1
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Chapter 1
Introduction of Topic
The Situations Related to the Underrepresentation of Minority Students
One of the most constant and controversial issues in gifted education is the
underrepresentation of minority students in gifted programs. According to U.S.
Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) (2002), in elementary school,
while minority students approximately make up 36% of the U.S. school population,
they comprise 19.7% of the students in gifted programs. On the other hand, White
students occupy 72% of students in gifted and talented programs, compared with
comprising 59% of the student population (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008). In
particular, Hopstock and Stephenson (2003) suggested that although 6.4% of all
students participate in gifted programs, only 1.4% of all English Language Learners
(ELL) are included in these programs based on a survey by the Office for Civil Rights
(OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education. More seriously, although the proportion
of White students on public school enrollment is decreasing and non-White students’
rate is increasing, minority groups are still inadequately identified and placed in gifted
programs. For example, in 1960, the proportion of White students in the nation’s
elementary and secondary school population was 86.6%. However, in 2005-06, they
comprised 57.1% (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2006).
Concerning this situation, since Jenkins (1936) posed the problem of
disproportionate representation of African Americans gifted students, research has
been conducted about the underidentification of African Americans, Hispanic
American, and Native American students. However, although many teachers,
2
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
policymakers, and researchers have been worried about the unbalanced representation
in gifted programs, the concerns are not connected with measures to change practices,
procedures, and policies (Ford, 1998). Actually, a survey by Patton, Prillaman, and
Van Tassel-Baska (1990) shows that there is a shortage of programs for disadvantaged
and minority gifted learners. For example, when the intervention section of the state
questionnaire asked about programs that served disadvantaged gifted learners, a
majority (78.8%) of states answered that they did not differentiate programs or
services “at all” or only “a little” for this groups. Also, 35 % of the states considered
the SES variable “a little” or “not at all” in identifying gifted students. In addition, the
race and ethnicity variable was taken into account “not at all,” “very little,” or “a
moderate” amount by 62 % of the states.
History and Legislation
In addition, history and legislation show clearly that minority gifted learners are
not considered in gifted programs. For example, in 1977, Congresswoman Shirley
Chisholm proposed legislation to include funding for minority gifted learners with
culturally different backgrounds within the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
However, she was confronted with widespread biased prejudice and apprehension.
Her white colleagues perceived that all minority children were the object of academic
remediation and her African American colleagues claimed that the act only fostered
discriminatory IQ testing. Therefore, she deplored the situation that there were not
appropriate methods for identifying minority gifted students and that there was the
lack of funding to provide special gifted programs for these students (Davis & Rimm,
2004).
In legal issues, despite persuasive commentary and evidence regarding the
3
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
underrepresentation of minority students (Brown, 1997; National Research Council,
2002), both the OCR rulings and court decisions have resulted in only negligible
outcomes in reversing this problem. More specifically, the court had concluded in the
recent cases such as Jacksonville (1999) that because the district have treated equally
in all respects regardless of race, the school system had fulfilled “unitary” status to
prohibit desegregation due to factors such as race prescribed in the Fourteenth
Amendment or Title VI requirements. However, the civil rights organization such as
NAACP maintained that minority students’ unbalanced representation in gifted
programs, the differences in school facilities, the imbalance of faculty in racial
composition, and the disproportion of extracurricular activities still maintain
( “Desegregation Arguments,” 1999; Zirkel, 2004;). Therefore, these legal cases did
not enact any great legal principles about the concerns (Brown, 1997).
Statement of Need/Problem
Therefore, to change this situation more fundamentally, it is necessary for
researchers to study systematically the diverse reasons for the underrepresentation of
minority students. In addition, the research results must be connected with actual
practices, procedures, and educational policies in terms of identification process,
teaching strategies, and teachers’ nomination. However, relatively few articles and
studies have treated this topic. Ford, Grantham, and Whiting (2008) contended that, as
maintained by Ford (1998), less than 2% of publications at that time researched
culturally, linguistically and diverse (CLD) gifted populations and this produced
limited literature about theories and studies from which to draw. In addition, when
investigating issues related to minority students, most research concentrated on the
general findings that minority students are underrepresented in gifted programs and
4
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
that the cause is related to assessment issues. There are few studies focusing on
sociocultural and sociopolitical factors such as peer pressure or segregation which
may worsen the problem. Also, studies related to practices and policies for improving
the underrepresentation problems are even rarer. As a result, the limited number of
studies, publication and the lack of data on minority students’ underrepresentaiton
make it difficult for policymakers to reverse these concerns and to develop a solution.
Therefore, it is urgently necessary to research systematically diverse factors
which cause the underidentification of minority students and the strategies to improve
the problems. As a result, the following three research questions will be posed: (1)
What factors affect the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted programs?
(2) What strategies can be employed for reducing the unbalanced representation of
minority students? (3) What model programs exist to reduce the imbalance? To
answer these three research questions, diverse research and literature related to the
underrepresentation of minority students will be reviewed.
Brief Review of Relevant Literature
To improve the depressed situations for minority gifted students, in 1988, the
Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act (P.L. 100-297) was passed
and this contributed to funding the National Research Center on the Gifted and
Talented (NRC/GT). The funding was used to research gifted learners, specifically
emphasizing the needs of CLD students, and to diffuse the research results into actual
educational fields. For example, the center has conducted five-year research plan
about “what works in gifted education.” The focus of the research will be composed
of the following three issues: (1) extending prior studies by improving a defensible
identification system (2) analyzing the impacts of curricular units in reading and math
on students selected using traditional and multiple criteria (3) measuring outcomes
5
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
employing extended standards-based assessments, structured performance assessment,
or standardized achievement measures. In particular, an identification system had
been created to identify students from across all cultural groups and socioeconomic
groups in this study. (The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, n. d.).
In addition, although the federal government does not mandate gifted education
services, the U.S. Department of Education proposed a culturally responsive
definition of giftedness by prescribing that outstanding talents are present in gifted
learners regardless of cultural and economic groups and areas of human efforts in
1993. Regarding this definition, Ford, Grantham, and Whiting (2008) maintained that
the federal definition recognizes that many students have had insufficient
opportunities to develop their potential and further, some gifted students experience
more barriers in life than others.
However, despite these efforts, because gifted minority students are still hidden
in gifted programs, showing the discrepancy of 16.3% in representation rate as
commented in the previous part (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil
Rights, 2002). Therefore, it is necessary to research the overlooked but important
reasons that cause the underrepresentation of gifted minority learners in terms of
diverse perspectives. For example, Oakes and Guiton (1995) contended that schools
with large minority populations do not tend to offer rigorous curricular and academic
tracks such as advanced placement classes. Therefore, although minority gifted
students have superior talents in specific aptitude, they cannot be provided systematic
and high quality programs to develop their potential. As a result, the lack of advanced
curriculum for minority students can decrease the rate for minority gifted students to
be identified.
6
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Also, much research (Banks& Banks, 2006; Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008)
pointed out inadequate teacher preparation related to multicultural education. Banks
(2006) maintained that few educators receive training in multicultural curriculum and
instruction, or internships and practicum placements in classrooms composed of
diverse student population. Therefore, he asserts that taking one course on diversity
does not prepare them to understand, assist, and work with CLD students.
In addition, not a little research has shown that some teachers have negative
stereotypes and incorrect understanding about the abilities of CLD students and their
families (Rist, 1996; Huff, Houskamp, Watkins, Stanton, & Tavegia, 2005). Therefore,
this can affect teachers’ referral rate for CLD students because most states require
teachers’ referral or completed checklists in order for students to be identified as
gifted (Davidson Institute, 2006). Also, some research asserted that while white
middle-class students receive family support, minority students such as African
American and Hispanic American students can often fail to get support and help for
their talent development from their families or peers (Robinson, Reis, Neihart, &
Moon, 2001).
In addition, it is urgently necessary to research useful and actual strategies to
improve these factors. For example, Clasen, Middleton, and Connel (1994) used a
multidimensional culture-fair assessment strategy. That is, the researchers employed
nontraditional and diverse assessment strategies such as drawing task and two
problem-solving. They also used diverse nomination methods- peer nomination and
teacher nomination- to identify more minority gifted learners of 433 sixth-grade
students (70% minority). As a result, minority students were selected as gifted
learners in proportion to the composition of the school. Also, creativity tests can be
7
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
used to identify creative minority students even though they have low scores in
achievement tests because creativity tests show no bias in race (Torrance, 1995).
In addition, the translated version of tests such as intelligence or achievement
tests can be used. For example, the use of a shortened version of the Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children Revised (WISC-R) both in English and Spanish can
contribute to identifying the underrepresented Hispanic American gifted students.
Also, quota systems can serve to identify minority students and actually, research
shows that students selected through the quota system did not drop out of high school,
compared with minority students with equal abilities who dropped out of typical
school programs (Smith, LeRose, & Clasen, 1991).
Therefore, because there are many measures to reverse this situation despite
complex factors causing the underrepresentation of minority students, it is important
to research them and to make them reflected in actual educational field.
Definition of Terms
Ethnic identity. An awareness of ethnic group membership and a commitment
to the attitudes, values, and behaviors of that group (Eggen & Kauchak, 2010).
Front-loading. The process of preparing students for advanced content and
creative and critical thinking skills prior to the formal identification or before
advanced programs are provided (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
Mentor. A mentor is a productive person whose role includes teaching,
counseling, and encouraging a student with interests in similar domains (Grantham,
2004).
Non-verbal test.
Any test that does not require the examinee to be literate, nor
8
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
require written or spoken language from the examinee (Ford, 2004),
CLD students.
In this study, CLD students focus on African American students,
and Native American students, and Hispanic American students who are culturally
and linguistically diverse (CLD) (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008).
Socioeconomic status (SES).
The combination of parents’ income, occupation,
and level of education that describes the relative standing in society of a family or
individual (Eggen & Kauchak, 2010).
Procedure for Conducting the Study
For this study, a diverse literature search was performed through major journals,
periodicals, and textbooks in the field of gifted education. These are the major
journals and periodicals searched: Gifted Child Quarterly, Roeper Review, Gifted
Child Today, Gifted and talented International, and Journal for the Education of the
Gifted. Also, online databases were searched for related literature such as
EBSCOHost, ERIC, PsycINFO. Combinations of the following keywords were
employed to facilitate online database search: minority students, disadvantaged
students, the underrepresentation in gifted programs, minority gifted students. In
addition, textbooks such as Education of the gifted and talented (Davis & Rimm,
2004) and Growing Up Gifted (Clark, 2002) were reviewed. In particular, when
investigating the effect SES on the underrepresentation of minority gifted students,
diverse journals, periodicals, and books related with other areas such as psychology
and sociology were consulted. Information and literature gathered through major
journals, periodicals, websites and textbooks were reviewed regarding their relevance
to this research. In particular, literature published recently was preferred because the
research was regarded as being based on established studies. Also, information and
articles assumed relevant were then further investigated and included as part of this
9
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
literature review.
Application of the Study to Concepts/Practices in Gifted Education
The research review will serve to uncover diverse sociocultural,
sociopolitical, and personal factors as well as assessment issues responsible for the
unbalanced representation of minority students in gifted programs. Also, it will serve
many educators and policy makers to refer to the diverse methods enhancing the
identification and referral to include more minority students in gifted programs.
Finally, by investigating the actual models that are used these diverse strategies, it can
be beneficial for educators and practioners responsible for other gifted programs with
the same problems to refer them.
Limitations of the Study
During conducting this research, there were three limitations. First, because
diverse factors can affect the underrepresentation of minority students with different
extent according to each case and context, it was difficult to assess the importance
about how some factors affect the underrepresentation of minority students. For
example, a certain factor may be the most important factor in one case, but in another
case, the same factor cannot be important at all. Second, it was difficult to find
literature regarding real policies or practices related to reversing the unbalanced
representation of minority students. In addition, it was more difficult to find the
research concerning evaluation or results about the strategies’ effect. Although much
literature exists regarding theoretical research about changing the situation, the
investigation about the real practices or cases implemented and succeeded in the
actual educational fields was short.
Finally, there was little literature dealing with unique problems, needs and
strategies to solve the concerns that respective ethnic group specifically have related
10
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
to the underrepresentation of minority students. In fact, it is necessary to have
different strategies to solve the problems according to each ethnic group based on
their unique culture and language. Therefore, researchers need to investigate each
group separately and deeply. If more detailed studies regarding respective group are
conducted, stakeholders will understand the group more and it will contribute to
decreasing the representation gaps of minority ethnic groups in gifted programs.
11
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Chapter 2
Introduction
There are many factors which impact reasons why minority students are
excluded from gifted programs. Baldwin (1987) suggested that high IQ cut-off scores
effectively eliminate the possibility of culturally diverse gifted students being selected
in gifted programs. Also, Fraser (1997) pointed out the following two factors
regarding this unbalanced identification: (1) the disparity in test performance among
racial or cultural groups (2) linguistic differences or deprivations of the linguistic
ability of minority students. In addition, Ogbu (2003) maintained, based on his case
study regarding the gap of school achievement between Black and White students and
the less academic engagement of Black students, that informal segregation systems in
the community still remained at all levels. Therefore, this underlying perception was
connected with equating academic success with “acting White.” As a result, this
perception directly affected Black students’ choice of classes.
