students	• Are multiple referral sources (e.g., teachers, parents, etc.) used and accessible to and utilized by all segments of the school community?
	• Have teachers and other district staff involved in the acceleration referral process been trained and/or provided guidance regarding the characteristics of giftedness in general, and their manifestation giftedness in Black students?
	• Are the referral/screening criteria for accelerated students applied in a non-discriminatory manner?
	• Are all referral/screening criteria/guidelines directly related to the purpose of the acceleration?
	• Are the standardized tests and cut-off scores appropriate (valid and reliable) for the purpose of screening Black students for acceleration?
Evaluation and placement of students in accelerated experiences	• Are the eligibility criteria applied in a non-discriminatory manner?
	• Are the eligibility criteria consistent with the purpose and implementation of the gifted program?
	• Are assessment instruments/measures and cut-off scores appropriate (valid and reliable) for the purpose of identifying students for acceleration?
	• To the extent that subjective assessment criteria are utilized, have those individuals conducting the assessments been provided guidelines and training to ensure proper evaluations for acceleration?
	• Are alternative assessment instruments utilized in appropriate circumstances to determine acceleration placement?
Accelerated student continuous participation	• Are continued eligibility standards/criteria and procedures applied in a non-discriminatory manner and do they ensure equal access for all qualified accelerated students?
	• Are continued eligibility standards/criteria applied in a non-discriminatory manner?
	• Are continued eligibility standards/criteria consistent with the purpose and implementation of the acceleration services?

Note. Adapted from Grantham et al. (2005). Parent advocacy for culturally diverse gifted students. Theory into Practice, 44, p. 142 (https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4402_8). Copyright 2005 by Taylor and Francis. Adapted with permission.

Accommodations for Accelerated Students

Making accommodations for Black students underrepresented in GATE means adjusting the status quo in order to provide what is needed for students to be successful. Acceleration can be considered a form of accommodation for high ability Black students, since many forms of acceleration, allow students to remain in a general education classroom. For Black students in schools that suffer from underrepresentation in gifted programs, this can make a significant difference in the racial and ethnic makeup of their classes and impact their interpersonal relationships and racial identity development (Ford & Whiting, 2010). Another aspect of accommodations involves the extra planning and monitoring that some forms of acceleration require from teachers, such as curriculum compacting, continuous progress, and mentoring. In these cases, making sure the infrastructure is in place to support both teachers and students in these efforts is essential. This should be built into acceleration policies so that educators know where to go for support as they pursue the acceleration choices best fitted for their gifted Black students.

Guidelines for programming options for gifted students, in general, are often broadly determined at the state level and described in more detail at the district or school level. Upstander teachers in various districts serve gifted students in an assortment of ways, such as cluster grouping, pullout classes, special schools, and advanced content. Upstander teachers can begin to assess the best options for their students using tools such as student interest inventories, standardized test scores, and informal observations (Johnsen et al., 2019). For Black students, it is critically important to examine the educational context in which students will be accelerated and provide social, emotional, and cultural support to ensure success.

Even after acceleration occurs, accelerated students’ performance usually remains at this level (Assouline et al., 2015); the purpose of acceleration is to place the student at a level that requires more effort to achieve. For Black students, many of the culturally relevant traits that often characterize gifted Black students also make them potentially strong candidates for acceleration such as verbal proficiency, independence, breath of information, and academic strength (Ford, 2013). However, these traits may manifest in different ways. Vocabulary may not always be appropriate for school settings, topics of interests may stray from traditional academic subjects, and underachievement may mask academic abilities (Rimm et al., 2018). This is important when thinking about possible gifted program accommodations for Black students after acceleration occurs. Upstander educators may need to think creatively about programming goals and how to integrate Black students’ unique manifestations of giftedness into programming options (Baldwin, 2011). Creating gifted programming that provides academic challenge as well as cultural relevance should be the goal when making accommodations for accelerated Black students (Stambaugh & Ford, 2015).

