For more than 30 years, underrepresentation of certain racial, cultural, and income groups in gifted and talented programs has been documented as a serious problem. Not only does this issue make gifted programs appear as if they are designed solely for upper class, dominant-culture individuals, but it also means that talented students from diverse backgrounds are not having their needs met. This study sought to determine the utility of applying group-specific norms to achievement tests in identifying more proportional numbers of gifted and talented students from low-income families. In addition, this study applied the use of a teacher-rating scale to locate even more underserved students with high potential. Results indicated that both practices helped identify more underserved students than did using traditional general norm-group comparisons. Implications for identification policy and practice are shared.
BartonP. E.ColeyR. J. (2009). Measuring the achievement elephant. Educational Leadership, 66(4), 30-34.
3.
CastellanoJ. A.FrazierA. D. (2010). Special populations in gifted education. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
4.
DonovanM. S.CrossC. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
5.
GagnéF. (1994). Are teachers really poor talent detectors? Comments on Pegnato and Birch’s (1959) study of the effectiveness and efficacy of various identification techniques. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 124-126.
6.
HighM. H.UdallA. J. (1983). Teacher ratings of students in relation to ethnicity of student and school ethnic balance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 6, 154-166.
7.
HodgeR. D.CudmoreL. (1986). The use of teacher-judgment measures in the identification of gifted pupils. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2, 181-196.
Illinois State Board of Education. (2010). Scale Score Ranges that Define Student Performance Levels on the 2010 ISAT Scales. Retrieved from www.isbe.net/assessment/pdfs/cut_points_10.pdf
10.
LohmanD. F. (2005). An aptitude perspective on talent: Implications for identification of academically gifted minority students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28, 333-360.
11.
LohmanD. F. (2006). Identifying academically talented minority students (Research Monograph No. RM05216). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
LohmanD. F.RenzulliJ. (2007). A simple procedure for combining ability test scores, achievement test scores, and teacher ratings to identify academically talented children. Unpublished manuscript.
14.
MatthewsM. S. (2007). Assessing the impact of a proposed rule change on the identification of gifted English language learners. Gifted Children: An Electronic Journal of the AERA SIG—Research on Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent, 2(1), 12-13. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/giftedchildren/vol2/iss1/5
15.
MatthewsM. S.KirschL. (2011). Evaluating gifted identification practice: Aptitude testing and linguistically diverse learners. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 27, 155-180. doi:10.1080/15377903.2011.56528110.1080/15377903.2011.565281
16.
MillerL. S. (2004). Promoting sustained growth in the representation of African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans among top students in the United States at all levels of the education system (Research Monograph No. RM04190). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
17.
National Association for Gifted Children. (2009). State of the states in gifted education. Washington, DC: Author.
18.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (n.d.). Number and percentage of public school students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, by state: 2000–01, 2005-06, 2006–07, and 2007–08. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_042.asp
19.
PegnatoC. W.BirchJ. W. (1959). Locating gifted children in junior high schools: Comparison of methods. Exceptional Children, 25, 300-304.
20.
PetersS. J.GentryM. (2010). Multi-group construct validity evidence of the HOPE Scale: Instrumentation to identify low-income elementary students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 298-313.
21.
PetersonJ. S. (1999). Gifted—through whose cultural lens? An application of the postpositivistic mode of inquiry. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 354-383.
22.
PetersonJ. S.MargolinL. (1997). Naming gifted children: An examination of unintended reproduction. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 82-100.
23.
PfeifferS. I.JarosewichT. (2003). Gifted Rating Scales. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
24.
PluckerJ. A.BurroughsN.SongR. (2010). Mind the (other) gap!: The growing excellence gap in K-12 education. Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.
25.
ReisS. M.McCoachD. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 152-170.
26.
RenzulliJ. S.SmithL. H.WhiteA. J.CallahanC. M.HartmanR. K.WestbergK. (2002). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
27.
RollinsK.MurskyC.Shah-ColtraneS. V.JohnsenS. K. (2009). RtI models for gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 21-30.
StambaughT. (2007). Next steps: An impetus for future directions in research, policy, and practice for low-income promising learners. In VanTassel-BaskaJ.StambaughT. (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (pp. 83-88). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
30.
SwansonJ. D. (2006). Breaking through assumptions about low-income, minority gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 11-25.
31.
United States Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s Talent. Washington, DC: Author.
32.
ValenciaR. R.SuzukiL. A. (2001). Intelligence testing and minority students. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. L. (2008). Epilogue: What do we know about identifying and assessing the learning of gifted students? In VanTassel-BaskaJ. L. (Ed.), Alternative assessment with gifted and talented student (pp. 309-319). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
34.
ViaderoD. (2006, November8). Scholars test out new yardstick of school poverty. Education Week, 26(11), 1, 15.
35.
WynerJ. S.BridgelandJ. M.DiiulioJ. J. (2009). The achievement trap (Rev. ed.). Washington DC: The Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.
36.
YoonS.GentryM. (2009). Racial and ethnic representation in gifted programs: Current status of and implications for gifted Asian American students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 121-136.