These studies contribute to understanding the reason why minority students are
not often identified as gifted students. However, beside these factors, other diverse
and complex factors affect the minority students’ underrepresentation in gifted
programs. Therefore, a more systematic and in-depth investigation regarding the main
inhibitors causing the unbalanced representation is necessary in order to reverse this
situation. The following factors will be investigated as the primary reasons for the
disparity.
The Factors which Influence on the Underrepresentation of Minority Students in
12
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Gifted Programs
The Definition of Giftedness
The traditional definition of giftedness.
The conventional method in identifying giftedness has relied on the statistical
comparison of intelligence test or achievement test scores among specific academic
subjects. For example, in deciding the eligibility for participating in gifted programs,
one state defined giftedness as the top 3-5% in intellectual ability based on
standardized intelligence tests. Another state used the criterion that when the student
scores two standard deviations above the mean (top 2.28%), he or she is identified as
a gifted student. Also, a third state’s standard mandated that students who have an IQ
score of 130 or higher although they have other aptitudes such as an artistic talent.
Conventional methods have used two criteria for identification. One criterion
uses intelligence tests such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition
(SB5) (2003) or the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth Edition (WISCIV) (2003), and the other employs the standardized achievement tests such as the
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) (2007). In particular, the standardized achievement
tests are norm-referenced tests in academic subjects such as language or math. As a
result, obtaining high test scores in the academic domains is regarded as indicating
giftedness by a numerical definition. However, these conventional methods establish
extremely high cut-off scores such as scoring above the 95th percentile on intelligence
tests.
Therefore, many objections have been made about the conventional
identification of giftedness in the gifted educational field. Gardner (1999) said
“intelligence is too important to be left to the intelligence testers” (p. 3), criticizing
that educators or parents limit intelligence to IQ and expanding the definition of
13
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
giftedness into various areas of intelligence. Moreover, as Winner (1996) suggested,
the first misunderstanding about giftedness is the belief that gifted children have
excellent abilities in all subject based on high IQ test scores or academic test scores.
Therefore, according to a traditional giftedness definition, too many gifted
children, including minority students, have been excluded from gifted programs
despite their diverse talents (Renzulli & Reis, n.d.). As a result, a great number of
research maintains that poor IQ test performance by CLD students is one of the most
important factors of the unbalanced representation in gifted programs (Ford &
Granham, 2003 ; Castellano & Diaz, 2001; Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008).
Cultural Factors
Cultural factors such as the differences in perspectives regarding culture, the
maintenance of students’ cultural identity, and the differences in cultural values can
affect the inclusion of minority students into gifted classes.
The effect of perspectives about diverse culture.
(Revise) According to the perspectives one adopts about the presence of diverse
culture, the identification of minority students with different cultural background can
be affected. Over the past 20 years, two perspectives about cultural differences have
existed: One is cultural deficits and the other is cultural differences. The cultural
deficits perspective reflects the value that the dominant culture is normative and the
customs and behaviors differing from the dominant culture are unfit and deviant. On
the other hand, the perspective of cultural differences is based on the belief that the
disparity in behavior and different customs among people from different cultures is to
be expected. These different cultures are regarded as parallel or cocultures (Ford,
Howard, Harris, & Tyson, 2000; Morris, 2002).
Educators who adopt the cultural differences perspective focus on the difference
14
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
in minority students’ communication and working preferences. So, they either
recognize differences but require minority students to adapt to the dominant group or
recognize differences and cater the learning environment to support the students’
learning characteristics (Baldwin, 2002; Ford & Grantham, 2003). Therefore, if
minority students are intended to be identified by their diverse talents and nominated
for gifted programs by teachers, the teachers should understand their differences. Also,
they must modify their learning environment based on the cultural differences
perspective (Briggs & Reis, 2004).
However, teachers are apt to misunderstand students’ attributes, characteristics,
and behaviors. In addition, they can fail to perceive that these diverse characteristics
do not indicate absence of talents. Therefore, the different manifestation of students’
aptitude due to cultural differences can be one inhibitor in receiving teachers’
nomination.
The different perspectives about maintenance of ethnic identity.
The underrepresentation of minority students can be caused by the differences in
perspective about the maintenance of minority students’ ethnic identity. Historically,
there are two contrasting perspectives related to keeping minority people’s culture and
language: (1) assimilationalists suggest that minority people’s subcultural values
prevent them from being integrated into the majority culture and limit to obtain the
minority person’s educational and socioeconomic opportunities (Bank, 1979). (2) the
cultural pluralists emphasize the importance of pride in one person’s ethnic identity in
educational and career success. Also, because they regard ethnic identity as an
importance factor in developing sound self-concept, they consider diversity in race,
culture, and ethnicity to be beneficial to both individual and cultural growth. For
example, they maintained that ethnic studies such as the study of African American or
15
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Native American history can contribute to building self-esteem and empowering
minority groups by helping them to understand the methods of cultural domination
(Spring, 2010).
When two contrasting perspectives are applied to the gifted programs, the
following differences results can occur (Kitano, 1991). Concerning the methods of
identification, assimilationists adhere to standardized tests, but pluralists consider
alternative assessment, nonbiased assessment, and multiple measure assessment.
Regarding the curriculum, assimilationists focus on mainstream culture and history in
teaching problem solving and critical thinking skills. However, pluralists consider the
culture and history of various groups when instructing diverse thinking skills. Finally,
there are fundamental differences regarding the purpose of schooling. Assimilationists
propose the transmission of dominant cultures to keep core culture. On the other hand,
the pluralist perceives diverse cultural perspectives to build a society that values
diversity.
As a result, Ford and Trotman (2001) maintained that teachers who educate CLD
students must hold the following characteristics related to keeping students’ ethnic
identity as well as the perspective of a pluralist: understanding of diverse groups’
beliefs, values and norms, addressing cultural differences, and seeking educational
and cultural opportunities to strengthen students’ cultural sensitivity. Therefore,
educators’ perspectives and attitudes related to keeping CLD students’ ethnic identity
can affect the underidentification of CLD students.
The differences in cultural values and customs
The differences in cultural values and customs can have an effect on the
inclusion of minority students in gifted programs. For example, according to
Sternberg (2007), because racial or cultural customs can affect concept of giftedness,
16
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
the usual characteristics of giftedness based on traditional giftedness concept may not
be applied when describing minority students’ giftedness.
In a recent study in Usenge, Kenya, researchers were interested in assessing
school-age children’s ability to adjust to their indigenous environment. Therefore,
they made a test for measuring their practical intelligence for adaptation to the
environment (Sternberg, et al., 2001). The test of practical intelligence assessed
children’ informal and tacit knowledge regarding herbal medicines that the tribal
people believe can be used to combat a variety of types of infections. In particular,
because more than 95% of the children suffer from parasitic illness, children in the
village employ their tacit knowledge of these medicines an average of once a week to
treat themselves and others. Roughly speaking, tacit knowledge is related to what one
knows how to survive in the environment and it is not usually taught explicitly and
often verbalized. Hence, tests of how to use these medicines are composed of
effective tools of measuring one aspect of practical knowledge as defined by the
villagers in their environmental contexts.
To do well on the test, children must know practical knowledge such as
recognizing the existence of an illness, defining what it is and thinking out the
strategies to combat it. For example, researchers asked the following tacit-knowledge
for Kenyan children: if a small child in your family is sick for three days with the
symptoms of a sore throat and fever, which of the following five Luo herbal
medicines can cure the symptoms? Many Kenyan children did well on this test. On
the contrary, middle-class Western students might not do well in the test because they
do not learn them at all.
This Kenyan study suggests that because these families focus on teaching this
indigenous knowledge, they showed superior ability in the practical intelligence.
17
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
From the perspective of an academic test, the rural Kenyan children would not look
smart. However, they had acquired important knowledge and exerted their abilities, in
their cultural context. In particular, researchers investigated the relationship between
scores on this test about tacit knowledge and the scores on conventional tests of
intelligence. As a result, the correlation was negative. For example, the correlation
between tacit knowledge and vocabulary (English and Dholuo combined) was -0.31
(p< .01).
This can be interpreted in the perspective of the anthropologists of the team like
the following: children who spend their time learning the indigenous knowledge
emphasized in the community may not heavily allocate their time in learning
knowledge taught in school. Hence, these results suggest that it is natural that they
show relative low scores in intelligence or achievement tests less highlighted and less
learned in the cultural context.
Moreover, because Native Americans and Mexican Americans have conflicting
cultural values about achievement, these customs and values can diversely affect
students of the ethnic groups (Tonemah, 1991; Duran &Weffer, 1992; Enriquez &
Pajewski, n. d.). For example, in the perspective of traditional Hispanic culture and
customs, because family or group needs are more emphasized than the needs of the
individual, Hispanics tend to be raised to be cooperative. Therefore, the culture can
cause the conflict with the Anglo cuture that typically incites students to be
competitive and individualistic. Moreover, because Hispanic students tend to ascribe
their accomplishment to destiny, fate or other religious causes rather than their ability,
this can affect their performance in schools.
Also, they more preciously accept present time than the future and grow up in a
relative loose environment where minutes or days are rarely regarded as critical
18
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
factors. Therefore, for them, schools composed of closely timed activities, with Anglo
cultural background, can become very tense environment to Hispanic students.
Therefore, Hispanic students can suffer from cross-cultural conflict due to the
differences of culture culture in the home and the school. Therefore, it is important
that classroom teachers should perceive and consider their specific cultural contexts,
values and customs in identifying minority students’ talents and giftedness.
Assessment Issues
These cultural factors are reflected in diverse mental tests and such cultural bias
in mental tests serves to exclude CLD students. Recent federal legislation such as No
Child Left Behind Act (2001) has increased the use of tests to identify and assess
students. The majority of school districts employ intelligence or achievement test
scores to select students in gifted programs (Davidson Institute, 2006). However, Ford,
Grantham, and Whiting (2008) asserted that traditional intelligence tests are less
effective in assessing for African American, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian
students, compared with middle-class White students. There are the two principal
explanations for the relative weaknesses of CLD students related to assessment issues.
The cultural bias in mental tests.
Regarding the cultural bias in mental tests, Groth-Marnat (1997) described how
diverse subscales on the Wechsler tests are affected by culture or socio-culture factors.
For example, the information subtest of the test measures factors such as old learning
or schooling or alertness to daily lives and the vocabulary subscale assesses items
related to educational background or ideas and experiences that an examinee has
acquired. Also, in the comprehension subscale, items assess questions concerning
social judgment or common sense or the comprehension about one’s social and
cultural settings such as knowledge for moral code or social rules. Therefore, studies
19
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
maintained that the verbal subsets are an assessment of crystallized intelligence rather
than a measure fluid intelligence. Because crystallized intelligence is defined as
intelligence that is learned and taught under the influence of cultural and social factors
and fluid intelligence is defined as the assessment raw intelligence (Groth-Marnat,
1997; Gregory, 2004). Therefore, these different socio-cultural factors of tests can
negatively affect CLD students’ performance. For example, in Sternberg’s (2007) case
study commented in the previous part, Kenyan children live in the cultural context are
emphasized practical knowledge to survive in the indigenous environment rather than
academic knowledge learned through schooling. Therefore, they will have difficulty
scoring well on the standardized test items asking unlearned and undeveloped
knowledge.
Also, Davis and Rimm (2004) maintain that linguistically different children
have difficulty taking verbal tests such as verbal comprehension because verbal tests
are adjusted to middle-class English. In the case of African American and Native
American children, because their linguistic structures, categories, and associations
through language are different from those of white children who speak English, they
have difficulty in scoring well on the conventional verbal tests. Therefore, these
children show large discrepancies in scores between Wechsler verbal comprehension
and nonverbal performance (Scruggs & Cohn, 1983). Other studies support this fact
through the following findings: (1) individuals from culturally diverse groups tend to
get higher scores on the performance subscale than verbal subscale (Naglier & Ford,
2003) (2) the performance scores have a weaker relationship to school achievement
than the verbal scores (Gregory, 2004).
In addition, Helms (1992) suggested that some African American cultural
characteristics could affect their students’ cognitive ability testing. For example,
20
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
because they tend to think that knowledge may be gained through oral and aural
methods, thus, the extent of their test performance may be higher if they are tested by
oral and aural instruments. (revise) However, because the identification of gifted
children through standardized tests with cultural bias that use writing or reading
methods are used, culturally diverse gifted children can be affected detrimentally.
Consequently, they contend that standardized testing is unfavorable to minority
students because of cultural and linguistic differences.
Biases in interpreting the tests.