Advocacy and Support for Accelerated Black Students

Advocating for acceleration is a time where parents and teachers must come together on behalf of Black students. For upstander teachers, the process of advocacy can be broken into 5 phases: (a) research (b), recognition (c) planning, (d) implementation, and (e) reflection.

Research

Upstander teachers begin at the research phase, during which time they learn about their state or district acceleration policy and its impact on Black students. If no acceleration policy exists, upstander teachers can contact their gifted coordinator to find out if unofficial precedents have been set and to begin working towards developing a formal policy. They should also take this time to increase their awareness of traits of giftedness through tools such as the TABs, as well as tests that minimize racial bias and can best highlight the strengths of racially diverse students. As an upstander teacher, these behaviors can occur even before a student needs acceleration. If the time is taken beforehand to become familiar with the traits of giftedness and procedures for acceleration, it can make the process more efficient when it becomes necessary.

Recognition

During the recognition phase, teachers look for students who could be candidates for acceleration, noting students’ strengths, having discussions with other teachers, and assisting others in observing indicators of readiness for acceleration. During this phase, teachers should also provide enrichment opportunities within the classroom to gauge students’ abilities and motivation for advanced work (Johnsen et al., 2019). Again, this is a time frame where tools such as the TABs can be useful. Black students who are exhibiting characteristics of giftedness in nontraditional or maladaptive ways may benefit from enrichment opportunities in the classroom that will reinforce their academic abilities while pursuing acceleration. This can prevent students, especially Black students, from falling into the trap of underachievement because they are not being challenged in the classroom (Grantham & Biddle, 2014).

Planning

In the third phase, planning, upstander teachers continue conversations with parents, teachers, administrators, and the student to formulate an initial multi-year acceleration plan (Johnsen et al., 2019). For teacher pursuing acceleration for Black students, this planning phase is where it is essential to enlist the help of parents. Black family engagement plays a positive role in students’ education (Davis, 2010; Grantham, 2005), and parents may have additional insight on students’ gifted characteristics (Zhbanova et al., 2013) This plan should include elements such as a transition period, progress monitoring, and resources for supporting the student’s academic, social, and emotional well-being (Colangelo et al., 2010; Johnsen et al., 2019).

Implementation

The fourth phase is implementation. At the beginning of a school year, or in some cases, mid-year, the plan is enacted, and gifted Black students begins whatever form of acceleration deemed most appropriate. Progress monitoring related to recruitment and retention of Black students also occurs to ensure no immediate adjustments are needed.

Reflection

The final stage is reflection. Gifted Black accelerated students, their parents, and upstander teachers must individually and collectively reflect on the experience and its effectiveness. Flexibility is crucial as the reflection process will require courageous conversations about race in accelerated GATE experiences. After reflection, the process returns to the planning phase, with adjustments being made as needed.

For parents of gifted Black students, what underscores all of these phases is parent engagement. It is essential for parents of gifted Black students to be invited and engaged in their child’s education in whatever capacity they are able. For upstander teachers, what overarches all of these phases is attitude. To effectively advocate, upstander teachers must honestly believe that acceleration is the best option for Black students and be willing to continue to work towards providing them with a culturally relevant educational environment that maximizes their abilities. Without having the right attitude, it is difficult for an upstander teacher to maintain momentum through the acceleration process. Both parents and upstander teachers of gifted Black students must work together toward this goal. While parent engagement is an important part of the equation, upstander teachers must not diminish racialized experiences and be willing to look at parent engagement through different lenses depending on the cultural context. Whether it is attending a community expo on excellence in the Black community featuring student leaders, a student led fish-fry fundraiser sponsored by a Black church organization, or a Black Greek fraternity or sorority speaker series on education, simply making sure that there is an authentic connection with gifted Black students and their community is essential. This kind of upstander teacher engagement can inspire parents and caregivers to recognize educators’ sincerity and empower them to engage a greater quantity and quality of small and large tasks to support Black students in GATE and the school. Keeping parents and caregivers of Black GATE students informed and arming them with valuable information is important to ensuring the success of accelerated Black students.

