A Content Analysis of Selected State Plans for Gifted and Talented Education

Abstract

Programs for gifted and talented education should be guided by research-based practices, but states’ policies vary in their recommendations for programming, and in how they hold local education agencies accountable for implementing those recommendations. State plans for gifted and talented education rely on the voluntary compliance of districts to implement policies meeting students’ advanced academic needs and providing opportunities for talent development. State plans for gifted education may outline expectations, but leave much about the implementation up to districts. Even within a state, gifted education services vary widely across districts and individual schools. This research identified 11 state plans for gifted education that included guidance on identification, curriculum, service options, professional development, and program evaluation. Through thematic analysis, eight primary themes and three secondary themes were identified, which demonstrate the necessity of ongoing program evaluation balancing the need for standardization with the need to adapt policies to fit local contexts.

Keywords

gifted qualitative policy talent development collaboration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arkansas Department of Education. (2009). Rules: Gifted and talented program approval standards. http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/divisions/learning-services/gifted-and-talentedand-advanced-placement

Assouline

Colangelo

VanTassel-Baska

Shoplik

Gross

(2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses that hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. II). The University of Iowa.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brown

E. F.

Garland

R. B.

(2015). Reflections on policy in gifted education: James J. Gallagher. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(1), 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214565558

Callahan

C. M.

Moon

T. R.

(2017). Describing the status of programs for the gifted: A call for action. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(1), 20–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216686215

Clarke

Braun

Hayfield

(2017). Thematic analysis. In Smith

J. A.

(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 232–248). SAGE.

Colorado Department of Education. (2015). Gifted education comprehensive program plan 2016-2020: Guidance handbook for administrative unit gifted education lead. https://www.cde.state.co.us/gt

Dai

D. Y.

(2017). Envisioning a new foundation for gifted education: Evolving Complexity Theory (ECT) of talent development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 172–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701837

Dai

D. Y.

Chen

(2014). Paradigms of gifted education: A guide to theory-based, practice-focused research. Prufrock Press.

10.

Delaware Department of Education. (2014). Gifted or talented education resource guide. https://www.doe.k12.de.us/domain/140

11.

Department of Defense Education Activity. (2019). DoDEA advanced academic programs and services implementation guide. https://www.dodea.edu/Curriculum/giftedEduc/upload/AAPS-Implementation-Guide-2019-for-DoDEA-website.pdf

12.

Dixon

F. A.

Yssel

McConnell

J. M.

Hardin

(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

13.

Dixson

D. D.

Peters

S. J.

Makel

M. C.

Jolly

J. L.

Matthews

M. S.

Miller

E. M.

Rambo-Hernandez

K. E.

Rinn

A. N.

Robins

J. H.

Wilson

H. E.

(2020). A call to reframe gifted education as maximizing learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(4), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720978057

14.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 89 U.S.C. § 2362, P.L. 89-10 (1965). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-79/pdf/STATUTE-79-Pg27.pdf#page=1

15.

Elo

Kyngäs

(2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x

16.

Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2015). https://congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf

17.

Florida Department of Education. (2013). Florida’s plan for K-12 gifted education. https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/7567/urlt/FPK12GE.pdf

18.

Gagné

(2017). The integrative model of talent development (IMTD): From theory to educational applications. In Plucker

J. A.

Rinn

A. N.

Makel

M. C.

(Eds.), From giftedness to gifted education: Reflecting theory in practice (pp. 149–182). Prufrock Press.

19.

Gallagher

J. J.

(2015). Political issues in gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214565546

20.

Gentry

Gray

Whiting

G. W.

Maeda

Pereira

(2019). Access denied/system failure. Gifted education in the United States: Laws, access, equity, and missingness across the country by locale, Title I school status, and race. Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.

21.

“Gifted by State.” (n.d.). National Association for Gifted Children. https://www.nagc.org/information-publications/gifted-state

22.

Golafshani

(2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–607. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2003.1870

23.

Hawaii Department of Education. (2007). Program guide for gifted & talented. http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/gifted/GT_Guide.pdf

24.

Hodges

Crutchfield

Lee

L. E.

(2021). Equitable access, locale, funding, and the alignment to performance ratings in Texas gifted programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 44(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220978306

25.