Also, there can be some biases in interpreting test results. Joseph and Ford (2006)
maintained that teachers who have stereotypes or preconceived ideas about CLD
students will consciously or unconsciously influence the results when they administer
or interpret tests. For example, if a referring teacher has stereotypes about CLD
students, the teacher will tend to reflect her same concerns about the students on a
rating scale that she is required to complete as part of an evaluation to determine if the
student is gifted. In addition, bias can offer in interpreting test results if not all data
are collected and assessed. Therefore, OCR (2000) have noted the serious negative
consequences of using one test score to identify gifted students and placing them in
gifted education programs, by suggesting that a test score is not an exact measure of
an individual’s knowledge or skills. Therefore, collecting teachers’ subjective data or
insufficient data serve to misrepresent assessment results.
Ford (2004) maintained that when educators interpret the test scores of diverse
students, they must take care of not under-interpreting or over-interpreting the scores.
For example, a low test scores does not always indicate that a student is not gifted. On
the other hand, a high test score does not mean that a student is gifted because there
are possibilities that these cases may be false negative and false positive in statistics
21
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
respectively. In addition, a low test scores on a vocabulary test or subscale does not
necessarily indicate that a student has poor verbal abilities when communicating
verbally or orally.
Therefore, Oritz (2002) maintained that educators can avoid such bias by
beginning with the process of assessment with the following hypotheses: a students’
performance, particularly if low, is not ascribed to intrinsic in nature but ascribed to
individual’ environment and external factors such as lack of access to books or
unequal opportunities in education.
Teacher Nomination
As most states require teacher referral, checklists or rating scales for selecting
or placing students in gifted programs (Davidson institute, 2008), this is a principal
factor in deciding the representation rates of CLD students in gifted programs. There
are three factors that teacher nomination actually influences the underepresentation of
minority students.
Teachers’ low expectation.
Some studies suggest that teachers have a tendency to have lower expectations
for minority students such as Hispanic or African American students than for White
students (Ladson-Billings, 1994). For example, teachers tend to expect that Hispanic
students will do more poorly on learning tasks than White students. Therefore,
teachers tend to assign these students to special classes when suffering from initial
learning difficulties rather than to consider the differences of language (McCombos &
Gay, 2001). Moreover, researchers asserted that both White and Black teachers
perceive White students more positively than minority students including English
Language Learners (ELL) (Elaine & Lora, 2009). Also, it is reported that preservice
teachers hold these perceptions about students (Tettegah, 1996; Cho & DeCastro-
22
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Ambrosetti, 2006).
More seriously, students’ academic achievement is strongly affected by teachers’
such perceptions (Brown, 2002). Regarding this issue, Beverley, James, and Keonya
(2010) researched African American high school students, based on qualitative and
interpretive research design. The researchers’ concern was to understand the
influences of teacher expectations on the academic achievement of African American
students as perceived by students themselves. Participants of this study were all
African American graduating seniors from two high schools in the Southeast.
However, two schools had different ethnic composition. One school (A school)’s
student population is 91.9% White and 8.1% minority students including African
American students. On the other hand, another school (B school) has 27.9% White
and 72.1% minority students including African American students (27.9% African
Americans, 21.8% Hispanic students, and 22.4% other minorities). Study participants
included 10 (3.2%) African American students from A school and 38 (28.3%) African
American students from B school.
The research methodology was descriptive and particular emphasis was put on
interview data that spoke to students’ perception. In particular, a semi-structured
interview protocol with a series of 15 questions to guide the discussion was employed.
Also, field note were used to interpret the interview results. In particular, students
from two schools participated in the study to enhance trustworthiness of the study and
the results’ abilities to be transferred to other contexts.
As a result, this study showed two findings: (1) the majority of the entire
students (48 students) in this study agreed that race or ethnicity was a factor that
affected the way teachers treated them (2) many of the respondents pointed out that
they perceived that some of their teachers had lower expectations for African
23
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
American students. In particular, some teachers had shown, by word or deed, that they
didn’t expect high quality work from African Americans as much as that they did
from White students. Based on these results, Beverley, James, and Keonya (2010)
maintained that it is important to perceive that the teacher can be the most influential
factor in a students’ academic success.
The lack of teachers’ preparation for multicultural education.
In addition, teachers’ inadequate and insufficient preparation for multicultural
education can affect CLD students’ nomination. Banks (2006) suggested that a
monocultural curriculum that future educators have at both undergraduate and
graduate levels cannot prepare for them to understand CLD students. In particular,
problems such as the lack of curriculum and practicum classes regarding multicultural
education are posed. Therefore, such unprepared teachers frequently misunderstand
cultural differences in learning, communication, and behavior styles. As a result,
unprepared teachers’ experience conflicts with CLD students and this mismatch
between teachers and CLD students results in teachers’ low expectation about these
students and their misbehaviors due to the failure of adjustment in school settings
(Ford, Grantham & Whiting, 2008).
In addition, it is urgently necessary to hire and retain more minority teachers in
gifted programs to enhance the inclusion of minority students. Ford (2001) maintained
that because most diverse teaching staffs are composed of White Americans, with so
few minority teachers, minority students often cannot have role models or cultural
advocates than White students have. Therefore, these points can give gifted CLD
students double weaknesses. In particular, the importance of recruiting and retaining
minority teachers was emphasized by Ford (1999). She surveyed minority teachers
regarding why they decided to teach or not to teach in gifted education. As a result,
24
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
many teachers responded that administrators or academic advisors did not urge them
to pursue their careers in gifted education. However, as King (1994) or LadsonBillings (1994) asserted, minority teachers can have a powerful impact on minority
students’ achievement and self-efficacy and many minority students report that they
are empowered from minority teachers as mentors, advocators, and role models ( Ford,
2001).
Personal Issues
Next, personal factors often contribute to the underidentification of minority students.
The differences in learning styles.
Learning style differences within cultured groups as well as between them can be
considered important. In particular, Ewing and Yong (1992) investigated learning
style differences among African American, Mexican American and Chinese American.
The Learning Style Inventory (Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 1987) was used to 54 AfricanAmerican, 61 third-generation Mexican-American, and 40 third-generation Americanborn Chinese students. A three-way analysis of variance on the LSI raw scores of
them showed that significant group differences in preferences for noise, light, visual
modality, studying in the afternoon, and persistence.
For example, gifted African-American students in this study preferred kinesthetic
modality of learning. Therefore, learning activities such as active and real-life
experiences are recommended to meet their learning needs. On the other hand, gifted
Mexican-American did not prefer bright light, visual and auditory modality, and were
less persistent. Also, Chinese American preferred visual modality and study in the
afternoon with bright light. Therefore, as Ewing and Yong (1992) maintained that
each gifted learner’ learning style should be assessed to accommodate instructional
strategies with his or her unique preferences, minority students’ achievement can be
25
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
affected according to their learning environment and teaching strategies.
Peer pressure.
Also, peer pressure in minority students’ social relationships plays an important
role in hindering the identification of minority students in gifted programs. In
particular, African American gifted students suffer from the “acting White” issue. For
example, Grantham (2004) maintained that speaking Standard English and receiving
good grades would be regarded as “a White thing to do” among Black students.
Therefore, black gifted students receive pressure from peers to disengage. Also, Ogbu
(2003) supported this fact because in terms of language, Black students are
bidialectual or bilingual by using Black English and Standard English. If black
students do not use the two languages appropriately, they receive criticism and
pressure by their peers. Moreover, to be successful in the dominant white society is
considered to affront to the black community by black students. This peer pressure is
evident at all school levels.
Actually, Tiffany, a student in the case study of Day-Vines, Patton and Baytops
(2003) experienced such peer pressure. Tiffany was a 10th grade African American
female student and performed well in the school. In addition, she took three advanced
placement (AP) courses and was a member of the orchestra and gymnastics team.
Both her parents were attorneys and she lived in an upper-middle class neighborhood.
However, she was accused of “acting White” by her African American peers because
she studied hard to get high scores, spoke Standard English, and took part in
gymnastics. However, she also experienced isolation from White peers. Her White
peers maintained contact with her only when Tiffany could supply answers for
homework or there were no other whites present. Therefore, she was not included in
either her Black or White peer groups and was an outsider within these distinct peer
26
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
groups. Like Tiffany, many African American gifted students suffer from the conflict
between racial identity and achievement.
Arroyo and Zigler (1995) contended that African American students who were
less identified with their race, or were raceless, showed higher achievement test scores,
but they also displayed higher depression scores. That is, academically successful
African American students performed well by adopting behaviors and attitudes that
keep distance them from their culture of origin because their cultural factors result in
increased feeling problems such as depression, anxiety, and identity confusion. This
means that these students accomplished academic achievement-at the cost of their
racial identity. Also, these emotional factors affect these minority students’ academic
development as Tiffany intended to withdraw from two AP courses. Therefore, this
can lead to minority students’ underachievement and low selection rate for gifted
programs.
Environmental Factors
Finally, minority students have disadvantages in terms of their environment,
such as low SES, negative stereotyping, racism and segregation..
The effect of SES.
Most of all, SES can significantly affect minority students’ educational
experiences and environment. Ford (2004) maintained that although giftedness is
present in all SES groups, students who live in low SES homes or communities often
have fewer educational experiences than those who reside in higher SES
environments. For example, Smith, Constantino and Krashen (1997) investigated
average number of books in the home and library in three California communities
(Beverly Hills, Watts, & Compton). As a result, the exposure of children living in
Beverly Hills (high SES) to books and to literature was greater than exposure for the
27
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
other two groups of students (low SES). Children in Beverly Hills, on average,
possessed 199 books in home and books in public libraries were 200,600. On the
other hand, children in Watts and Compton respectively had 0.4 books and 2.7 books
in the house and 111,000 books and 90,000 books in the public library. Further, as
reported by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (U.S. Department of
Education, 2003), Black students tend to be exposed to words and literature less time
than White students.
Therefore, Ford (2004) contends that children in Beverly Hills are more likely
to have higher outcomes in reading skills and literacy rates and perform better on
achievement tests. Also, she asserted that despite of heritability of intelligence, the
effect of environmental factors such as educational experiences or the exposure to
literacy on intelligent test performance cannot be denied.
Also, SES can often affect parental involvement in children’s education,
parental attitudes and values. For example, high-SES parents tend to provide their
children with various educational activities such as traveling and visiting to science
museums as well as plentiful learning resources like reference books (Wenner, 2003).
Also, high-SES parents have tendency to ask their children more questions with more
elaborate language and provide more abundant full explanations about events, which
can contribute to a sound future foundation for learning (Holloway, 2004). In addition,
high-SES parents tend to show high expectations for their children. (Greenfield,
Trumbull, Keller, Rothstein-Fisch, Suzuki, & Quiroz, 2006).
However, low-SES parents often have difficulty in being involved in children’s
educational activities because they often must work in two or more jobs (Weiss et al.,
2003). Therefore, they have little time to interact and talk with their children. Such as
enviornment can influence students’ fundamental knowledge and intellectual
28
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
development. In addition, low-SES parents tend to show lower expectations for their
children and only emphasize obedience and submission (Eggen & Kauchak, 2010).
Consequently, they tend to rarely urge their children to attend high school and college
(Brown, Anfara, & Roney, 2004). As a result, students from low SES backgrounds
tend to experience the lack of security and support from families (Evans & English,
2002).
Harmful stereotyping.
In addition, harmful stereotyping of minority students in the environment plays
an important role in the unbalanced representation of gifted programs. For example,
Aronson (2004) asserted that stereotype threat and the responses about it can
importantly affect poor performance of certain students such as African Americans or
Latinos. He and his colleague Claude Steele, a social psychologist, defined stereotype
threat like the following: the anxiety or concern that an individual suffers from in a
situation in which he or she has the possibility to confirm a negative stereotype. For
example, he contended that when Black students are placed in an evaluation situation,
they suffer from an additional amount of risk that will not be experienced by nonstereotyped counterparts.
He researched this suggestion through the following simple experiments (Steele
& Aronson, 1995): In the control condition, the researchers presented the test as an
assessment of intellectual ability and preparation. In the experimental condition, they
tried to decrease stereotype threat by saying that they were not interested in using the
test to assess their abilities. The kind of test and the time to complete the test were the
same and students were equally able. As a result, Black students solved, on average,
in the test of a non-evaluative manner twice as many items as on the test that was
taken in the standard way.
29
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Therefore, this result showed that feelings, such as worry about the potential
that negative stereotype can be true, let African American students be more concerned
about being evaluated than White students (Aronson, 2004). Actually, children from
an elementary group that had been negatively stereotyped significantly performed
worse under diagnostic testing circumstances (McKnown & Weinstein, 2003).
More importantly, this stereotype threat can occur without any conscious
attempt to pose the stereotype. Because it can be most seriously felt by individuals
caring about their achievement and feeling a deep sense of attachment to their ethnic
identity (Aronson, 2002), academically gifted students with negative stereotypes are
at risk for underachievement. Moreover, this stereotyping within school settings is
prevalent and students’ equal educational access in the schools can be limited by
teachers’ negative stereotyping of certain ethnic and racial groups (Weinstein, Gregory,
& Strambler, 2004). Therefore, it is important to perceive that school context can
produce negative stereotyping about the social groups to which students belong
(McKnown & Weinstein, 2003). Also, because intellectual performance can be
influenced by the social context, understanding the stereotype can serve to help
teachers to decrease minority students’ achievement gaps.