To support Black students through an acceleration experience, it is also important that teachers are familiar with acceleration in general (Gross, 2006). Upstander teachers who are receiving an accelerated Black student into their classroom must be prepared to assist them with social adjustments while ensuring they take cues from the student on how to approach situations. Accelerated Black students should also understand beforehand that it will more than likely require more effort for them to achieve at the same level. If the content is still too easy, the student may not have been accelerated enough. This is why it is essential that communication and reflection are consistent, Black students’ concerns are heard, and their academic needs are met. Table 6 gives considerations for accelerating students at different levels of schooling.

Table 6.

General Considerations for Accelerating Black Students.

Educational Level	Considerations
PreK-8	• Make decision to accelerate early in a Black child’s life in order to minimize the impact of low academic expectations and normalizing need for rigor.
	• Examine state laws and local acceleration policies and practices as they may not allow account for equity.
	• Encourage Black accelerants to embrace new peer group based on ability and academic rigor versus solely maintaining peer group on race or grade level.
	• Prepare to fill content gaps, particularly among Black accelerants from low-income backgrounds or low-performing schools with limited resources.
High School	• At the beginning of high school, seek understanding of policies and governing GPA or class rank for high school and set goals.
	• Monitor engagement with required heavy course loads that can be culturally unresponsive or not in high interest or strength area as this can dissuade Black students from wanting to sustain the acceleration and rigor.
	• Provide support for understanding short and long-term academic, career and life benefits. Missing “typical” Black high school experiences because of academically accelerated experiences with mostly White and/or affluent students can be a challenge.
	• Problem solve with parents/caregivers regarding transportation for Black students, particularly Title I students, traveling to local sites for acceleration or for dual-enrollment at a college of university. Off-school sites may not be conveniently located, and minor status requires special accommodations.
	• Promote equity in selection policies and practices for top honors because unexpected changes can arise as Black accelerants become noticeably competitive in schools where traditionally signature accolades (e.g., valedictorian, salutatorian, etc.,) were held by non-Blacks.
Pre-collegiate preparation	• Plan to support social adjustments from high school to college, particularly among Black students transitioning from majority minority or predominantly Black high school to predominantly White institutions.
	• Encourage gifted Black accelerants to be knowledgeable about required scores at a certain level on standardized tests to obtain college credit, scholarships (e.g., National Merit Scholars), and other honors and accolades.
	• Explain to gifted Black accelerants that credit by Advanced placement or International Baccalaureate examination differs by postsecondary institution. AP credit may be accepted at an historically Black college or university, but not at an Ivy League.

Conclusion

When examining research, there is no debate about acceleration as an effective way of addressing the needs of many high ability students. However, research on how these experiences differ for students from various racial and ethnic backgrounds is lacking. For Black students, what we know about underrepresentation in gifted and talented programming, combined with our knowledge of acceleration would lead one to believe that acceleration would be an effective option for Black students who have exceptional academic abilities and upstander teachers should be purposeful in their advocacy for the acceleration of Black students. For upstander teachers, examining attitudes, assessment, access, and accommodations related to acceleration in their schools and districts can be the start of ensuring that acceleration is a viable option for Black students and represent an important response to NAGC’s call for equity and social justice for gifted Black students.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Jessa Luckey Goudelock

Tarek Grantham

Bios

Jessa Luckey Goudelock, PhD, is a project manager at the Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness at Penn State University. She has worked in all levels of education as a classroom teacher, curriculum specialist, gifted program director, and professor. Her research interests include early childhood education, gifted education, culturally diverse gifted students, academic acceleration, gifted education policy, military-connected gifted students, and historically Black colleges and universities.