Hsieh

Shannon

S. E.

(2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

26.

Hunsaker

S. L.

(2005). Outcomes of creativity training programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(4), 292–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900403

27.

“Jacob Javits Gifted & Talented Students Education Act.” (n.d.). National Association for Gifted Children. https://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources-university-professionals/jacob-javits-gifted-talented-students

28.

Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Children and Youth Education Act of 1987, 100 U.S.C. § S.303 (1987-1988). https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/senate-bill/303

29.

Jolly

J. L.

(2014). Building gifted education: One state at a time. Gifted Child Today, 37(4), 258–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514544031

30.

Jolly

J. L.

Robins

J. H.

(2016). After the Marland Report: Four decades of progress? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(2), 132–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216640937

31.

Kaul

C. R.

Davis

B. K.

(2018). How the state education agencies addressed gifted education in the Title II sections of their ESSA state plans. Gifted Child Today, 41(3), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217518769700

32.

Koro-Ljungberg

Yendol-Hoppey

Smith

J. J.

Hayes

S. B.

(2009). (E)pistemological awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research projects. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09351980

33.

Lakin

J. M.

(2018). Making the cut in gifted selection: Score combination rules and their impact on program diversity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752099

34.

Lee

L. E.

Ottwein

J. K.

Peters

S. J.

(2020). Eight universal truths of identifying students for advanced academic interventions. In Jolly

J. L.

Robins

J. H.

(Eds.), Methods & materials for teaching the gifted (5th ed., pp. 61–79). Prufrock Press.

35.

Makel

M. C.

Hodges

Cook

B. G.

Plucker

J. A.

(2021). Both questionable and open research practices are prevalent in education research. Educational Researcher, 0013189X211001356.

36.

Marland

S. P.

(1972). Education of the gifted and talented, volume 1: Report to the Congress of the United States by the US Commissioner of Education (Vol. 1, p. 126.). U.S. Government Printing Office.

37.

Matthews

D. J.

Foster

J. F.

(2006). Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education. Roeper Review, 28(2), 64–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190609554340

38.

Matthews

M. S.

(2015). Creativity and leadership’s role in gifted identification and programming in the USA: A pilot study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16, 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9373-x

39.

Matthews

M. S.

Shaunessy

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

40.

Meyer

M. S.

Crutchfield

(2020, November 24). When families serve: Military-connected gifted students and school transitions. TEMPO+. https://tempo.txgifted.org/when-families-serve-military-connected-gifted-students-and-school-transitions/

41.

Montana Office of Public Instruction. (2019). 2019 revised planning guide & strategies for serving Montana’s high ability/high potential students. https://opi.mt.gov/Gifted-andTalented-Education-Family

42.

National Association for Gifted Children. (2019). Pre-K to grade 12 gifted programming standards. https://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/pre-k-grade-12

43.

New Mexico Public Education Department. (2019). Gifted education in New Mexico: Technical assistance manual 2019. https://webnew.ped.state.nm.us/wpcontent/uploads/2019/08/manual-08-22-19ver3-Gifted-TAM.pdf

44.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6319 (2008). https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ110/PLAW-107publ110.htm

45.

Novak

A. M.

Lewis

K. D.

Weber

C. L.

(2020). Guiding principles in developing equity-driven professional learning for educators of gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 43(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520915743

46.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

47.

Peters

S. J.

Matthews

M. S.

McBee

M. T.

McCoach

D. B.

(2014). Beyond gifted education: Designing and implementing advanced academic programs. Prufrock Press.

48.

Peters

S. J.

Rambo-Hernandez

K. E.

Makel

M. C.

Matthews

M. S.

Plucker

J. A.

(2017). Should millions of students take a gap year? Large numbers of students start the school year above grade level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701834

49.

Peterson

J. S.

(2019). Presenting a qualitative study: A reviewer’s perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(3), 147–158. https://doi.org10.1177/0016986219844789

50.

Plucker

J. A.

(2012). Positively influencing gifted education policy. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(4), 221–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212456071

51.

Plucker

J. A.

Barab

S. A.

(2005). The importance of contexts in theories of giftedness: Learning to embrace the messy joys of subjectivity. In Sternberg

R. J.

Davidson

J. E.

(Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 201–216). Cambridge University Press.

