Racial and Ethnic Representation in Gifted Programs

Abstract

The Elementary and Secondary School Survey data and Civil Rights Data Collection of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) were analyzed to describe the issue of overrepresentation of gifted Asian American students in gifted education programs in the United States. Nationally, Asian and Whites have been overrepresented in gifted education since 1978, whereas, students from other ethnic backgrounds, such as those from American Indian or Alaska Native, Hispanic, and African American groups, have been underrepresented with gradual increases in this underrepresentation since 1994. When the data were disaggregated by state for the period from 2002 to 2006, each racial and ethnic group displayed varied ranges of representation. Those varied distributions can be attributed to each state's unique demographic profile, varied definitions of giftedness, identification procedures, and identification policies. By focusing on Asian American students, this study addressed some difficulties that gifted Asian American students may face concerning the image of model minority and through the acculturation processes as immigrants or descendents of immigrants. Furthermore, this study suggests a need for disaggregated data collection and more research concerning gifted Asian American students from various ethnic Asian groups. Putting the Research to Use: Findings from this study highlight the need for carefully collected data in the field of gifted education concerning race and ethnicity of students in programs and provide the reader with a picture of both underrepresentation and overrepresentation of students by state and ethnic group. Attention needs to be paid to sub-groups within categories of race and ethnicity to understand representation. By considering the issue of Asian Americans and their overrepresentation, this research has raised awareness about factors, such as identification processes, acculturation, and academic motivation that might promote recognition of giftedness among some ethnic groups. Finally, this research offers readers with a new, multiple-year, current, analysis of the representation in gifted programs nationally and by state for racial/ethnic groups, an area of continued concern to those in the field of gifted education.

Equity and Excellence

“…Thus, before children even enter school, massive differences in OTL already exist. These early inequalities contribute to the observed score differences shown in Tables 1 to 4 and in the differential rates of identification as gifted reported by Yoon and Gentry (2009). Put differently, the underrepresentation observed in gifted identification rates is, in part, a symptom of larger societal inequality.…”

Using Above-Level Testing to Track Growth in Academic Achievement in Gifted Students

“…Lee, 2002), including in gifted education research (S.-Y. Lee & Olszewski-Kubilius, 2006;Olszewski-Kubilius & Lee, 2011;Yoon & Gentry, 2009). These inequalities increased as students in this study spent more time in the gifted magnet program.…”

The Impact of Race and Ethnicity on the Identification Process for Giftedness in Utah

“…Hispanic students were overrepresented in 1 state, evenly represented in gifted programs in 2 states, and underrepresented in 47 states, and Black students were evenly represented in 3 states and underrepresented in 47 states. Black students were not overrepresented in gifted programs in any state in 2006 (Yoon & Gentry, 2009). Yoon and Gentry (2009) also confirmed the prevailing wisdom regarding the overrepresentation of Asian American and White students in gifted programs in the United States (e.g., Carman & Taylor, 2010) compared to the proportions that these groups are found in the general school population.…”

“…Black students were not overrepresented in gifted programs in any state in 2006 (Yoon & Gentry, 2009). Yoon and Gentry (2009) also confirmed the prevailing wisdom regarding the overrepresentation of Asian American and White students in gifted programs in the United States (e.g., Carman & Taylor, 2010) compared to the proportions that these groups are found in the general school population. The researchers found that, in 2006, Asian Americans were disproportionately overidentified as gifted in 45 states and were proportionally identified as gifted in 5 states.…”

“…Yoon and Gentry (2009), in the most detailed published state-by-state analysis of the demographic composition of gifted programs at the state level, found that, in 2006, Native Americans were overrepresented in gifted programs in 2 states, evenly represented in 5 states, and underrepresented in 43 states. Hispanic students were overrepresented in 1 state, evenly represented in gifted programs in 2 states, and underrepresented in 47 states, and Black students were evenly represented in 3 states and underrepresented in 47 states.…”