Racism and segregation
Finally, racism and segregation are among the environmental factors that can
affect minority students’ inclusion into gifted programs. Ogbu (2003) maintained,
based on his case study, that unlike the perception of Whites about race relations,
Blacks stated that informal segregation systems in the community still remained at all
levels. Therefore, concerning the achievement gap, Whites ascribed the differences to
social class whereas Blacks attributed the gap to racism. Also, he described that Black
students showed distrust of Whites and their institutions and felt exploited based on
30
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
historical acts of mistreatment including slavery. Therefore, this underlying perception
was connected with equating academic success with “acting White.”
According to Ogbu’s observation on the case study (2003), this directly affected
Black students’ choice of classes. Although the school district had no official system
of tracking, where there were differences in the academic workload and differences in
teaching methods between levels, Black students usually selected lower levels on their
own. The author contended that because academically demanding classes were
populated mostly by White students, Black students avoided them. Also, he observed
the lack of teachers’ personal interest and expectations of minority students, as well as
an uncaring attitude toward the students. Therefore, such attitudes by teachers caused
the perception of racism in Black students and it affected their performance in school
settings.
In particular, it seriously influenced the process of nomination for gifted
programs. For example, 42 states use self-nominations in the screening process
(Coleman, Gallagher, & Foster, 1994). However, many gifted minority adolescents
decide not to take part in gifted programs because they did not want to feel isolated
and alienated from White peers (Ford, 1996). Also, although 43 states use peer
nominations as an identification method for gifted programs, Ford (1998) suggested
that one must consider the extent to which the peer nomination is appropriate for
minority students who attend schools that are populated a majority of White students.
She questioned the quality of data gathered from peers because of cultural bias that
peer nomination can cause. Hence, self-nomination and peer nomination may be
useless options for some minority students.
Strategies that Increase the Participation of Minority Students in the Gifted
Programs
31
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
In the situation of minority students being underrepresented due to diverse and
complex reasons, many studies have investigated some strategies for reversing the
unbalanced representation of minority students in gifted programs.
The Use of Multiple Criteria
The background of introducing multiple criteria.
To reverse the underepresentation of minority students based on limited
definition and identification, schools are beginning to use multiple criteria in
identifying gifted students. Although intelligence tests are employed extensively in
school settings, the following much criticism about the tests have been posed: (1)
intelligence tests cannot measure the entire scope of abilities, by assessing a limited
set of cognitive abilities (Groth-Marnat, 2003; Sternberg, 2000) (2) intelligence tests
have the limitation that it is difficult to make long-term predictions (Groth-Marnat,
2003) (3) intelligence tests may not be appropriate to use with CLD students (Helms,
1992; Esters, Ittenback, & Han, 1997; Joseph & Ford, 2006;).
The kinds of multiple criteria.
Besides intelligence and standardized achievement tests scores, the following
criteria are added to multiple criteria: (1) scores on a creativity test such as the
Torrance test (1995), a creative characteristics rating scale, or evaluations of creative
products (2) motivation evaluated in terms of GPA, scores on a motivational
characteristics scale, or ratings in student-generated products (3) scores on a
behavioral rating scale (4) records of previous achievement such as awards or honors
(Davis & Rimm, 2004). Actually, the Federal Giftedness Definition (1993) is not
limited to academic areas but expands to diverse areas such as leadership, creative,
and /or artistic areas.
The results of multiple criteria use.
32
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Through these multiple criteria, many students with leadership, creative ability,
and various talents are included in gifted programs despite scoring below the rigid
cut-off scores in test scores. For example, according to Krisel (1997), in 1991, the
state of Georgia defined giftedness using a single IQ. However, with the help of
Renzulli’s NRC/GT, in 1994, the state of Georgia changed the law. Through the use of
multiple criteria, much of the underepresented minority population was included in
gifted programs, and legislators were convinced of the fairness of multiple criteria.
Also, in the educational field, classrooms which were taught based on Multiple
Intelligence (MI) theory (Gardner, 1983) could provide more diverse students with
opportunities to develop their potential abilities. As a result, more gifted minority
students could be identified in the classroom based on MI theory. For example,
Plucker, Callahan, and Tomchin (1996) employed multiple criteria, using an
alternative assessment approach based on MI theory, to identify culturally diverse
and/or low income students’ giftedness. The sample of in this study was composed of
1,813 children from kindergarten to first grade in 16 schools in a large school district
during the 1992-1993. The target population was ethnically diverse and /or low SES
like the following composition: Caucasian, 18.8%, African American, 71.3%, Asian
American, 1,8%, Hispanic American, 2.5%, and other ethnic groups, 2.5%.
Their multiple criteria employed tools such as teacher checklists and ratings and
performance-based assessment activities such as writing or drawing a story (linguistic
intelligence) or manipulating puzzle pieces (spatial intelligence) in order to measure
four intelligences of spatial, logical-mathematical, linguistic, and interpersonal
intelligences. In addition, in this experiment, because the ethnic composition of the
sample was imbalanced, - African American (71.3%), Caucasian (18.8%) ,Hispanic
American (2.5%) and Asian American (1.8%)- students were randomly chosen from
33
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
the larger ethnic groups to make the same group size. As a result, there was little
significant difference among specific groups except that Asian students scored higher
than all other ethnic groups on all four scales. Therefore, this research showed that an
alternative assessment approach based on MI theory can serve to reverse minority
students’ unbalanced representation rate in gifted programs.
In addition, Clasen, Middleton, and Connel (1994) used a multidimensional
culture-fair assessment strategy through multiple criteria to identify more minority
students. They researched 433 sixth-grade students (70% minority) to identify gifted
learners through multiple criteria such as problem solving, art, peer nominations and
teacher nominations. Specifically, they used the following diverse criteria: the ability
to brainstorm the solution of problems, the ability to draw a picture, the top 5 % of
students selected as the best students in 25 areas by peers’ nomination, and teachers’
nomination of top three minority students in diverse academic and nonacademic areas.
As a result, both minority and majority students were identified as gifted learners in
proportion to the composition of the school.
Also, Renzulli’s talent pool identification method can contribute to selecting
more gifted students including minority students (Renzulli & Reis, 1997). Renzulli’s
talent pool identification process expands the range by expanding the eligibility
criterion such as a test score of the 92nd percentile. As a result, 15-20% of gifted
students can participate in gifted programs. In particular, the approach uses the
following multiple nomination procedures: (1) teachers nominate additional students
who show specific interests or talents besides students nominated by test scores (2)
there are alternate methods such as parent nomination, creativity test results and
product evaluation, (3) through special nomination by resource teachers and all
teachers, more potential gifted students are included (4) non-talent pool students who
34
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
have extreme interests in project can be included in the talent pool. Therefore,
Renzulli’s talent pool identification model can contribute to including a greater
number of students with diverse talents such as creative students or non-talent pool
students with interests in the project.
Alternative Identification Plans
Next, there are strategies to increase minority students’ identification rate by
using a series of alternative procedures unlike traditional identification procedures.
The Academically Gifted (AG) Project.
In the beginning, there is a method of using additional identification plans. For
example, in Academically Gifted (AG) Project, Woods and Achey (1990) increased
the identification of minority students (grade 2-5) through the following strategies: (1)
providing students with additional evaluation opportunities (2) the systematic referral
of students according to existing aptitude and achievement test scores rather than
lowering or changing the requirements (3) maximizing of efforts of school personnel.
In particular, the AG project employed three step evaluation procedures- the first and
second step were group evaluation (group aptitude (IQ test) & achievement test) and
the third step was individual step (individual aptitude (IQ test) & achievement test).
Unlike traditional procedures, students who did not pass in the initial testing
proceeded to two additional steps of group and individual testing. Also, the unique
point in this project was that parents notified the results and members of school
committee may request retesting at each step of the evaluation sequence. When a
student meets the requirements of AG classification at any point during this process,
more tests did not be administrated. As a result, 181 % from 99 to 278 more minority
students could be identified through this strategy.
The Rural and Migrant Gifted Project.
35
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Besides additional identification plans, there is an alternative identification
method for specific ethnic gifted students. For example, the Rural and Migrant Gifted
Project provided Hispanic American gifted students with opportunities to be identified
as gifted learners. The most important characteristic of this project was to use a
shortened version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Revised (WISC-R)
both in English and Spanish. Also, to identify gifted Hispanic American, the following
multiple criteria were employed: (1) information on the prescreening form provided
by teachers (2) the WISC-R screening test performance (3) achievement test records
in specific academic areas (4) motivation and behavioral factors (Ortiz & Gonzalez,
1989).
The Discover process.
In addition, a promising the Discovering Intellectual Strengths and Capabilities
(DISCOVER) process using performance-based assessment (Sarouphim, 1999; Maker,
2005) can be considered. The DISCOVER process has been implemented to identify
diverse students in gifted programs through different grades, school district, ethnic
groups, and countries. However, in this research, one study will be briefly introduced
(Sarouphim, 2002).
In the beginning, the assessment used in the process was originally designed to
increase the representation of diverse students in gifted programs, but was later
expanded to identify all students’ strengths. The assessment is composed of five
activities assessing linguistic (Storytelling), logical-mathematical (Tangram), and
spatial intelligence (Pablo®), based on Gardner’s (1983) theory of multiple
intelligences and Marker’s (1996) definition of giftedness.
In particular, the DISCOVER process has strengths in discovering minority
students’ potential because it requires performance-based assessment and problem-
36
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
solving skills. In addition, the process has merits in detecting minority students’
strengths such as superior problem-solving behaviors or unique speed in completing
the tasks through the following three strategies: (1) when students work in small
groups, at least two trained observers directly take notes and record students’
problem-solving skills in the standard observation sheets (2) the assessment accepts
all products they complete (3) all observers discuss the students’ strengths and
behaviors using checklists based on four different categories from “Unknown” to
“Definitely”(Sarouphim, 1999).
However, the assessment can cause potential problems if gifted students,
identified from the DISCOVER process, are placed in traditional gifted programs.
They may not exert their giftedness in traditional gifted programs because the focus in
the DISCOVER assessment is to solve problems efficiently and skillfully in spatial,
mathematical, and linguistic areas. Therefore, to reduce the gap between the
identification and instruction, a curriculum based on multiple intelligence should go
abreast of the DISCOVER assessment (Sarouphim, 1999).
As one example, Sarouphim (2002) investigated the extent to which the
DISCOVER’s process using behavior checklists and rating process fits MI theory on
which it is based in the high school. In this study, a sample (N=303) comprised of
Navajo (29%), Mexican American (50%) and White (29%) students from grade 9-12
(50.5% males and 49.5% females). Their socioeconomic status was comprised from
low to lower classes. Data were collected over 4 academic years, from 1997 to 2001.
The DISCOVER assessment was composed of performance-based activities to assess
the underlying intelligences. For instance, there were the following five activities:
Drawing & Construction (spatial artistic), Word Play (linguistic), Writing (linguistic),
Individual Tangrams (Spatial analytical/logial-mathematical) and Group Tangrams
37
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
(interpersonal intelligence). Also, the activities include a various problem-solving
tasks that measure corresponding intelligences. An important feature of DISCOVER
is that the assessment was designed to be culturally responsive to diverse groups. For
example, the instructions were offered in the native language of students and the
materials were modified to ascertain that DISCOVER is a culturally bias-free
instrument.
As a result, observers’ inter-rating correlations across the different DISCOVER
tasks was low. For example, the two activities of Drawing & Construction and
Writing (r = 0.193) showed the lowest correlation. This means that a student who
received high score in the rating scale of one activity did not necessarily obtain a
similar high score in the other activities. Also, there were moderate relationships
between activities designed to measure the same intelligences. For example, Word
Play and Writing indicated the highest correlations (r = 0.567). These results
demonstrated that the DISCOVER activities with discernable cognitive tasks
measured different kinds of intelligence. In addition, these results showed some
evidence that the assessment was aligned with Gardner’s theory of multiple
intelligences.
Also, the percentage of students identified from different ethnic groups (i.e.,
Mexican American (33.5%), Native American (28.4%), and Caucasian (20.6%) did
not show statistically significant differences and was mostly in proportion with their
ethnic distribution in the sample. Therefore, Sarouphim (2002) concluded that
DISCOVER is a promising assessment tool for identifying gifted students from
culturally diverse groups.
