The Relationship of Gifted Program Enrollment to Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and SES.

Abstract

Disproportionalities in gifted and talentedenrollment exist among individuals regardless ofrace/ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic status(SES). Inequities are most pronounced for/in caseswhere race/ethnicity and SES are factors. Todiscern why specific student groups benefit fromgifted program access, while others do not, a cross-sectional observational design was applied toextant data from a large school district thatincluded both rural and urban schools.Proportional distribution among race/ethnicity,gender, and SES was evaluated using prevalencerates and a one-sample z test of proportions.Results showed that, while disproportionalitiesexisted across all variables, student racial groupsexhibited the most disproportional distribution.These findings indicate that issues drivingdisproportionality in gifted education go deeperthan acknowledged by previous arguments. Historicand current conceptualizations of giftedness rest ona culture-bound construct that perpetuatesdisproportionate representation of student groups.Gifted measures and assessments of intellect arebiased, excluding some while benefiting others, andthus gifted identification procedures andassessments warrant heightened scrutiny.

A Revised GTCrit Framework: A Broadened Critical Lens for Gifted and Advanced Education Settings

“…Thus far, the use of CRT in gifted education research has been limited. Much of the gifted education inequity literature summarized in the above "Systemic Issues Surrounding Gifted and Talented Education" section employed CRT in the context of gifted education research (Anderson, 2020;Barnes, 2022;Ferrell & Black, 2019;Henfield et al, 2008;List & Dykeman, 2019;Montoya et al, 2016;Savick, 2009;Yohannan et al, 2021). Frequently, equity-minded gifted education researchers refer to concepts associated with CRT (such as systemic racism and the need for social justice), but they do not explicitly name it as a framework of use (Ecker-Lyster & Niileksela, 2017;Peters, 2021;Wells & Plucker, 2022).…”

Marx’s Critique of Hegel: The Dialectic-Reconciliation Needs to Become Dialectic-Revolution

“…A pesar de estos desarrollos teóricos, actualmente parecen mantenerse las premisas del enfoque psicométrico que ignoran que las condiciones sociales y las oportunidades de aprendizaje dependen, entre otros aspectos, del sexo y el nivel en la escala socioeconómica (Silverman & Miller, 2009). Por ello, se puede observar a ciertos grupos de población históricamente infrarrepresentados en los programas para superdotados: estudiantes de sexo femenino (Anderson, 2020;Collins et al, 2020;List & Dykeman, 2019), de entornos en situación de desventaja socioeconómica (Hamilton et al, 2018;Olszewski-Kubilius & Thomson, 2010;Plucker & Peters, 2018), estudiantes que desconocen la lengua vehicular del centro educativo (Allen, 2017;Andreadis & Quinn, 2017) y/o de etnias diferentes (Allen, 2017;Ford et al, 2020;List & Dykeman, 2019;Olszewski-Kubilius et al, 2017;Peters et al, 2019;Siegle et al, 2016;Worrell et al, 2019).…”