Underrepresentation in Gifted Education in the Context of Rurality and Socioeconomic Status

Abstract

Proportional identification of students for gifted services in Florida school districts is an important goal. A multi-level model was used to analyze school district data from the Florida Department of Education from the 2011–2016 academic years. Results from the study indicate that the likelihood of identification of students varied by their socioeconomic status. Students who were Black were 59% more likely to be identified for gifted services if they participated in federal meal subsidy programs. However, the likelihood of identification for students who are Latinx or Native American decreased by 47% and 38%, respectively, when compared with peers who did not participate in federal meal subsidy programs.

Keywords

underrepresentation multi-level modeling longitudinal identification gifted

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bates

Maechler

Bolker

Walker

(2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 (R Package Version 1.1-23). https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html

Bland

J. M.

Altman

D. G.

(2000). The odds ratio. BMJ, 320(7247), Article 1468. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7247.1468

Bradley

J. V.

(1978). Robustness? British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31(2), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1978.tb00581.x

Card

Giuliano

(2016). Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(48), 13678–13683. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605043113

Carman

C. A.

Taylor

D. K.

(2010). Socioeconomic status effects on using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) to identify the gifted/talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(2), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986209355976

Daniels

V. I.

(1998). Minority students in gifted and special education programs: The case for educational equity. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 41–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699803200107

Domina

Pharris-Ciurej

Penner

A. M.

Penner

E. K.

Brummet

Porter

S. R.

Sanabria

(2018). Is free and reduced-price lunch a valid measure of educational disadvantage? Educational Researcher, 47(9), 539–555. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18797609

Donovan

M. S.

Cross

C. T.

(Eds.). (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. National Academies Press.

Dupraz

(2013). Using weights in Stata. http://www.parisschoolofeconomics.eu/docs/dupraz-yannick/using-weights-in-stata.pdf

10.

Erwin

J. O.

Worrell

F. C.

(2012). Assessment practices and the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted and talented education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428197

11.

Esquierdo

J. J.

Arreguín-Anderson

(2012). The “invisible” gifted and talented bilingual students: A current report on enrollment in GT programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353211432041

12.

Faraway

J. J.

(2014). Linear models with R (2nd ed.). CRC Press.

13.

Florida Department of Education. (2017a). PK-20 education information portal. https://edstats.fldoe.org/SASPortal/main.do

14.

Florida Department of Education. (2017b). PK-20 data warehouse. http://www.fldoe.org/accountability/data-sys/edw/

15.

Florida Department of Education. (2019). Definitions. https://edstats.fldoe.org/portal%20pages/Documents/Definitions.pdf

16.

Ford

(2014). Segregation and the underrepresentation of blacks and Hispanics in gifted education: Social inequality and deficit paradigms. Roeper Review, 36(3), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2014.919563

17.

Gentry

Fugate

C. M.

Castellano

(2014). Gifted Native American students—Literature, lessons, and future directions. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(2), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214521660

18.

Goings

R. B.

Ford

D. Y.

(2018). Investigating the intersection of poverty and race in gifted education journals: A 15-year analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217737618

19.

Grissom

J. A.

Redding

(2015). Discretion and disproportionality: Explaining the underrepresentation of high-achieving students of color in gifted programs. AERA Open, 2(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415622175

20.

Grissom

J. A.

Redding

Bleiberg

J. F.

(2019). Money over merit? Socioeconomic gaps in receipt of gifted services. Harvard Educational Review, 89(3), 337–369. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-89.3.337

21.

Hodges

(2018). Assessing the influence of No Child Left Behind on gifted education funding in Texas: A Descriptive Study. Journal of Advanced Academics, 29(4), 321–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X18779343

22.

Hodges

(2020). Using state data to conduct research in the field of gifted education. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19881436

23.

Hodges

McIntosh

Gentry

(2017). The effect of an out-of-school enrichment program on the academic achievement of high-potential students from low-income families. Journal of Advanced Academics, 28(3), 204–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X17715304

24.

Hodges

Tay

Desmet

Ozturk

Pereira

(2018). The effect of the 2008 recession on gifted education funding across the State of Texas. AERA Open, 4(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858418786224

25.

Hodges

Tay

Lee

Pereira

(2019). The influence of the Great Recession on the identification of students from non-White populations in the State of Texas. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(2), 124–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19825802

26.

Hodges

Tay

Maeda

Gentry

(2018). A meta-analysis of gifted and talented identification practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752107

27.

Ihrig

L. M.

Lane

Mahatmya

Assouline

S. G.

(2018). STEM excellence and leadership program: Increasing the level of STEM challenge and engagement for high-achieving students in economically disadvantaged rural communities. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353217745158

28.

Kettler

Puryear

J. S.

Mullet

D. R.

(2016). Defining rural in gifted education research: Methodological challenges and paths forward. Journal of Advanced Academics, 27(4), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X16656896

29.

Konstantopoulos

Modi

Hedges

L. V.

(2001). Who are America’s gifted? American Journal of Education, 109(3), 344–382. https://doi.org/10.1086/444275

30.

Kuznetsova

Brockhoff

P. B.

Christensen

R. H. B.

(2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26.

31.

Lamb

K. N.

Boedeker

Kettler

(2019). Inequities of enrollment in gifted education: A statewide application of the 20% equity allowance formula. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(4), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219830768

32.

Makel

M. C.

Plucker

J. A.

(2017). Toward a more perfect psychology: Improving trust, accuracy, and transparency in research. American Psychological Association.

33.

Matthews

M. S.

(2007). Assessing the impact of a proposed rule change on the identification of gifted English language learners. Gifted Children, 2(1), Article 5.

34.

Matthews

M. S.

Shaunessy

(2010). Putting standards into practice: Evaluating the utility of the NAGC pre-K–Grade 12 gifted program standards. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986209356708

35.

McBee

M. T.

(2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2006-686

36.

McBee

M. T.

Shaunessy

Matthews

M. S.

(2012). Policy matters: An analysis of district-level efforts to increase the identification of underrepresented learners. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(4), 326–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12463511

37.

Montgomery

(2001). Increasing Native American Indian involvement in gifted programs in rural schools. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.1035

38.

Naglieri

J. A.

Ford

D. Y.

(2003). Addressing underrepresentation of gifted minority children using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 155–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700206

39.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2016). Common core of data: Identification of rural locales. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/rural_locales.asp#justification

40.

Peters

S. J.

Gentry

Whiting

G. W.

McBee

M. T.

(2019). Who gets served in gifted education? Demographic representation and a call for action. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698621983373

41.

Plucker

J. A.

Burroughs

Song

(2010). Mind the (other) gap! The growing excellence gap in K-12 education. Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University.

42.

R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria.

43.

Rasheed

(2020). Context and content in rural gifted education: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19879174

44.

Seber

G. A.

Lee

A. J.

(2012). Linear regression analysis (Vol. 936). John Wiley & Sons.

45.

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

46.

U.S. Census Bereau. (2012). Florida: 2010. https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/2010/cph-2/cph-2-11.pdf

47.

Warne

R. T.

Anderson

Johnson

A. O.

(2013). The impact of race and ethnicity on the identification process for giftedness in Utah. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(4), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353213506065

48.

(2003). Measuring explained variation in linear mixed effects models. Statistics in Medicine, 22(22), 3527–3541. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1572

49.

Yoon

S. Y.

Gentry

(2009). Racial and ethnic representation in gifted programs: Current status of and implications for gifted Asian American students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(2), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208330564