Identifying Discourses About Gifted English Learners for Equitable Identification (original) (raw)

Proceedings of the 2021 AERA Annual Meeting

Gifted students are present in every population of students in "all levels of society regardless of sex, race, socioeconomic , or ethnic origin" (Brown, 1997, p. 159), including diverse ethnic groups (Adler, 1967; U.S. Department of Education: Office for Civil Rights [OCR], 2014a). The federal government has asserted that education of gifted and talented learners is needed to benefit "students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities" (No Child Left Behind [NCLB], 2001, p. 535). However, identifying students as gifted and providing accompanying services is left to the discretion of individual states with some states not requiring gifted identification or services and with others offering one or both (National Association for Gifted Children & Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted [NAGC & CSDPG], 2015). Within this disparity of gifted identification among states is the additional challenge of equitable identification of underserved populations of gifted learners, including students of color, children from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, and students with limited English language (Callahan, 2005; Plucker & Callahan, 2014). Statement of Problem Of all underserved populations of gifted learners, English learners (ELs) are the least likely to be commensurately identified for gifted services (Callahan, 2005; Matthews, 2014). This is of concern as ELs are the fastest growing population of learners in the United States (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2013). So substantial and pervasive is the issue of underidentification and underrepresentation for gifted ELs, the U.S. Department of Program Plans Districts were required to produce comprehensive gifted education program plans for 2012-2016. Program plans included all elements in sections 12.02(2)(a) through 12.02(2)(l) of the ESEA rules for communication, definition, identification, programming, student accountability and accreditation, student accountability and program evaluation, personnel, budget, record keeping, early access, and dispute resolution. Additionally, program plans included descriptions of what already existed in the district as well as target/s for improvement (Colorado Board of Education, 2015). Stakeholders All administrators, teachers, parents, and students involved in the education and development of gifted and talented children (CDEOGE, 2015, p. 593). Underrepresented Populations. "Underrepresented or Underserved Populations-Those populations within a school/district that are not proportionately represented among the learners provided with accommodations for their giftedness. Traditionally underserved populations include low socioeconomic, English language learners, and minority groups" (CDEOGE, 2012, p. 594). Universal Screening Universal screening provides baseline data and recognizes strengths of high-and low-performing students. From the Guidelines document This data becomes part of a body of evidence that may lead to identification or determine a need for additional assessment before formal identification occurs. Examples of universal screening tools include cognitive and achievement tests or behavioral observations. These screenings may identify a need for early supports and services, prior to formal identification, especially for underrepresented student groups. (CDEOGE,