The Use of Non-Verbal Tests
Because there are many CLD students who are not regarded as gifted due to the
38
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
lack of school-related knowledge and skills such as reading, writing and arithmetic
skills, it is necessary to consider non-verbal tests (Naglier & Ford, 2003). The
important merit of non-verbal tests is that they depend less on learned or obtained
knowledge than traditional intelligence tests. Therefore, as Kaufman and
Lichtenberger (2006) suggested, non-verbal tests are measurement tools measuring
fluid intelligence rather than crystallized intelligence. Crystallized intelligence is
acquired by being taught or learned. Therefore, students who do well on non-verbal
tests may be abstract thinkers who lack academic skills such as reading skills or math
skills and therefore, they may be intelligent gifted underachievers (Ford, 2004).
While many non-verbal tests exist, only two tests have been systematically
researched related to gifted students-Ravens’ Progressive Matrices (Raven, Raven, &
Court, 2004). and Naglieri Non-Verbal Ability Test (NNAT) (Naglieri, 1997). First,
the Raven’s Progressive Matrices is the oldest and most commonly used non-verbal
test. Although the test has been studied in many countries and for diverse individuals,
the test has been criticized for the fact that little research has been conducted about its
validity in assessing academic potential in minority students. For example, a sample
composed of low-income minority students was tested through the Raven’s Advanced
Progressive Matrics along with more traditional assessment test, The School and
College Ability Test. The purpose was to compare the ability of each test to identify
student who might benefit from advanced coursework. As a result, although there
were differences in ethnic composition of students identified through both tests,
significantly higher proportion of minority students obtained higher scores in the
Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrics. However, Miller and Tissot (1995)
maintained that because the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrics was not correlated
with school success, the test must be used as a screening tool along with other
39
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
measures such as nominations or observation scales.
Another non-verbal test is the Naglieri’s Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) and this
test is well standardized on samples of over 89,000 students from K-12. Also, the
psychometric properties of the test are well documented (Naglieri, 1997a). In a recent
study, Naglieri and Ford (2005) found that the NNAT shows much promise for
enhancing the representation rate of diverse learners in gifted programs. For example,
when investigating numbers and percentages of children who earned various NNAT
Standard Scores by ethnic group, there are few differences in the IQ highest levels on
the NNAT according to groups. If White students are composed of 2.5% (467) in 130
& above in 14,141 (sample size), Black students and Hispanic students comprise 2.6%
(75) and 2.3% (46) respectively (Naglier & Ford, 2003).
However, although the test showed promising results enhancing the placement
of minority students in gifted programs, more research must be conducted. Ford (2004)
maintained that there are no published data regarding whether students placed through
the test show good performance and/or indicate as good performance as students
identified through traditional tests in gifted programs.
Quota System
Finally, there is a quota system in which districts fix the percentage of culturally
diverse children to be included into gifted programs based on the percentage of those
students in a school or in a district, regardless of grades or test scores. Therefore, there
is a problem whether the system may exclude majority students with higher test
scores than minority students admitted in gifted programs because of quota system.
However, the effectiveness of the quota system was uncovered through a longitudinal
study of minority students identified as gifted learners (Smith, LeRose, & Clasen,
1991).
40
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
In this study, the Racine United School District began the Light-house Project
federally supported for a decade. Identification for the project occurred kindergarten
when 2500 children entered school, but this project emphasized minority students
must be proportionally included in the gifted sample. Thus, the top 9% of each major
ethnic group (White, Black, Hispanic, and “other”) were identified as gifted and 91
minority students were randomly assigned either to gifted treatment groups (seven
classes) or no special treatment groups. As a result, 12 years later, 0% (24) students
who were selected through the quota system and participated in the treatment groups
did not drop out of high school. However, 45 % (30) minority students with equal
abilities who were not included in the gifted project dropped out of typical school
programs.
Multicultural Mentoring- in the Case of Black Males
Although there are diverse mentoring programs, successful and efficient
mentoring includes experiences based on mutual caring and reciprocal contribution.
In order to understand why Black Males particularly need mentoring, it is important to
understand their needs and characteristics. In particular, in the case of Black males,
Ford (1996) asserted that the students choose not to join gifted programs on their own,
which contributes to their underrepresentation. There are the following three reasons
why Black boys make such decisions: (1) social influences (2) motivational issues (3)
a racial identity.
The reasons why Black males do not choose gifted programs.
Most of all, as social influences, Black gifted students experience isolation in
gifted classes predominantly composed of White students and this negatively
influences their decision to continue in the programs.
Next, strategies to let Black males choose and retain in gifted programs must
41
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
consider motivational factors. As described in the previous part, social and
psychological experiences by gifted Black students may yield negative self-concept
and expectation concerning the value of their attendance in gifted programs.
Therefore, a Participation Motivation Expectancy-Value Model (PMEVM), an
expectanvy-value theory of motivation, was employed to offer a framework for
understanding why Black students make certain academic or course-related choices
(Grantham, 2004).
In the perspective of participation competence expectancy, one factor of a
participation motivation, Black students tend not to believe that they can perform at a
desired level in gifted programs. Therefore, it is less likely that they will enroll in
advanced classes. Also, negative outcome attainment expectancy factors make Black
boys not choose the gifted programs. For example, if the students believe that the
participation in advanced classes result in taking away their playing time due to
excessive homework, they will select not to take part in the classes. In addition, they
will consider the importance of value produced by taking part in the programs (value
of outcomes). As a result, if they perceive that the choice provides them with valuable
things such as feelings of accomplishment (intrinsic outcomes) or pride held by
family (extrinsic outcomes), they will pick up the programs. However, Black males
tend to perceive the value of gifted program outcomes negatively (Grantham, 1997).
In addition, Black boys’ racial identity has an important impact on their
selection of the programs. Cross and Vandiver (2001) maintained that what stages of
racial identity African American students have depends on the individuals’ personality,
others’ support, and their experiences. For example, gifted Black males tend to
perceive their race negatively in predominantly White settings as opposed to those in
predominantly Black settings. In addition, Black males who attend gifted programs
42
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
experience distrust from Black male peers concerning loyalty to the Black community.
Therefore, because Black peers may reject the gifted Black males who desire to join
the dominant culture, gifted Black males are apt not to choose gifted programs.
The necessity of mentorship.
Therefore, Black gifted males who experience problems such as isolation in
gifted classes, the racial identity, and motivation must be continuously provided with
the enhancement of self-beliefs through persistent encouragement. In particular,
although there are many strategies to retain Black males in the gifted programs,
mentorship is a powerful method when considering the unique situations gifted Black
male youths are faced with such as peer pressures (Ogbu & Wilson, 1990; Floyd,
1993).
By participating in the following mentoring activities, Black male students can
be encouraged to choose and pursue gifted programs continuously: One is
conversations with a mentor about their problems. Mentors of gifted Black males can
play critical roles for as a facilitator, problem solvers, and communicators in the
students’ personal and educational development (Schwiebert, 2000). For instance, as
facilitator, mentors try to bridge gaps between the mentees’ merits and weaknesses by
offering opportunities for knowledge and skill development as well as socioemotionl
growth. In particular, gifted males tend to overestimate their level of readiness in
terms of making academic-related decisions because they have been able to engage in
conversation about adult-oriented topics.
However, gifted Black males may have insufficient experiences in
understanding fully the effect or results of their choices such as quitting advanced
coursework in a racialized society that may minimize their existence. As a result, they
may end up missing opportunities or being perplexed by their intelligently wrong
43
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
intuitive decisions. At this time, effective mentors can help to change these negative
trends and decisions. Also, as a problem solver and a communicator, mentors can
assist for their mentees to overcome hurdles in achieving academically, such as peer
pressure or racial identity by sharing their own experiences and communicating
openly mentee’s personal and career-related goals.
The other is to have open dialogues with other successful current or former
Black students about the issues such as conflict or anger management. Many Black
students experience negative peer pressure related to their achievement, but they
hardly know the coping strategies about anger or the pressure. Therefore, it is very
important for gifted Black males to learn conflict resolution skills from successful
peers. In particular, when they underachieve, these skills can assist them to deal with
negative feeling and pressure (Grantham, 2004).
Model Programs for Increasing the Identification of Minority Gifted
Learners
Based on these strategies, to answer the question about what model programs
demonstrate such strategies to increase minority students in gifted programs, four
models will be introduced.
Project Excite
Project Excite, in Evanston, Illinois, was started from the collaboration between
the Evanston School District and Northwestern University. The students’ composition
in terms of ethnicity in this district was diverse: 43.7% African American, 7.1%
Latino, 2.5% Asian American, and 45.6% White. However, this district showed the
problem of the discrepancy between the number of CLD student population and the
number of CLD selected in gifted programs. Therefore, Northwestern University
assisted to develop Project Excite.
44
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
The purpose of Project Excite is to increase the number of high school CLD
students prepared to take advanced courses in math and science. To do so, this project
had the following program goals: (1) to lessen the achievement gap between CLD
students and other students in the district (2) to solve concerns related to achievement
gap such as teachers’ low expectation for CLD students’ performance, the lack of
access to extracurricular program and students’ own negative self-concept about their
abilities (3) to increase the identification of elementary students with potential. In
particular, this project employed front-loading strategy and as defined in the term, this
strategy bridges the achievement gap of CLD students, develops their abilities, and
provided minority students with high potential with opportunities to prepare them for
advanced courses in math and science.
Specifically, third grade students participated in a program once per two weeks
during three months and fourth- and fifth-grade students may attend 8-week sessions
in the fall, winter, and spring. A summer session was also opened for grade 3-8
students. In particular, to identify potential in early elementary students, strategies of
teachers’ nomination of CLD students with talents and the use of nonverbal
assessment were implemented. Moreover, the identified students received
supplemental educational services in the advanced level. Eventually, the program tried
to support the students in order to enter into and do well in advanced math and science
classes at Evanston High School.
As a result, after taking part in Project Excite’s summer classes, 17.3% middle
school students were assigned in a high-ability group in math and 14.8% students
were placed the next course in the level. Also, 12.3% could attend an advanced course
at the local high school. Therefore, around 44% of participants during summer session
could participate in high-ability or advanced-level math classes according to a 2004
45
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
investigation of Project Excite (Olszewski-Kubilius, Lee, Ngoi, & Ngoi, 2004).
Overall, after being involved in the program for two years, there was a 300%
increase in the number of minority students who could attend advanced math class in
grade 6 (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
The Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet
The Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet is a magnet program that is
housed in the Euclid Avenue School situated in the Boyle heights area of Los Angeles.
In the school, 352 of the 800 students (grades 1-5) enrolled in the school attend in the
gifted/high-ability magnet program. The most important characteristic of this school
is that population of school and of the magnet program is composed of 98% Hispanic.
In addition, all of the participants in the Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet
receive free or reduced-price lunch.
The goal of the instruction is to enhance the levels of learning through complex
and deep curricular challenges. Although most students are English Language
Learners (ELL) and transition from Spanish speakers to English speakers during
participating in this program, the magnet program shows that almost 100% retention
of participants in the elementary school level. In addition, 75% of students participate
in gifted programs in the middle school level and the number of CLD gifted students
selected for this magnet program have doubled in the past 5 years.
In terms of teaching strategies, the program employs Kaplan’s (1999) approach
to effectively teach gifted ELL . Kaplan (1999) maintained that when instructing
gifted ELL, the strategies for teaching gifted learners should be taught without
diminishment. Therefore, the following strategies for complexity and depth of their
learning are required: encouraging the ability to perceive from diverse view of points,
improving the language of the discipline, including understanding words with
46
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
multiple meanings and learning figurative language, and questioning or inquiry
(Kaplan, 1999).
As a result, to offer diverse academic opportunities, the program enables students
to build two languages while gaining English abilities based on a dual-language
model and to learn different perspectives or big ideas through their study of the
Aztecs and the Incas related to their cultural background.
Also, educators try to choose universal themes across contents areas such as
math and reading curriculum at each grade level. This can contribute to promoting
deep and interdisplinary understanding. For example, teachers instruct the following
universal and interdisplinary concepts according to their grades: change (Grade 2),
order (Grade 30, relationships (grade 4), and power (grade 5). Also, in a group
activity, they investigate the work of sociologists, historians, and anthropologists to
conduct their social studies assignment, which contributes to developing their deep
and interdisplinary perspectives. To implement this curriculum, the program keeps
flexible schedules, with a 3-day instructional pacing schedule to instruct required
contents effectively and with a 2 day exploratory schedule to investigate the learned
contents in greater depth and complexity.
In addition, gifted students of this program actively participate in learning
activities in rich educational environment. For example, in the classroom, there are
several computer with internet and learning resources of grade-level themes.
Because teachers use differentiated questioning skills, work, and products as well as
tasks requiring creativity to develop students’ creative and critical thinking skills,
students positively participate in challenging lessons such as discussion of small
groups to conduct assignments based on advanced content. In particular, during the
summer, about 100 students from second grade to sixth grade attend enrichment
47
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
programs.
Consequently, as this school’s mission statement states that their mission is to
provide all students opportunities to be successful members of diverse world, to
develop problem-solving, and to enhance research and critical thinking skills, this
program shows a model of successful gifted minority students’ magnet school,
making good use of their language and cultural differences (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan,
2008).
