Three special populations of gifted who have received significant attention in the last 20 years are those who come from low socioeconomic status (SES) families, English Language Learners (ELL), and those from culturally diverse backgrounds. This week we will be looking at the challenges associated with identifying these gifted students through traditional standardized testing. Alternative methods of identification are discussed with ideas for meeting the special needs of these populations.
Across the country, school districts continue to find it difficult to identify underrepresented gifted students from low socioeconomic status (SES) families, English Language Learners (ELL) abd those from culturally diverse backgrounds. While the national funding through Javits grants has produced some promising practices, a review of the data shows that these gifted students are still underrepresented and underserved in programs designed for gifted students. Why? The reasons have been compiled into three distinct categories:
- Lack of teacher knowledge of gifted characteristics displayed by these populations,
- Inadequate test instruments that are often normed on the majority populations, and
- A nationwide educational focus on the struggling students.
Barriers To The Identification
It has been established that teachers who have not been properly trained in identifying these special populations of gifted students often overlook these children completely. Once again the first barrier to identification may be the teacher who does not understand the culture, language, income, and environmental factors that impact low SES and ELL students.
As discussed in Week 2, student attractiveness, conduct, cumulative folder information, race/ethnicity, and social class were all related to teacher expectancies. From these types of research results comes the second barrier to the identification of gifted students from low SES and ELL backgrounds. Stereotypic notions based on socioeconomic status, race, and ethnicity usually compromise the teacher’s first impression. This obviously results in less challenge and opportunities for our potentially gifted low SES and ELL students to “show what they know.”
In the same survey discussed last week that was conducted by the University of Georgia, 750 teachers identified the following barriers to the identification of these potentially gifted students from low SES and ELL backgrounds. Bias in standardized testing was #1 and was addressed in Week 2. Additionally, the following barriers were identified:
- teachers’ inability to recognize potential giftedness
- students’ nonstandard English and English Language Learners's proficiency
- differences in language experiences
- lack of stimulating environment
- use of narrow screening/selection process
Let’s now take a look at these other barriers to the identification and programming of gifted students from low income and ELL backgrounds.
In the 1990’s the State of Florida determined that there were two distinct populations that were underrepresented that could be offered alternative criteria for eligibility to receive gifted services: those students from low SES families, and ELLs.
Let’s now take a look at these other barriers to the identification and programming of gifted students from low income and ELL backgrounds
Teachers’ uncertainty over what characteristics to look for has created a major barrier to the identification of low SES and ELL students who are gifted. Training is vital if this barrier is to be removed. The attributes presented in Week 1 should be very helpful to teachers in identifying potential giftedness.
Most districts start with a screening process. The screening stage consists of the nomination of students for testing. At the screening stage, a variety of data are used. For example, teachers, parents, peers, or a student may provide nominations to the principal or coordinator of the gifted program. Depending on the program, some standardized test scores may be used as a cutoff in determining who is nominated. For example, any one or a combination of the following might place a student into the nomination pool: an 85% ranking on an achievement test, two nominations, and a score of 115 on a group intelligence test.
Language Issues
Many researchers have studied the effect of nonstandard English and English Language Learners on the identification of giftedness. Some found that issues regarding the language abilities of minority and economically disadvantaged students frequently result in evaluations of them as incompetent students. Students with nonstandard speech are often rated as less competent and socially different from students with a more standard dialect. Opinions about dialect and English language proficiency may not only affect initial judgments about students’ abilities, it may also affect the way the students are grouped for instruction. Tests of communicative competence provide a much more comprehensive picture of students’ language abilities. When the focus is placed on listening for the richness of expression, the fluency, and elaboration of a story, and less focus is placed on the proper grammatical structure and high-level vocabulary, teachers are much more able to find potentially gifted students.
Lack Of Stimulating Environment
It has been speculated that low SES and ELL and families do not always have the resources available to support students' educational development. However, it is incorrect to assume that these families do not engage their children in supportive educational activities. It is also incorrect to assume that these families are not encouraging the intellectual development of their children. It may be that the educational support they are providing is different from what is more traditionally viewed as helping students acquire skills necessary for school. For example, a low SES family may put great emphasis 
on the child’s ability to solve problems around the house, to assist with cooking at an early age, interact with people on the telephone taking messages, etc. These may not show up as building educational skills when in fact the divergent thinking, the independence, the communication skills are all there. It’s vital that teachers get to know how parents view their support and encouragement of the development of their child’s intellectual skills .
Screening/Selection Process Too Narrow
This seems to be a barrier that many districts are addressing. In the 1990’s, the State of Florida gave their districts the opportunity to create and implement an alternative plan to determine eligibility for low SES and ELL students. This alternative plan would need to be submitted to the State for approval. It has become known as “Plan B.”