Tarek Grantham, PhD, is a professor in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Georgia. His research focuses on equity for underrepresented students in advanced programs, recruitment and retention, creativity policy, mentoring, gifted Black males, multicultural education, motivation, and parent engagement. Dr. Grantham co-edited Gifted and Advanced Black Student in School: An Anthology of Critical Works (2011), and Young Triumphant and Black: Overcoming the Tyranny of Segregated Minds in Desegregated School (2013).

References

Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

Lupkowski-Shoplik

Lipscomb

Forstadt

(2009). Iowa acceleration scale. Acceleration institute at the Belin-Blank center (3rd ed.) The University of Iowa.

Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), (2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students (Vol. 1). Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

Baldwin

A. Y.

(2011). Understanding the challenge of creativity among African Americans. In Grantham

T. C.

Ford

D. Y.

Henfield

M. S.

Harmon

Trotman Scott

M. F.

Porchèr

Price

(Eds.), Gifted and advanced black students in school: An anthology of critical works (pp. 73–80). Prufrock Press.

Colangelo

Assouline

S. G.

Marron

M. A.

Castellano

J. A.

Clinkenbeard

P. R.

Rogers

Calvert

Malek

Smith

(2010). Guidelines for developing an academic acceleration policy. National work group on acceleration. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(2), 180–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1002100202

Cross

T. L.

Andersen

Mammadov

(2015). Effects of academic acceleration on the social and emotional lives of gifted students. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students. (Vol. 2, pp. 31–42). Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

Dare

Nowicki

(2019). Beliefs about educational acceleration: Students in inclusive classes conceptualize benefits, feelings, and barriers. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(1), 86–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1440368

Davis

J. L.

(2010). Bright, talented, and black: A guide for families of African American gifted learners. Great Potential Press.

Ecker-Lyster

Niileksela

(2017). Enhancing gifted education for underrepresented students: Promising recruitment and programming strategies. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216686216

Ford

D. Y.

(2013). Recruiting and retaining culturally different students in gifted education. Prufrock Press.

10.

Ford

D. Y.

Moore

J. L.

Trotman Scott

(2011). Key theories and frameworks for improving the recruitment and retention of African American students in gifted education. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(3), 239–253. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41341131

11.

Ford

D. Y.

Whiting

G. W.

(2011). Beyond testing: Social and psychological considerations in recruiting and retaining gifted black students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(1), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235321003400106

12.

Frasier

(1997). Gifted minority students: Reframing approaches in their identification and education. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.) pp. 498–515. Allyn & Bacon.

13.

Frasier

M. M.

Hunsaker

S. L.

Lee

Mitchell

Cramond

Krisel

Gracia

Jaime H.

Martin

Frank

Finley

V. S.

(1995). Core attributes of giftedness: A foundation for recognizing the gifted potential of minority and disadvantaged students (research monograph 95210). Storrs: University of Connecticut. National Research Center for Gifted and Talented https://nrcgt.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/953/2015/04/rm95210.pdf

14.

Frasier

M. M.

Passow

A. H.

(1994). Toward a new paradigm for identifying talent potential (research monograph 94112). Storrs: University of Connecticut. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented https://nrcgt.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/953/2015/04/rm94112.pdf

15.

Grantham

T. C.

(2005). Parent advocacy for culturally diverse gifted students. Theory Into Practice, 44(2), 138–147. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4402_8

16.

Grantham

T. C.

(2011). New directions for gifted black males suffering from bystander effects: A call for upstanders. Roeper Review, 33(4), 263–272. http://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2011.603114

17.

Grantham

T. C.

Biddle

W. H.

(2014). From bystander to upstander teacher for gifted black students accused of acting white. Gifted Child Today, 37(3), 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514530117

18.

Grantham

T. C.

Collins

K. H.

(2013). Upstander parents choosing to homeschool gifted black students. Parenting for High Potential, 2(8), 4–9. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1182597

19.

Grantham

T. C.

Ford

D. Y.

(2007). Continuing the search for equity and excellence: An overview of Frasier’s talent assessment profile (F-TAP). Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 21(2), 2–4. https://www.giftededpress.com/GEPQSPRING2007.pdf

20.