The Mentor Connection
The Mentor Connection is a three-week summer program for gifted high school
juniors and seniors at the University of Connecticut, Storrs. The goals of this program
are to offer gifted high school students, including CLD students, the opportunities to
complete an in-depth study in an interest area, preparing for challenging college
courses. Mentors in the physical and biological science, literature, history, the arts,
communications and theater serve to meet the participants’ unique and individual
needs. In particular, the program recognizes students’ interests, strengths and
motivation and provides participants with opportunities to exert their talents and
creativity at high levels. Approximately 60% of participants are CLD students and this
number has increased each year.
The program is implemented based on a theoretical framework of Renzulli’s
Enrichment Triad Model (Renzulli, 1977; Renzulli & Reis, 1997) and the following
philosophy: (1) above-average ability, creativity, and task commitment can be
identified regardless of ethnic and culture group and socioeconomic levels (2) creative
productivity can be nurtured. Each summer, Mentor Connection provides students
with about 30 mentorship settings. During the 3-week program, students learn
advanced methodologies and how to perform the work of a researcher. For example,
48
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
students choosing archeological sites learn specific techniques such as mapping,
recording data, and site grid development.
As a result, more than 99% of Mentor Connection participants have attended
college. In particular, 30% of Mentor Connection has attended the University of
Connecticut because they have wanted to continue to conduct the research with their
mentors (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008; The National Research Center on the Gifted
and Talented, n. d.). (Could you check verb tense? This program has implemented
until now).
Rockwood School District
Rockwood school district is a large suburban district which is located in St. Louis,
Missouri. This district thought that when the identification process uses traditional
objective measures, it was apt to misidentify students with disabilities or from
different economic and cultural and/or linguistic backgrounds. They also thought that
parents expect educators to develop identification procedures that consider individual
circumstances. Therefore, they thought that if educators did not develop such
identification methods, they would lose credibility and support for maintaining gifted
programs.
TREASURES strategy
As a response, this district adopted a TREASURES strategy. As TREASURES,
an acronym for To Recruit, Educate, and Serve Under-Represented Exceptional
Students, maintained a basic identification process and it additionally adopted an
approach that addressed a variety of needs. That is, the TREASURES strategy was
developed to identify and serve gifted learners whose abilities were overlooked due to
speaking English as a second language, economically disadvantaged backgrounds, or
cultural diversity (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005). This program was considered a
49
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
successful state model to demonstrate a way to enhance the participation of diverse
students and received a state award in Missouri (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
Rockwood school district made the following efforts to increase the
identification of minority students. In the beginning, staff members of the school
district achieved TREASURES strategy through two year’s research, discussion, and
training regarding the strategies for identifying gifted students. Also, they collaborated
with the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to make
guidelines and forms that included requirements of the state. In particular, they
involved parents in a discussion of the characteristics of giftedness in diverse students.
Next, the TREASURES identification process employed a case study model
to collect diverse information and data regarding individuals’ potential academic
abilities and needs. For example, the approach included the choice of broader
standardized tests and more opportunities to individually meet among students,
parents, teachers and counselors. However, the most important thing was that students’
products and performance for qualitative reviews regarding student work were offered
teachers as multiple indicators of their giftedness. Although the approach took more
time than assessing the giftedness through test scores, it enabled educators to watch
the authentic learning capabilities of students with challenges such as different
language and culture, beyond surface criteria.
In particular, this district did not change the curriculum or lower their
expectations for newly identified minority students. Still, the emphasis of the program
continued to be on finding and developing gifted students’ strengths and potential and
providing them with environment where stimulates risk-taking, critical thinking, and
uniqueness. Also, the district focused on finding topics that enhanced gifted students’
imagination and motivated them to contribute to their school, community, and world.
50
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
In this regard, the district used different cultural backgrounds and values of minority
communities as learning resources and let minority students contribute to providing
classroom dialogues with diverse perspectives.
Additionally, the district encouraged parents to be involved in helping to develop
an identification process and assisting their children to be admitted into the gifted
programs. For example, the committee provided parents and gifted program personnel
with a forum to learn more about working with gifted learners from diverse
backgrounds. This enabled gifted program personnel to ascertain that their efforts
would reflect both research and their own community’s needs and parents to
understand state and district’s intention and boundaries about the gifted programs. The
district and parents could work together to make the goals and parents’ positive
evaluation about the gifted programs and their encouragement let their children stay
involved in the programs (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005).
Results
Consequently, although 10 years ago, just 10 students with minority
backgrounds took part in the elementary pull-out program, the current participation
number has grown 202 students, 7.3% of the population of identified gifted students,
by using TREASURE Identification Process. Collecting and processing qualitative
data through case studies as well as intelligence and achievement test scores is
required but this enables teachers to understand students’ abilities and characteristics
well. Finally, these strategies brought increased identification of minority students in
the gifted programs (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
Conclusion from the Literature
In conclusion, there were many factors which consistently prevent minority
students from participating in gifted programs. There was a narrow identification of
51
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
giftedness through standardized tests scores, concentrating solely on academics. Also,
there were factors such as not considering the differences in language and culture in
assessment, biased teachers’ nomination due to the lack of knowledge concerning
cultural differences and the unique personal issues of minority students- such as peerpressure. In addition, segregation and racism connected with negative stereotyping of
minority students could play a contributing role in the underrepresentation of minority
students. What is worse, there were environmental factors such as low SES, lack of
parental support, poor educational resources.
However, to lessen the gap in the identification of gifted minority students,
there were many strategies that can reverse this situation. For example, by using
multiple criteria, hidden and creative minority students with diverse talents as well as
academic abilities could be identified. Moreover, additional identification strategies
such as a series of evaluation procedures, or the use of alternative and modified
identification strategies such as DISCOVER process, considering the differences in
language and culture could increase the participation rate of minority students. In
addition, there could be the use of non-verbal tests for CLD students and a quota
system that allocated a fixed rate of minority students to gifted programs according to
the racial composition of a school or a district. In addition, there was a multi-cultural
mentoring system that helped at- risk minority students (at risk??) who tended to
decline to participate in gifted programs due to racial identity and social influences.
However, because it was necessary to identify how these theoretical strategies
were used in the actual educational field, diverse models and strategies were
investigated. For example, Project Excite used front-lodging strategies to bridge CLD
students’ achievement gaps (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008; The National Research
Center, n. d.). Also, the Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet employed diverse
52
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
strategies for gifted ELL students, using a dual language program and incorporating
their cultural assets and resources into learning process In particular, this model
explicitly showed how strategies catered to gifted minority students’ needs
contributed to the retention of minority students in gifted programs, through evidence
of 100% retention of students at the elementary school level (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan,
2008)..
Also, Mentor Connection provided gifted CLD students with opportunities to
develop their interests and creative productivity (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008; The
National Research Center, n. d.) Finally, Rockwood school district used a the
following TREASURES strategy: (1) by employing additional identification
processes of case study models and devoted staff members in researching (2) by
encouraging parents to be positively involved in the development of gifted programs
for minority students (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005).
53
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Chapter 3: Methodology
Summary of Findings
Introduction
The underidentification of minority students in gifted programs has been one of
the long-standing concerns in gifted education. According to U.S. Department of
Education Office for Civil Rights (2002), in elementary school, while minority
students approximately make up 36% of the U.S. school population, they comprise
19.7% of students in gifted programs. On the other hand, White students were
overrepresented by 13% in gifted and talented programs. (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting,
2008).
Also, Hopstock and Stephenson (2003) pointed out the low representation
rate of all English Language Learners (ELL) underrepresentation, based on a survey
by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Department of Education.
In addition, history and legislation show that minority gifted learners have not
been admitted in gifted programs proportionately, compared with the composition rate
of minority students in the school system (Brown, 1997). Also, few publications
regarding CLD gifted populations have been yielded (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting,
2008). Studies related to practices and policies for improving the underrepresentation
of minority students are even rarer. Therefore, it is necessary to research diverse
reasons for this concern and the useful strategies and the actual models to reverse the
situation. So, based on the following three research questions, the investigation was
performed and the results could be obtained: (1) What factors affect the
underrepresentation of minority students? (2) What strategies are recommended to
reverse underidentification of minority students? (3) What model programs exist to
reduce the imbalance?
54
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
The Factors that Cause the Unbalanced Inclusion of Minority Students in Gifted
Programs
In the beginning, the definition of giftedness can play an important role about the
concerns. Conventional definitions that identify only top 3-5% intellectually gifted
students has excluded non-academic gifted learners including minority students due to
high cut-off scores.
Next, cultural factors such as differences in perspective regarding cultural
differences and the retention of minority students’ cultural identity or differences
cultural values and customs can erode minority students’ achievement and
identification. Teachers’ attitudes and perceptions toward their minority students’
cultures can influence the teachers’ nomination for gifted programs according to
whether they perceive that minority students’ talents are expressed by other behaviors
and methods. In addition, different communication styles and different cultural values
related to achievement must be considered for minority students. Also, regarding
retention of racial identity, the following perspective can positively affect the
identification of minority students in gifted programs: (1) minority students need to
feel proud about their ethnic identity (2) minority students should be identified by
alternative assessment based on the perspective of pluralists (Ford & Trotman, 2001).
The assessment issues related to a cultural bias ingrained in mental measurement
tools and biases in interpreting tests can add the concerns. In taking standardized tests,
cultural and linguistic differences and different cognitive ability testing methods
according to culture are disadvantageous to minority learners. For example, verbal
comprehension problems geared to middle-class English or written or reading testing
methods can negatively influenced children who are culturally and linguistically
different or are more used to oral and aural instruments. In addition, preconceived
55
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
teachers’ negative stereotypes or insufficient data regarding CLD students can
adversely influence examiners’ interpretation about test results and the exact
assessment about CLD students. This disadvantageous interpretation and assessment
can be reflected in minority students’ underrepresentation in gifted programs.
Also, teacher nomination can affect the unbalance in racial composition of
gifted programs. In particular, teachers’ lower expectations for minority students and
the lack of knowledge concerning their culture and characteristics can cause fewer
referrals (Fraiser, Garcia, & Passow, 1995). In addition, inappropriate preparation for
multicultural education due to the lack of curriculum and practicum classes regarding
multicultural education (Banks, 2006) and few minority teachers as role models and
advocates for minority culture in gifted programs (Ford & Trotman, 2001) can
negatively affect minority students’ academic success.
In addition, if minority students have personal factors such as learning style
differences and peer-pressure, these can affect their intellectual development and the
rate of retention of minority students in gifted programs. In particular, peer pressure
toward African American gifted students can cause a conflict between keeping their
racial identity and striving for academic honors (Harris & Ford, 1991).
Moreover, minority students have many weaknesses in terms of environment.
Low SES can affect minority students’ underidentification through poor educational
environment and less parents’ support. In addition, stereotyping toward minority
students, such as having low intelligence and poor academic performance (revise)
tend to be more at risk for underachievement and negative stereotyping by teachers
can prevent equal educational access for minority students in the schools. In addition,
racism and segregation that African American students still perceived make them
choose lower academic level classes to avoid advanced classes populated with White
56
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
students (Ogbu, 2003).
Strategies to improve the imbalance of racial composition in gifted programs
Nonetheless, there are strategies to enhance the participation of minority students
in the gifted programs. It is important to use multiple criteria and the assessment
based on performance to look for minority students’ hidden talents because they may
express their talents through other methods. Actually, Clasen, Middleleton, and
Connel (1994) showed the identification of students in proportion to the composition
of the school through a multiple criteria including culture-fair assessment strategy
such as the ability to brainstorm the solution of problems or the ability to draw a
picture. Also, alternative assessment approach based on MI theory (Plucker, Callahan,
& Tomchin, 1996) and Renzulli’s talent pool identification method employing diverse
nomination steps (Renzulli & Reis, 1997) show promising results in increasing
representation rate of minority students.
Next, there are alternative and modified identification strategies such as
employing two additional steps of group and individual testing (Woods & Achey,
1990) or the shortened version tests composed of two languages for specific ethnic
gifted learners (Oritz & Gonzalez, 1989) can be used. In addition, DISCOVER
process was implemented in diverse groups such as different grade, school district,
and countries and showed the process was effective in identifying CLD students
(Sarouphim, 1999; Marker, 2005).
As other alternatives, the use of non-verbal tests such as Ravens’ Progressive
Matrices (Raven, Court, & Raven, 2004) or Naglieri Non-Verbal Ability Tests (NNAT)
(Naglier, 2004) can be used. Also, a quota system that a predetermined percentage of
minority students are to be included into gifted programs can be used and research
showed that the system was effective in a longitudinal study (Smith, LeRose, &
57
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Clasen, 1991).
Finally, there is the method of multicultural mentoring. In particular, Black males
tend to experience social isolation in gifted classes composed of mainly White
students. Therefore, gifted Black males need to be encouraged to choose and
persevere in gifted programs through communication with mentors (Grantham, 2004).
