By Xinyi Zhang
Director of Diversity and Equity at Harvard Alumni for Education, Boston Chapter
In November 2020, the Harvard Club of Dallas sponsored a virtual event, also supported by Harvard Alumni for Education, titled Equity of Advanced Learning Opportunities: Improving Diversity and Enacting Justice in Public Education Gifted and Talented Programming and Services. Around 50 people attended the event.
A panel of Texas-based experts discussed the definition, history and impact of Gifted and Talented Education (GT) programs and services. While the definition of "gifted and talented" and legal requirements vary from state to state, in general, GT programs involve research-based curricula and instruction needed by students with above-level ability in order to achieve their full potential. Speakers shared research on underrepresentation of Black and Latinx students in GT programs and the solutions to improve the status quo. It is essential for educators, researchers, community leaders, and policy makers to achieve educational equity for all students.
Emily Villamar-Robbins, HLS ‘03, moderated the discussion. Emily is a parent of two GT-identified public school students and a volunteer for local and state organizations supporting public education and GT education. The panelists included Dr. Kristina Henry Collins, core faculty for Talent Development at Texas State University, Dr. Fred A. Bonner II, Professor and Endowed Chair of Educational Leadership and Counseling in the Whitlowe R. Green College of Education at Prairie View A&M University, Dr. Todd Kettler, Associate Professor in the Department of Educational Psychology in the School of Education at Baylor University, and Dr. Jaret Hodges, Assistant Professor of Gifted Education at the University of North Texas. More information about the panelists can be found here.
Dr. Todd Kettler first introduced the definition of gifted education and the reasons why gifted programs are critical for equity in Texas public schools. A strong gifted education program has four elements: grouping, the use of acceleration, an established curriculum, and measurable goals and outcomes. Dr. Kettler suggested that the reasons some schools do not have these four elements are due to excessive local control and minimal accountability. Dr. Fred A. Bonner II added that it is important to look at the context (people, places, situations) when examining what it means to have equity in gifted programs in both rural and urban areas.
Next round of questions and discussion focused on underrepresentation in gifted programs. Black and Latinx students are underrepresented in many gifted programs in Texas and across the country. The panelists shared with the audience the causes of this problem and its long-term impact on the students that miss out on these educational opportunities. Dr. Kristina Henry Collins offered Frasier’s “4 As” to explain the overwhelming barriers: Attitude (who gets to be gifted?), Access (who knows about these opportunities, and to what extent are they available?), Assessment (are evaluation tools designed to “see” them?), and Accommodation (is programming culturally responsive?). Dr. Bonner argued that this problem is not going to be solved if we do not examine the systemic pipeline between PreK-12 education and higher education, and he explained the importance of bridging the gap between PreK-12 and post-secondary education.
At the end, the panelists shared their thoughts surrounding the solutions of inequity in GT programs. Dr. Collins emphasized the importance of framing the work before starting the work. First, we need to understand that giftedness is a social construct just like race. Next, we need to understand the differences between diversity, inclusion, equity, and justice, and what each word means for social action. The third step is reframing and differentiating between the terms discrimination and racism. As we engage in anti-racism work, we need to examine the historical positions of racialized groups in America that have been historically marginalized. Dr. Hodges shared some advocacy steps to make changes. He stressed the importance of individual advocacy for state-level changes through face to face meetings with state representatives, senators, and members of their staff. He suggested that parents share their stories as parents, and that they share the personal impact of a policy on themselves, on their children, and on their community. Another way is to be involved locally. He recommended that parents go to their school board meetings and invite other parents to go together as a group.
“Texas policy right now – and it has for 30 years – defines gifted students as those who are performing at a remarkably high level, as well as those who show the potential for performing at a remarkably high level,” Dr. Kettler said. “Most school districts’ identification systems exclusively focus on the performing side, not the potential side… the students who are already performing more often are performing because of educational opportunity, which is tightly associated with socioeconomic status… you can come up with ways to look for potential. That is different than looking for performance... even if we just got it to be 50-50, half and half, we would make drastic improvements.”
The author wants to thank Emily Villamar-Robbins for additional information shared.