Gross

M. U. M.

(2006). Exceptionally gifted children: Long-term outcomes of academic acceleration and nonacceleration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29(4), 404–429. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2006-247

21.

Johnsen

S. K.

Dailey

Cotabish

(2019). NAGC pre-K-grade 12 gifted education programming standards: A guide to planning and implementing quality services for gifted students (2nd ed.) Prufrock Press.

22.

Johnsen

S. K.

Parker

S. L.

Farah

Y. N.

(2015). Providing services for students with gifts and talents within a response-to-intervention framework. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(4), 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915569358

23.

Lee

S.-Y.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Peternel

(2010). The efficacy of academic acceleration for gifted minority students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210369256

24.

Luckey

J. D.

Grantham

T. C.

(2017). Upstander parents for academic acceleration of gifted black students. Parenting for High Potential, 6(2), 2–5. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1182597

25.

Lupkowski-Shoplik

Behrens

W. A.

Assouline

S. G.

(2018).Developing academic acceleration policies: Whole grade, early entrance and single subject. Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

26.

McClarty

K. L.

(2015). Life in the fast lane: Effects of early grade acceleration on high school and college outcomes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214559595

27.

NAGC Board of Directors (2020). Championing equity and social justice for black students in gifted education: An expanded vision for NAGC (statement from the NAGC Board of Directors). National Association for Gifted Children. https://nagc.org.442elmp01.blackmesh.com/championing-equity-and-supporting-social-justice-black-students-gifted-education-expanded-vision

28.

Park

Lubinski

Benbow

C. P.

(2013). When less is more: Effects of grade skipping on adult STEM productivity among mathematically precocious adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 176–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029481

29.

Plucker

J. A.

Peters

S. 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

30.

Pressey

S. L.

(1949). Educational acceleration: Appraisal and basic problems. Bureau of educational research monographs, no. 31. The Ohio State University.

31.

Rimm

S. B.

Siegle

Davis

G. A.

(2018). Education of the gifted and talented (7th ed.) Pearson Education.

32.

Rogers

K. B.

(2015). The academic, socialization, and psychological effects of acceleration: Research synthesis. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students (Vol. 2). pp. 19–29. Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

33.

Southern

W. T.

Jones

E. D.

(2015). Types of acceleration: Dimensions and issues. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students. (vol. 2, pp. 9–18). Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

34.

Stambaugh

Ford

D. Y.

(2015). Microaggressions, multiculturalism, and gifted individuals who are black, Hispanic, or low income. Journal of Counseling & Development, 93(2), 192–201. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2015.00195.x

35.

Torrance

E. P.

(1973). Non-test indicators of creative talent among disadvantaged children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 17(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698627301700101

36.

Toy

(2015). Differentiation of processes for the gifted. In Karnes

F. A.

Bean

S. M.

(Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 139–163). Prufrock Press.

37.

Trotman Scott

Moss-Bouldin

(2014). We need more drama: A comparison of Ford, Hurston, and Boykin’s African American characteristics and instructional strategies for the culturally different classroom. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 68–80. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1063222

38.

VanTassel-Baska

(2015). The role of acceleration in policy development in gifted education. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students. (Vol. 2, pp. 43–52). Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

39.

Wai

(2015). Long-term effects of educational acceleration. In Assouline

S. G.

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(Eds.), A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students. (Vol. 2, pp. 73–83). Acceleration Institute at the Belin-Blank Center, The University of Iowa.

40.

Wells

Lohman

Marron

(2009). What factors are associated with grade acceleration? Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(2), 248–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X0902000203

41.

Zhbanova

K. S.

Rule

A. C.

Stichter

M. K.

(2013). Identification of gifted African American primary grade students through leadership, creativity, and academic performance in curriculum material making and peer-teaching: A case study. Early Childhood Education Journal, 43(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-013-0628-z