1THE 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,

2THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSpolicymakers, 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

3THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSunderrepresentation 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

4THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSthat 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

5THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSemploying 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.

6THE 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

7THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSused 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

8THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSrequire 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

9THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSliterature 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

10THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSto 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.

11THE 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

12THE 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 (WISC-IV)

(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

13THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSgiftedness 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

14THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSin 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

15THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSNative 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,

16THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSthe 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.

17THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSFrom 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

18THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSfactors. 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

19THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmaintained 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,

20THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSbecause 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

21THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSrespectively. 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-

22THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSAmbrosetti, 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

23THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSAmerican 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,

24THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmany teachers responded that administrators or academic advisors did not urge them

to pursue their careers in gifted education. However, as King (1994) or Ladson-

Billings (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 African-

American, 61 third-generation Mexican-American, and 40 third-generation American-

born 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

25THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSaffected 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

26THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSgroups. 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

27THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSother 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

28THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSdevelopment. 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 non-

stereotyped 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.

29THE 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

30THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTShistorical 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

31THE 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.

32THE 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

33THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSthe 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

34THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTShave 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.

35THE 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-

36THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSsolving 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

37THE 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

38THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSlack 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

39THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmeasures 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).

40THE 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

41THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSconsider 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

42THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSprograms 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

43THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmay end up missing opportunities or being perplexed by their intelligently wrong

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.

44THE 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

45THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSinvestigation 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

46THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmultiple 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

47THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSprograms.

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,

48THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSstudents 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

49THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSsuccessful 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’

50THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSimagination and motivated them to contribute to their school, community, and world.

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

51THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSstudents from participating in gifted programs. There was a narrow identification of

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 peer-

pressure. 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

52THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSCenter, n. d.). Also, the Euclid Avenue Gifted/High Ability Magnet employed diverse

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).

53THE 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

54THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSreverse underidentification of minority students? (3) What model programs exist to

reduce the imbalance?

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

55THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmethods can negatively influenced children who are culturally and linguistically

different or are more used to oral and aural instruments. In addition, preconceived

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,

56THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSracism and segregation that African American students still perceived make them

choose lower academic level classes to avoid advanced classes populated with White

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

57THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSpercentage 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, & 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.

58THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSAdditionally, the TREASURES’s identification process used a case study model

because the model contributes to finding students’ authentic potential learning

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

59THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSmore minority students’ giftedness (Baldwin, 2002).

Also, teachers can contribute to including more minority learners into gifted

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)

60THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSdescribe, gifted classes should have the following culturally responsive factors to stay

in and keep up with the gifted programs: culturally relevant instruction, the

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

61THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSabout gifted education because they can contribute to reversing minority parents’

negative attitudes toward gifted education (Smith & Puttcamp, 2005). The attitude

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

62THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSminority students’ readiness, nurture their potential, and prepare them for catching up

with advanced content programs (Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008).

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.

63THE 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.

64THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTSBaldwin, A. Y. (1987). I’m Black but look at me, I am also gifted. Gifted Child

Quarterly, 31(4), 180-185.

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. 3-

49). 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

65THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(2), 131-145.

Brown, C.N. (1997). Legal issues and gifted education. Roeper Review, 19(3), 157-

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 problem-

solving 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

66THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

Policy Studies Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Cox, J., Daniel, N., & Boston, B. (1985). Educating able learners. Austin: University

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). GIFFI : Group inventory for finding interests. Ⅱ

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)

and : Instruments for identifying creative potential in junior and senior high Ⅰ Ⅱ

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

67THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

http://www.literacynet.org/lp/hperspectives/hispcult.html

Esters, I. G., Ittenback, R. F., & Han, K. (1997). Today’s IQ test: Are they really

better than their historical predecessors? School Psychology Review, 26, 211-

223.

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

68THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

Education of the Gifted, 23, 397-427.

Ford, D. Y., & Trotman, M.F. (2001). Teachers of gifted students: Suggested

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

69THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

exploration of the Pulaski County Special School District’s Advocacy Efforts.

Gifted Child Quarterly, 47 (1), 46-65.

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

70THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

Civil Rights Data related to LEP students. Washington, DC: U. S. Department

of Education, OELA.

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.

71THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally

relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159-165.

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.

72THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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.

(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

73THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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,

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-to-

guide 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

74THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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.

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, 90-

93.

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

75THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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.

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.

76THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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:

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/tu-online/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

77THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS

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-2005A-

SPSYvillarr.pdf?sequence=1

Weinstein, R. S., Gregory, A., & Strambler, M. J. (2004). Intractable self-fulfilling

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.

78THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF MINORITY STUDENTS