52.

Plucker

J. A.

Callahan

C. M.

(2014). Research on giftedness and gifted education: Status of the field and considerations for the future. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 390–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914527244

53.

Plucker

J. A.

Callahan

C. M.

(2020). The evidence base for advanced learning programs. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(4), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720978056

54.

Plucker

J. A.

Makel

M. C.

Matthews

M. S.

Peters

S. J.

Rambo-Hernandez

K. E.

(2017). Blazing new trails: Strengthening policy research in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701838

55.

Plucker

J. A.

Peters

S. J.

(2016). Excellence gaps in education: Expanding opportunities for talented students. Harvard Education Press.

56.

Renzulli

J. S.

(2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the 21st century: A four-part theoretical approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(3), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212444901

57.

Rinn

A. N.

Crutchfield

(2020). Developing psychosocial skills at school. In Robins

J. H.

Jolly

J. L.

Karnes

F. A.

Bean

S. M.

(Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (5th ed., pp. 81–100). Prufrock Press.

58.

Rinn

A. N.

Mun

R. U.

Hodges

(2020). 2018-2019 State of the States in Gifted Education. National Association for Gifted Children and the Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. National Association for Gifted Children. https://www.nagc.org/2018-2019-state-states-gifted-education

59.

Robbins

J. H.

(2019). Gifted program evaluation: Catalyst for change or keeper of the culture. Gifted Child Today, 42(4), 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217519862326

60.

Ryan

G. W.

Bernard

H. R.

(2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X02239569

61.

Saldaña

(2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE.

62.

Schreier

(2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE.

63.

Siegle

Wilson

H. E.

Little

C. A.

(2013). A sample of gifted and talented educators’ attitudes about academic acceleration. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24(1), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12472491

64.

Simonds

(2020, June 8). Leveraging conversations: Progress through practice [Conference Session]. Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented Virtual Leadership Conference.

65.

South Carolina Department of Education. (2017). South Carolina Department of Education gifted and talented best practices manual. https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standardslearning/advanced-academic-programs/gifted-and-talented/

66.

South Carolina Department of Education. (2018). South Carolina Department of Education gifted and talented best practices guidelines: Identification. https://ed.sc.gov/scdoe/assets/File/instruction/standards/Advanced%20Programs/2018_GT_BPM_Identification_Revised_January_2019.pdf

67.

Spoon

Rubenstein

L. D.

Shively

Stith

Ascolani

Potts

M. L.

(2020). Reconceptualizing professional learning with the gifted field: Exploring the instruct to innovate model. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 43(3), 193–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353230933001

68.

Subotnik

R. F.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Worrell

F. C.

(2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056

69.

Subotnik

R. F.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Worrell

F. C.

(2018). The talent development framework: Overview of components and implications for policy and practice. In Olszewski-Kubilius

Subotnik

R. F.

Worrell

F. C.

(Eds.), Talent development as a framework for gifted education: Implications for best practices and applications in schools (pp. 7–23). Prufrock Academic Press.

70.

Swanson

J. D.

Lord

E. W.

(2013). Harnessing and guiding the power of policy: Examples from one state’s experiences. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(2), 198–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353213480434

71.

Texas Education Agency. (2019). Texas state plan for the education of gifted/talented students. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/special-student-populations/gifted-and-talented-education

72.

Thomas

D. R.

(2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748

73.

Utah State Board of Education. (2017). Utah’s gifted & talented. https://www.schools.utah.gov/curr/giftedtalented

74.

VanTassel-Baska

(2019). The role of evaluation in gifted program development: Coordinators’ portraits of progress. Gifted Child Today, 42(4), 240–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217519862323

75.

VanTassel-Baska

Johnsen

S. K.

(2007). Teacher education standards for the field of gifted education: A vision of coherence for personnel preparation in the 21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 182–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207299880

76.

Virginia Department of Education. (2011). Reference guide for the development & review of local plans for the education of the gifted. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/gifted_ed/

77.

Zirkel

P. A.

(2005). State laws for gifted education: An overview of the legislation and regulations. Roeper Review, 27(4), 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190509554323