Inequitable Access to Gifted Education

Abstract

This study examined discrepancies in educational opportunity for gifted students at the program services level. School districts in the study (N = 1,029) varied in expenditures for gifted education and the allocation of faculty for gifted education. The relationships of variables representing funding and staffing gifted education and school contextual variables such as locale (city, suburban, town, rural) were examined. Pairwise comparisons among locales revealed effect sizes as high as 0.31 with respect to funding and staffing variables. Multiple regression analyses and bivariate correlations were examined to estimate the relative strength of the predictor variables on the funding and staffing variables. Data in this study indicated that locale, school size, and economic disadvantage were the strongest predictors of variance in funding and staffing gifted education programs. Rural schools, small schools, and schools with larger economically disadvantaged populations allocate proportionally less fiscal and human resources to gifted education services. Racial/ethnic diversity, property wealth, and overall expenditures per student accounted for relatively little of the variance in funding and staffing gifted programs.

Exploring Alignment in Gifted Education Program Policies and Practices

“…While Baker (2001a;2001b) and Kettler et al (2015) found variation in gifted education services by district/school size or available resources, other than the cases mentioned above, this was not the case in the sample states and districts in this study.…”

“…Recent research indicates that gifted services offered in districts and/or schools continue to vary relative to district/school size, as Kettler, Russell, and Puryear (2015) found that small rural school districts spend less money per student in gifted education, allocate a smaller proportion of their overall budget to gifted services, and allocate less money for faculty in gifted. Additionally, school size and locale were the strongest predictors of variance in funding and staffing across all contextual variables (Kettler et al, 2015).…”

“…likely have an influence on the quality of gifted education programming occurring in LEAs (Baker, 2001a;Kettler et al, 2015). I selected a sub-sample of districts based on the following criteria.…”

“…First, previous findings about practices in gifted education (e.g. Kettler et al, 2015) indicate the amount of funding available in any given school and/or district can influence the type and availability of gifted education services. The amount of funding available can influence key programming elements like the availability of staff for providing gifted education services, for example.…”

The influence of perfectionism on mental health in gifted and twice-exceptional students

“…Because schools are federally required to provide special education services to students with disabilities, yet gifted programming is dictated by state or district requirements, students may have uneven access to services simply based on where they attend school. In a study of Texas school districts, researchers found that rural schools, small schools, and schools with higher percentages of low-income students often provided students with fewer opportunities for gifted and talented education compared to schools in other areas (Kettler, Russell, & Puryear, 2015). Lack of resources for rural districts in particular is commonly noted as a concern for gifted students, as districts can be unwilling or unable to provide academic enrichment opportunities (Howley, Rhodes, & Beall, 2009).…”