Racial and Ethnic Representation in Gifted Programs

122 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Group-Specific Norms and Teacher-Rating Scales (2012, background): “…identification, measurement, underrepresentation The underidentification and resulting underrepresentation of students from certain racial, ethnic, and cultural groups in gifted and talented programs have been well documented since the 1970s (Donovan & Cross, 2002; Yoon & Gentry, 2009).”
Who Gets Served in Gifted Education? Demographic Representation and a Call for Action (2019, background): “Although it is difficult to evaluate changes in state-level representation rates, a few state-level comparisons between data reported in Yoon and Gentry (2009) and the 2016 data are worth mentioning.”
A Meta-Analysis of Gifted and Talented Identification Practices (2018, methodology): “This supports previous findings that Black and Hispanic students continue being largely underidentified and underrepresented in gifted programs in the United States for decades (Daniels, 1998; Erwin & Worrell, 2012; D. Ford, 2014; Yoon & Gentry, 2009).”
Disentangling the Roles of Institutional and Individual Poverty in the Identification of Gifted Students (2018, background): “…such as systematically lower expectations for various subgroups of students (Jussim & Eccles, 1992; Jussim et al., 1996; Tenenbaum & Ruck, 2007) or the values that teachers hold (Yoon & Gentry, 2009) may be at play, though our observational data do not allow us to investigate such factors directly.”