Model Programs’ Advocacy Efforts for Unbalanced Representation
Finally, actual model programs were investigated to see how these strategies are
used in these programs. In the beginning, Project Excite tried to decrease the
achievement gaps of minority students by using front-loading strategies in math and
science. Also, the Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet showed the model
regarding how gifted ELL students’ potential could be developed through appropriate
teaching strategies and a dual language program. In particular, the model
demonstrated that gifted minority students’ curriculum must be differentiated and kept
without diminishment (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
In addition, Mentor Connection by the University of Connecticut provided
many CLD high school students with opportunities to directly experience researchers’
work in the field and this aroused CLD students’ interest and motivation. As a result,
this program showed a promising result that 99% of participants attended college
(Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008; The National Research Center, n. d.).
Also, Rockwood School District (RSD) adopted the TREASURES strategy to
recruit, educate and serve the underrepresented students. In particular, they adopted
four strategies. Staff members collaborated with Missouri Department of Elementary
and Secondary Education to reverse the underrepresentation of minority students.
Additionally, the TREASURES’s identification process used a case study model
because the model contributes to finding students’ authentic potential learning
58
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
abilities by watching their work and performance. Third, the district tried to use the
views and opinions of students from diverse cultural background as learning resources
and make parents work together to develop clear goals for gifted programs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, as these models show, schools can enhance the identification of
more gifted minority learners by using the following insightful strategies despite
adversarial factors such as personal, cultural, and environmental (Is this right
expression?): (1) the buildup of teachers’ knowledge about the characteristics of
minority students and the recruitment of multicultural gifted teachers (2) respecting
minority students’ ethnic identity and culture (3) setting up counseling programs to
help minority students’ difficulties (4) getting parents’ support toward gifted education.
However, the most important thing in improving the underrepresentation of minority
students with disadvantages is to keep in mind the fact that these minority students’
potential abilities are limitless, but their circumstances limit the development of their
potential abilities.
Recommendations for Teachers and Schools
Educators’ More Training in Gifted Education and Multicultural Education
To improve the situation of the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted
programs, the following recommendations can be suggested. First, the roles of
teachers are crucial in raising the minority students’ identification rate in gifted
programs. If teachers receive professional training regarding how to search for
behaviors that indicate students’ giftedness such as problem-solving skills and
creative thinking, not solely relying on academic test scores, it will be helpful to find
more minority students’ giftedness (Baldwin, 2002).
Also, teachers can contribute to including more minority learners into gifted
59
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
programs by taking multicultural training to understand minority students’
multicultural characteristics such as specific attitudes and learning styles (Clark,
2002). For example, as Ford and Trotman (2001) describe, gifted program
multicultural teachers must demonstrate additional characteristics to those of typical
gifted program teachers. They must draw on higher level thinking skills through
multicultural resources and materials. In addition, they have to promote an
environment where multicultural gifted students can feel challenged yet show their
cultural characteristics safely. If they do so, minority students of different cultural
backgrounds can display their potential abilities to their fullest extent and this can
increase their inclusion into gifted programs.
As an example, diverse strategies to include multicultural contexts in learning
should be employed. For instance, through dual language classrooms, language
disparity can be addressed (Castellano & Diaz, 2002) and the diverse cultural
elements of students can be naturally incorporated into the learning process, which
can serve majority students to broaden their view toward the world (Ford et al., 2000).
Keeping Minority Students’ Ethnic Identity
Next, school system and individual teachers must consider the issue of minority
students’ ethnic identity. Most of all, Ogbu (1992) suggests that minority students
whose cultural identities are different from American mainstream culture suffer from
greater difficulties in learning in American schools. Therefore, if gifted programs
intend to serve minority students with diverse cultural backgrounds, it is necessary for
the program to include multiethnic experiences and develop students’ positive ethnic
identity (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008). Moreover, as Ford and Trotman (2001)
describe, gifted classes should have the following culturally responsive factors to stay
in and keep up with the gifted programs: culturally relevant instruction, the
60
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
recognition of students’ different languages, and assessment which reflects cultural
differences, and a diverse composition of teachers.
Counseling Programs
Next, counseling programs are urgently needed because negative peer pressure
which emphasizes disengagement from learning can influence minority students’
achievement. For example, antilearning terms such as “acting White” used to describe
African American students who perform well in school and “apples” used for Native
American students may negatively influence minority gifted students’ potential
abilities (Steinberg, Dornbush & Brown, 1992). Moreover, many Black students
suffer from conflicts between racial identity and academic achievement because of the
perception that academic success removes them from their cultural community and
betrays their race (Grantham, 2004). Therefore, to prevent antilearning factors from
influencing minority students, counselors who have knowledge about minority
students’ communities must help their students internalize the value of education and
find cohorts who also pursue academic achievement (Ford & Trotman, 2001;
Grantham, 2004).
Parental Support
In addition, to overcome minority gifted students’ underrepresentation, it is very
important for parents of minority students to understand and support gifted education.
Minority students’ parents are more likely to think that their children will be isolated
and will not receive benefits from gifted programs (Grantham, 2004). Also, minority
parents may experience the pressure of circumstances that do not encourage learning.
(Revise)Therefore, it is important the advocacy and education of minority parents
about gifted education because they can contribute to reversing minority parents’
negative attitudes toward gifted education (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005). The attitude
61
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
change of minority students’ parents can affect their children’s achievement, active
participation and interest in gifted programs as the Rockwood models show.
Recommendations Related to Assessment Issues
Regarding the assessment of giftedness, the following factors should be
considered to reverse the unbalanced identification rate of minority students. First of
all, the notion of “assessment” being composed of comprehensive information must
take the place of the notion of “testing” getting information from only one measuring
tool. Educators must be cautious of making identification and placement decisions
based on a single criterion such as a test score because this information is too limited
(Sternberg, 2000; Ford, 2004). In addition, in identifying students with diverse
language and culture, every effort to accurately measure their abilities must be made
in testing. For example, linguistically different students need bilingual test
instruments translated in their native language for fair assessment. In particular, in
administrating and interpreting of assessment, the examiners must consider the
examinee’s cultural and linguistic context and background (Sattler, 1992, Ford, 2004;
Joseph & Ford, 2006). This will contribute to helping teachers to appropriately
interpret and use the test results regarding the achievement of the child.
Pre-Experiences in Gifted Programs
Additionally, it is recommended that teachers give probationary placement or trial
periods when minority students show their achievement gaps due to the different
language and learning contexts. Students’ participation in gifted programs or
challenging lessons through a probationary program can reveal their hidden talents.
Also, through front-loading, as previously defined, teachers can narrow the gap in the
minority students’ readiness, nurture their potential, and prepare them for catching up
with advanced content programs (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).
62
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Collaboration with Key Decision Makers
Eventually, it is important to collaborate with key decision makers to cause
significant change in gifted programs. For example, it is helpful to contact gifted
program coordinators, district-level administrators, the members of boards of
education and State Departments of Education because efforts to reverse the concern
will be unlikely to succeed without their help (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005).
In conclusion, many policymakers, educators, and researchers have made
efforts to reverse the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted programs.
However, despite the modified screening process and multiple identification criteria,
minority students have remained unidentified. Therefore, the topic of the
underidentification of minority students should be investigated by contextual and
comprehensive methods and strategies because numerous and complex factors have
influence on the identification and retention of these students in gifted programs.
Therefore, more systematic research to uncover how and why minority students are
not detected for diverse gifted programs is necessary. Based on this research, more
efforts through diverse strategies, referring to successful programs’ policies and
methods, should be made to prevent the unnecessary loss of human potential and
resources.
63
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
References
Anderson, K., & Minke, K. (2007). Parent involvement in education: Toward an
understanding of parents’ decision making. Journal of Educational Research,
199(5), 311-323.
Aronson, J. (Ed.). (2002). Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological
factors on education. San Francisco: Elsevier Science.
Aronson, J. (Ed.). (2004). The threat of stereotype. Educational Leadership, 62(3),
14-19.
Arroyo, C. G. & Zigler, E. (1995). Racial identity, academic achievement, and the
psychological well-being of economically disadvantaged adolescents. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 69, 903-914.
Baldwin, A. Y. (1987). I’m Black but look at me, I am also gifted. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 31(4), 180-185.
64
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Baldwin, A. Y. (2002). Culturally diverse students who are gifted. Exceptionality, 10
(2), 139-147.
Baldwin, A. Y. (2005). Identification concerns and promises for gifted students of
diverse population. Theory into Practice, 44, 105-114.
Bank, W. (1979). Teaching strategies for ethnic studies (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Banks, J.A. (1993). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and
practice. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (p. 349). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. M. (2006). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives.
Hoboken, NJ.: John Wiley & Sons.
Barton, P. (2004). Why does the gap persist? Educational Leadership, 62(3), 9-13.
Berk, L. (2003). Child Development (6th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Boykin, A., & Toms, F. (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In
H. McAdoo & McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental
environments (p. 33-51). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Briggs, C. J., & Reis, S. M. (2004). Case studies of exemplary gifted programs. In C.
A. Tomlinson, D. Y. Ford, S. M. Reis, C. J. Briggs, & C. A. Strickland (Eds.), In
search of the dream: Designing schools and classrooms that work for high
potential students from diverse cultural backgrounds (pp. 5-32). Washington, DC:
National Association for Gifted Children.
Briggs, C., Reis, S., Sullivan, E. (2008). A national view of promising programs and
practices for culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse gifted and talented
students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(2), 131-145.
Brown, C.N. (1997). Legal issues and gifted education. Roeper Review, 19(3), 157-
65
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
162.
Brown, E.L. (2004). What precipitates changes in cultural diversity awareness during
a multicultural course: The message or the method? Journal of Teacher Education,
55, 325-339.
Brown, K., Anfara, V., & Roney, K. (2004). Student achievement in high performing,
suburban middle schools and low performing, urban middle schools: Plausible
explanations for the differences. Education and Urban Society, 36(4), 428-456.
Brown, K., Anfara, V., & Roney, K. (2004). Student achievement in high performing,
suburban middle schools and low performing, urban middle schools: Plausible
explanations for the differences. Educational and Urban Society, 36(4), 428-456.
Castello, J. A., & Diaz, E. (Eds.). (2002). Reaching new horizons: Gifted and talented
education for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Celious, A., & Oyserman, D. (2001). Race from the inside: An emerging
heterogeneous race model. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 149-165.
Charp-Lewis. (2003). Breaking the silence: White students’ perspectives on race in
multiracial schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 85, 279-285.
Clark, B. (2002). Growing up gifted (sixth ed.). Columbus, OH: Merill.
Clasen, D. R., Middleton, J. A., & Connel, T.J. (1994). Assessing artistic and problemsolving performance in minority and nonminority students using a
nontraditional multidimensional approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 27-37.
Coleman, M. R., Gallagher, J. J. & Foster, A. (1994). Updated report on state policies
related to the identification of gifted students. Chapel Hill: Gifted Education
Policy Studies Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Cox, J., Daniel, N., & Boston, B. (1985). Educating able learners. Austin: University
66
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
of Texas Press.
Cross, W. E., Jr., & Vandiver, B. J. (2001). Nigrescence theory and measurement:
Introducing the Cross Racial Identity Scale (CRIS). In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M.
Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural
counseling (pp. 371-393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davis, G.A., & Rimm, S.B., (1980). GIFFIⅡ: Group inventory for finding interests.
Watertown, WI: Educational Assessment Service.
Davis, G.A., & Rimm, S.B., (1982). GIFFIⅡ: Group inventory for finding interests.
Watermelon, WI: Educational Assessment Service.
Davis, G.A., & Rimm, S.B., (1982). Group inventory for finding interests (GIFFI)
Ⅰand Ⅱ: Instruments for identifying creative potential in junior and senior
high school. Journal of Creative Behavior, 16, 50-57.
Davis, G. A. & Rimm. S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented. Boston,
M.A.: Pearson.
Day-Vines, N.L., Patton, J.M., & Baytops, J. L. (2003). Counseling African
American adolescents: The impact of race, culture, and middle class status.
Professional School Counseling, 7, 40-51.
Duran, B., & Weffer, R. (1992). Immigrants’ aspiration, high school process, and
academic outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 165-168.
Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2010). Educational psychology - Windows on classrooms.
New York: Prentice-Hall.
Enriquez, L., & Pajewski, A. (n. d.). Teaching from a Hispanic perspective: A
handbook for non-Hispanic adult educators. Retrieved from
http://www.literacynet.org/lp/hperspectives/hispcult.html
Esters, I. G., Ittenback, R. F., & Han, K. (1997). Today’s IQ test: Are they really
67
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
better than their historical predecessors? School Psychology Review, 26, 211223.
Evans, G.W., & English, K. (2002). The environment of poverty: Multiple stressor
exposure, psychophysiological stress, and socioemotional adjustment. Child
Development, 73, 1238-1248.
Ewing, N. J., & Yong, F. L. (1992). A comparative study of the learning style
preferences among gifted African-American, Mexican-American, and
American-born Chinese middle grade students. Roeper Review, 14, 120-123.
