Early twentieth‐century biological determinism and the classification of exceptional students

Chapter 4: Critical Race Theory and Education: History, Theory, and Implications

“…Some of the earliest studies with educational implications centered on the intellectual assessment and school achievement of African American and other ethnic minority students (Hilliard, 1979;Kamin, 1974;Madaus, 1994). This research legacy, referred to as the inferiority paradigm, is built on the belief that people of color are biologically and genetically inferior to Whites (Carter & Goodwin, 1994;Gould, 1981;Selden, 1994).6 The inferiority paradigm is characterized by its fluidity and dynamic nature, an ever-changing hegemonic discourse. However, despite its fluid nature, some scholars have attempted to describe elements of the inferiority paradigm.…”

“…However, by the turn of the 20th century the doctrine of "separate but equal" was the law of the land (Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896). The separate-but-equal doctrine reflected the prevailing social temperament, a belief in the inherent inferiority of African Americans that made it impossible for Whites to see themselves sharing public accommodations with Blacks (Bogle, 1989;Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857;Jefferson, 1954;Peters, 1982;Selden, 1994). African Americans in the South were required by law to use racially segregated schools, trains, streetcars, hotels, barbershops, restaurants, and other public accommodations.…”

An Investigation of Student Roles within Small, Racially Mixed Science Groups: A racial perspective

“…Race, the factor of interest in this study, is considered a diffuse characteristic and differs from local characteristics such that expectations of competence are not domain specific, but are widely held (Webster & Foschi, 1988). One example of an expectation that is not domain specific is the belief that African-Americans are inferior to European-Americans (Hernstein & Murray, 1994;Selden, 1994). In light of the historical and socio-political contexts of Black-White relations in the USA (Tate, 1997), race as a factor in influencing status in groups warrants exploration.…”

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

“…Many modern educators still ascribe to this biologically determined construct of giftedness (Martschenko, 2021;Mickelson, 2003;Selden, 1994), meaning they believe that giftedness is inherited-among those who belong to more privileged racial/ethnic groups or those who hold high levels of wealth. These eugenicist origins have likely influenced how many teachers see and serve giftedness in their classrooms (Mansfield, 2014), affecting how they sort students into leveled ability groups (Mickelson, 2003), refer students for advanced learning opportunities or special education services (Martschenko, 2021;Selden, 1994), make assumptions based on students' background and designated learning status, and set the level of expectations they hold of different students (Martschenko, 2021;Peterson, 2016).…”

“…Since we know that all those factors contribute to inequities in gifted education settings (Anderson, 2020;Bryan & Ford, 2014;Gordon & Nocon, 2008;Tyson, 2011), the framework might be bolstered with their inclusion. Novak's (2022b) framework addresses and incorporates concepts related to major systemic issues related to race highlighted in critical gifted education literature, such as how educators' deficit thinking prevents students of color from accessing gifted education (Martschenko, 2021;Selden, 1994), students internalize the fallacy that giftedness equates to whiteness (Staiger, 2004;Tyson, 2011), and problematic identification systems and programs reproduce capital for White students (Anderson, 2020;Ecker-Lyster & Niileksela, 2017;Savick, 2009;Staiger, 2004). At present, Novak's GTCrit does not incorporate ideas of cultural wealth (Ladson-Billings, 2006), which posit that historically marginalized communities have garnered special skills and knowledge by navigating oppressive systems.…”