Dr. Robinson's proposed action plan will serve the needs of highly achieving gifted students. However, defining giftedness as high academic performance based on traditional assessment procedures could reverse the field's fledgling success in supporting culturally diverse gifted children and youth. Changing the focus of equity in gifted education to economic representation will not decrease educators' responsibility to understand the learning needs of racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse students. Nevertheless, a focus on children of poverty with high potential is a worthy and achievable goal and will require extraordinary commitment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BorlandJ. H. (1997). The construct of giftedness. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(3&4), 6–20.
2.
BorlandJ. H.SchnurR.WrightL. (2000). Economically disadvantaged students in a school for the academically gifted: A post-positivist inquiry into individual and family adjustment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 13–32.
3.
Brooks-GunnJ.DuncanG. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. The Future of Children: Children and Poverty, 7(2), 55–71.
4.
CappsR. (2001, February). Hardship among children of immigrants: Findings from the 1999 National Survey of America's Families (New Federalism, Series B, No. B-29). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
5.
CastellanoJ. A.DíazE. I. (2002). Reaching new horizons: Gifted and talented education for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
6.
College Board (The). (1999). Reaching the top: A report of the National Task Force on Minority High Achievement. New York: College Board Publications.
7.
De AvilaE. (1997). Setting expected gains for non and limited English proficient students (NCBE Resource Collection Series No. 8). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
8.
DesimoneL. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and income matter?Journal of Educational Research, 93, 11–30.
9.
FoxM. (2001). Open Gate. Gifted Education Communicator, 32(4), 27–29.
10.
HakutaK.ButlerY. G.WittD. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? (Policy Report 2000–1). Stanford: Stanford University, University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
11.
HarrisC. R. (1991). Identifying and serving the gifted new immigrant. Teaching Exceptional Children, 23(4), 26–30.
12.
HouseE. R.LapanS. (1994). Evaluation of programs for disadvantaged gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 441–466.
MakerC. J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem, needed changes, and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41–50.
15.
OgbuJ. U.SimonsH. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29, 155–188.
16.
OkagakiL.FrenschP. A. (1998). Parenting and children's school achievement: A multiethnic perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 123–144.
17.
PetersonJ. S.MargolinL. (1997). Naming gifted children: An example of unintended reproduction. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 82–100.
18.
RosenzweigC. (2001, April). A meta-analysis of parenting and school success: The role of parents in promoting students' academic performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED452232).
19.
SaccuzzoD. P.JohnsonN. E. (1995). Traditional psychometric tests and proportionate representation: An intervention and program evaluation study. Psychological Assessment, 7, 183–194.
20.
ShumowL. (1997). Daily experiences and adjustment of gifted low-income urban children at home and school. Roeper Review, 20, 35–38.
21.
SlocumbP. D. (2001). Giftedness in poverty. Gifted Education Communicator, 32(4), 6–11.
22.
SteeleC. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.
23.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L.BundyD. A. (2001). The predictive value of IQ. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47(1), 1–41.
24.
ThomasW. P.CollierV. P. (1997/98). Two languages are better than one. Educational Leadership, 55(4), 23–26.
25.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.PattonJ.PrillamanD. (1989). Disadvantaged gifted learners at risk for educational attention. Focus on Exceptional Children, 22(3), 1–15.
26.
WangM. C.HaertelG. D.WalbergH. J. (1998). Building educational resilience. Fastback, 430. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