Exum, H. (1983). Key issues in family counseling with gifted and talented black
students. Roeper Review, 5(3), 28-31.
Floyd, N. (1993). Mentoring (Education Research Consumer Guide, November 7).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational
Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED
363 678)
Ford, D. Y. (1996). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students:
Promising practices and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.
Ford, D. Y., (1998). The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted
education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. The Journal of
Special Education, 32 (1), 4-14.
Ford, D. Y., & Grantham, T.C. (2003). Providing access for culturally diverse gifted
student: From deficit to dynamic thinking. Theory Into Practice, 42, 217-225.
Ford, D. Y., Howard, T. C., Harris, J. J., & Tyson, C. A. (2000). Creating culturally
responsive classrooms for gifted African-American students. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 23, 397-427.
Ford, D. Y., & Trotman, M.F. (2001). Teachers of gifted students: Suggested
68
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
multicultural characteristics and competencies. Roper Review, 23, 235-239.
Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C., & Whiting, G. W. (2008). Culturally and linguistically
diverse students in gifted education: recruitment and retention issues.
Exceptional Children, 74 (3), 289-306.
Frasier, M. M. (1997). Multiple criteria: The mandate and the challenge. Roeper
Review, 20, A4-A6.
Frasier, M. M., & Passow, A. H. (1994). Toward a new paradigm for identifying
talent potential. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and
Talented.
Frasier, M. M., Garcia, J.H., & Passow, A. H. (1995). A review of assessment issues
in gifted education and their implications for identifying gifted minority
students. Retrieved from University of Connecticut, National Research Center
on the Gifted and Talented website:
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/frasgarc.html
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New
York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st
century. New York: Basic Books.
Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1994). Looking in classrooms. New York: Harper Collins.
Grantham, T. C. (1997). The under-representation of Black males in gifted
programs: Case studies of participation motivation. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Grantham, T. C. (2003). Increasing black student enrollment in gifted program: An
exploration of the Pulaski County Special School District’s Advocacy Efforts.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 47 (1), 46-65.
69
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Grantham, T. C. (2004). Multicultural mentoring to increase black male
representation in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48 (3), 232-245.
Greenfield, P., Trumbull, E., Keller, H., Rothstein-Fisch, C., Suzuki, L., & Quiroz,
B. (2006). Cultural conceptions of learning and development. In P. Alexander
& P. Winner (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., p. 675-692).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gregory, R. J. (2004). Psychological testing: History, principles and applications
(3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Groth-Marnat, G. (1997). Handbook of psychological assessment (3rd ed.). New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Harris, J. J., & Ford, D. Y. (1991). Identifying and nurturing the promise of gifted
Black American children. Journal of Negro Education, 60, 42-48.
Helms, J.E. (1992). Why is there no study of cultural equivalence in standardized
cognitive ability testing? American Psychologist, 47, 1083-1101.
Herrnstein, R.J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Hoffman, B. (1964). The tyranny of testing. New York: Collier Books.
Holloway, J. (2004). Family literacy. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 88-89.
Hong, S., & Ho, H. (2005). Direct and indirect longitudinal effects of parental
involvement on student achievement: Second-order latent growth modeling
across ethnic groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 32-42.
Hopstock, P. J., & Stephenson, T. G. (2003). Descriptive Study of Services to LEP
Students with DISABILITIES Special Topics Report #2. Analysis of Office of
Civil Rights Data related to LEP students. Washington, DC: U. S. Department
of Education, OELA.
70
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E., Johnson, D., Stevenson, H., & Spicer, P.
(2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and
directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747-770.
Irvine, J.J. (1990). Black students and school failure. Westport, CT: Greenwood
Press.
Jenkins, M. D. (1936). A socio-psychological study of Negro children of superior
intelligence. Journal of Negro Education, 5, 175-190.
Jensen, A.R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free press.
Johnson, L. (2002). “My eyes have been opened”: White teachers and racial
awareness. Journal of teacher Education, 53, 153-167.
Katz, I., Roberts, S., & Robinson, J. (1965). Effects of difficulty, race of
administrator and instructions on Negro digit-symbol performance, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 53-59.
Kaplan, S. N. (1999). Teaching up to the needs of the gifted English language
learner. Tempo, 14 (2), 20.
Kaufmna, A. S., & Lichtenberger, E. O. (2006). Assessing adolescent and adult
intelligence. Hoboken, N. J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kirschenbaum, R.J. (1998). Dynamic assessment and its use with underserved
gifted and talented populations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 140-147.
Krisel, S.C. (1997). Georgia’s journey toward multiple-criteria identification of
gifted students. Roeper Review, 20, A1-A3.
Kitano, M. K. (1991). A multicultural educational perspective on serving the
culturally diverse gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 4-19.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally
relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159-165.
71
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Macionis, J. (2006). Society: The basics (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Maker, C.J. (1993). Creativity, intelligence, problem solving: A definition and
design for cross-cultural research and measurement related to giftedness.
Gifted Education International, 9, 68-77.
Maker, C. J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem,
needed changes and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41-50.
McKnown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). The development and consequences of
stereotype consciousness in middle childhood. Child Development, 74, 498-515.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Percentage distribution of public
elementary and secondary school enrollment, by race/ethnicity: Selected years,
1986-87 to 2005-06. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Newport News Public Schools. (2005). 2006-2011 Local Plan for the Education of
the Gifted. Retrieved from http://sbo.nn.k12.va.us/tag/index.html
Naglieri, J. A. (1997a). NNAT multilevel technical manual. San Antonio, TX: The
Psychological Corporation.
Naglieri, J. A., & Ford, D. Y. (2003). Addressing the underrepresentation of gifted
minority children using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted
Child Quarterly, 47, 155-160.
Oakes, J., & Guiton, G. (1995). Matchmaking: The dynamics of high school tracking
decision. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 3-33.
Ogbu, J.U. (1992). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Educational
Researcher, 21 (8), 5-14.
Ogbu, J. U., & Wilson, J., Jr. (1990). Mentoring minority youth: A framework.
72
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED354293).
Ogbu, J. U. (2003). Black American students in an affluent suburb: A study of
academic disengagement. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Lee, S. Y., Ngoi, M., & Nogi, D. (2004). Addressing the
achievement gap between minority and non-minority children by increasing
access to gifted programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28, 127-158.
Oritz, V.Z., & Gonzalez, A. (1991). Gifted Hispanic adolescents. In M. Bireley &
J.Genshaft (Eds.), Understanding the gifted adolescent: Educational,
developmental, and multicultural issues (p. 240-247). New York. Teachers
College Press.
Oritiz, S. O. (2002). Best practices in nondiscriminatory assessment. In A. Thomas
& J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology IV (pp. 1321-1336).
Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
Passow, A. & Frasier, M.M. (1996) Toward improving identification of talent
potential among minority and disadvantaged students. Roeper Review, 18,
202-208.
Patton, J.M., Prillaman, D., & VanTassel-Baska. J. (1990). The nature and extent of
programs for the disadvantaged gifted in the United States and territories.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 94-96.
Patton, J. & Day-Vines, N. (2003). Strategies to guide the training of special and
general education teachers. Williamsburg, VA: The College of William and
Mary, School of Education.
Peterson, J.S., & Margolin, L. (1997). Naming gifted children: An example of
unintended reproduction. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 82-100.
Plucker, J.A., & Callahan, C.M., & Tomchin, E. M. (1996). Wherefore art thou,
73
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
multiple intelligence? Alternative assessments for identifying talent in
ethnically diverse and low income students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40(2),
81-90.
Pulaski County Special School District School Board. (1992). Pulaski County
Special School District desegregation plan. Pulaski County, AR: Author.
Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (2004). Manual for Raven’s Progressive
Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt.
Reid, C., & Romanoff, B. (1997). Using multiple intelligence theory to identify
gifted children. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 71-74.
Reis, S. M., & Small, M. (2005). The varied and unique characteristics exhibited
by diverse gifted and talented learners. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.),
Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (pp. 3-32). Waco, TX:
Prufrock.
Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A
comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT:
Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-toguide for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative
Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (n.d.) The schoolwide enrichment model¹ executive
summary. Retrieved from University of Connecticut, Neag Center for Gifted
Education and Talent Development website:
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semexec.html
Rimm, S.B. (1976). GIFT: Group inventory for finding creative talent.
Watermelon, WI: Educational Assessment Service.
74
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Robinson, N. M., Reis, S. M., Neihart, M., & Moon, S. M. (2001). Emotional
issues facing gifted and talented students: What have we learned and what
should we do now? In M. Neihart, S.M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S.M. Moon
(Eds.), Social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know?
(pp. 267-289). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational
reform to close the black-white achievement gap. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Sarouphim, K. (1999). Discover: A promising alternative assessment for the
identification of Gifted Minorities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(4), 244-251.
Sattler, J. (1992). Assessment of children (Rev. 3rd ed.). San Diego, CA: Author.
Schwiebert, V. L. (2000). Mentoring: Creating connected, empowered
relationships. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED437586)
Scruggs, T. E., & Cohn, S. J. (1983). A university-based summer program for a
highly able but poorly achieving Indian child. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27, 9093.
Silverman, L.K. (Ed). (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver: Love.
Smith, J., LeRose, B., & Clasen, R.E. (1991). Underrepresentation of minority
students in gifted programs: Yes! It matters. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 81-83.
Smith, L. & Puttcamp, C. (2005). Discovering Treasures: One district’s effort to
identify underrepresented gifted students. Retrieved from the Davidson
Institute for Talented Development website :
http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10463.aspx
Solomon, A. O. (1974). Analysis of creative thinking of disadvantaged children.
Journal of Creative Behavior, 8, 293-295.
75
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
Spring, J. (2010). American education. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Sternberg, R. S. (2000). Identifying and developing creative giftedness. Roeper
Review, 23, 60-64.
Sternberg, R. S. (2007). Cultural concepts of giftedness. Roeper Review, 29(3),
160-165.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity
and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
Steele, C. M. (2003). Stereotype threat and African –American student achievement.
In T. Perry, C. Steele, & A.G. Hilliard, Ⅲ (Eds.), Young, gifted, and Black:
Promoting high achievement among African-American students (pp. 109-130).
Boston: Beacon.
Steinberg, L., Dornbusch, S.M., & Brown, B.B. (1992). Ethnic differences in
adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologist,
47, 723-729.
Sue, D., & Sue, D. (2003). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and Practice
(4th ed.). New York: John Wiley.
Swenson, J.E. (1978). Teacher-assessment of creative behavior in disadvantaged
children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 338-43.
Tatum, B. (1997). “Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?”
and other conversation about race. New York: Basic Books.
The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. (n. d.). The national
research center on the gifted and talented. Retrieved from University of
Connecticut: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/
The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. (n. d.). Uconn mentor
connection 2011. Retrieved from University of Connecticut:
76
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/
The Times-Union. (1999, November 11). Desegregation arguments at a glance.
The Florida Times-Union. Retrieved from http://jacksonville.com/tuonline/stories/111199/met_1208345.html
Thomas, A., Hertzig, I., & Fernandez, P. (1971). Examiner effect in IQ testing of
Puerto Rican working –class children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
41(5), 809-821.
Tonemah, S. (1991). Gifted and talented American Indian and Alaska Native
Students. Indian Nations at Risk Task Force Commission Papers. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly?: A philosophy of creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2007). Healthy food: Healthy communities.
Retrieved from
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/newroom/news/2007news/cfp_report.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (1993). Federal Definition of Giftedness. Washington,
DC: Government Printing Office.
U. S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (2002). Elementary and
secondary school civil rights survey. Washington, DC: Author.
Villarreal, C., A. (2005). An analysis of the reliability and validity of the Naglieri
nonverbal ability test (NNAT) with English language learner (ELL) Mexican
American children. (Dissertation, Texas A& M University). Retrieved from:
http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/3850/etd-tamu-2005ASPSYvillarr.pdf?sequence=1
Weinstein, R. S., Gregory, A., & Strambler, M. J. (2004). Intractable self-fulfilling
77
THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS
prophecies fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education. American
Psychologist, 59, 511-520.
Weiss, H., Mayer, E., Kreider, H., Vaughan, M., Dearing, E., Hencke, R., & Piano, K.
(2003). Making it work: Low-income working mothers’ involvement in their
children’s education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 879-901.
Wenner, G. (2003). Comparing poor, minority elementary students’ interest and
background in science with that of their White, affluent peers. Urban Education,
38(2), 153-172.
Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools. (2007). 2005-2010 Local Plan for
the Education of the Gifted. Retrieved from
http://www.wjcc.k12.va.us/content/programs/gifteded/index.shtml
Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools. (2007). Emerging Scholars.
Retrieved from
http://www.wjcc.k12.va.us/content/programs/gifteded/index.shtml
Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Woods, S.B., & Achey, V.H. (1990). Successful identification of gifted racial/ethnic
group students without changing classification requirements. Roeper Review, 13,
21-26.