Identifying gifted and talented students: The focus of identification is to provide programming and services in which students' specific learning needs and potential are appropriately addressed and met. Instructional adaptation: An adjustment or modification to instruction enabling a student who is gifted and talented to participate in, benefit from, and demonstrate knowledge and application of the New Jersey Student Learning Standards in one or more content areas at the instructional level of the student, not just the student’s grade level. This also applies to students who are gifted with ADHD or gifted with autism” (New Jersey Association for Gifted Children, Multiple measures: “Multiple measures" refers to the use of multiple indicators and sources of evidence of student assessment, of varying kinds, gathered at multiple points in time. Some examples might include but are not limited to: achievement test scores ability assessments intelligence testing, student performance or products, talent portfolios, and parent, student, and/or teacher observations and recommendations. These students may also be referred to as having dual exceptionalities or as being gifted with learning disabilities (GT/LD). Twice-exceptional (2E) students: A twice-exceptional (2E) student is defined as “a student who is both gifted and a student with a disability. Missing students come from two sources: Schools in which students have no access to identification (schools that do not identify students) and schools in which some groups of students are under-identified.Gifted and talented student: The “ Strengthening Gifted and Talented Education Act” defines a gifted and talented student as a “student who possesses or demonstrates a high level of ability in one or more content areas when compared to their chronological peers in the school district and who require modifications of their educational program if they are to achieve in accordance with their capabilities. ” On the percentages identified in each state on average (lower boundary) and at the higher rate of identification in Non-Title I schools (upper boundary). We define missingness as students who could/should have been identified, based We refer to RIs greater than 1.00 as “well-represented” rather than “over-represented.” MISSINGNESSĪn area not found in previous reports that demonstrates gifted identification trends is missingness. A RI of 1.00 indicates perfect proportional representation. Equity is defined as having an RI of at least 0.80. EQUITYĮquity in gifted identification was examined using representation indices (RI), which are simply the percentage of a group identified as gifted divided by its percentage in the general population. This is a decrease from 2000 of 6% and 4%, respectively. Nationally, in 2015–2016 67.38% of students had such access and these students attended 55.58% of schools in the country. ACCESSĪccess is defined as attending a school that identifies youth with gifts and talents. Only 2 states have no language, mandate, or funding.
Of the remaining 13 states with no laws, 11 have language, with 4 of those having partial funding. Of those 30 states, 6 have no funding and 4 are fully funded. Most states have laws concerning gifted education (N=38) however, laws vary widely with some only having language requiring identification (N=7) but not services, and some requiring identification and services (N=30). Specifically, we examined these areas nationally, and by state across schools for Non-Title I and Title I schools, by Locale (i.e., City, Suburb, Town, Rural), and by Race (i.e., American Indian/Alaska Native American Alaska Native Asian Black Latinx Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Two or More Races and White) LAWS This project investigated laws, access, equity, and missingness related to gifted education identification as reported biennially to the federal government Office of Civil Rights by all public schools in 2000, 2011–2012, 2013–14, and 2015–16. Other scholars in the field of gifted education work to understand and solve inequity and some continue to defend inequity as it exists. Because of inequity in identification and services, many scholars and practitioners outside the field of gifted education raise concerns about racism, classism, and elitism within the field. This report seeks to refine what is known about underrepresentation in gifted education by conducting more detailedĪnalyses than have previously been done. Additional literature exists concerning gifted students in locales including city, suburban, town, and rural school settings. Much has been written about underrepresentation by income and race in gifted education during the past 40 years. Laws, access, equity, and missingness across the country by locale, Title I school status, and race
0 kommentar(er)
