Cross-cultural+Concerns+for+GATE


 * Cross-cultural and Socio-Economic Issues for GATE**
 * Luna Wong**

(ready for grading)

"Manifestation of characteristics associated with giftedness may be different in minority children, yet educators are seldom trained in identifying those behaviors in ways other than the way they are observed in the majority culture" M. Frasier.

"The major emphasis of the [Jacob Javits GATE Act] is on serving students traditionally underrepresented in gifted and talented programs, particularly economically disadvantaged, limited English proficient, and disabled students, to help reduce the serious gap in achievement among certain groups of students at the highest levels of achievement." //U.S. Dept. of Education// My interest in this topic is that the above statement remains a persistent problem and a major challenge for our moral imperative as educators to nurture each of our students to educational and personal excellence.


 * The Case is Made for Cultural Disparity In Gifted Education**

While testing is not necessarily the singular cardinal issue, most evaluations for special education and gate education invariably starts with testing. As this discussion of cultural concerns within GATE will move across various points, the issues raised in this article will provide an initial point for further treatment as we develop this wiki.

> > Some specialists say low performance is due to cultural deprivation, and a lack of referrals for GATE programs is the result of the educator's own "deficit thinking and stereotyping of diverse students" and implies an inferiority to dominant-culture students. Others believe that culture does impact test performance, however this is not indicative of intellectual inferiority. > > The same test for all culture groups, yet we see disparate impact on how the results are used with culturally diverse groups, such as to "underestimate their potential or over-pathologizing their symptoms."
 * What is the core debate over seemingly low performance on standardized tests and under-representation in gifted programs for culturally (racially, ethnicly, or linguistically) diverse students?
 * To what extent are tests valid? Is interpretation bias a convenient excuse, or is it real?

> > Culture-based concern: is there compelling evidence that culturally conditioned intellectual skills use by minorities and majority students are actually different? Are such differences considered in measurement procedures? Is test-taking strageties the same for all culture groups?
 * Cultural bias on I.Q. and standardized tests have been studied for decades; has it been corrected, or is it still a valid issue?

> what are some principles we can apply for equitable and culturally responsive GATE testing? > > __Culturally Sensitive Assumptions:__ > Assessment should be focused on student, not the test > The evaluator must have sufficient expertise to use the test as a component of a comprehensive assessment, and not rely primarily on the test > Intelligence testing is a sampling only, it is not exhaustive and complete > Tests measure under only fixed conditions and does not predict performance in other settings >
 * Getting past the debate - what we can do now to ensure all students have access:

**Socio-Economic Factors**
A four-study report on the achievement gap for underrepresented groups and found that poverty was as likely a characteristic in demographic disparity as cultural minority groups among GATE programs. If a child was both from a lower socio-economic class and identifies with most minority groups, their representation was even lower than if they possessed only one of these characteristics. Because initial identification is most often based on standardized assessments and IQ tests, the preponderance of students who score well on these tests, receive higher grades and qualify for Advanced Placement classes are White and upper-middle class. This question of what the effect social standing has on the recognition of giftedness for educational scholars has gone way back, even referencing the studies of Sir Francis Galton conducted in 1869, "eminence in mental work was 400 times more likely to be found among children of upper-class parents than of laborers." After many decades of concerted efforts of research and initiatives to close the socio-economic achievement gap among regular and identified gifted and talented learners, several theories have arisen as to why the same pattern of underachievement persists.

Often times, members of minority groups are subject to poverty, racism, and class bias. However, these issues are often considered correlational rather than explanatory and found other possible causes for the problem:

• Voluntary and involuntary minorities; descendants of African American slaves and Latino groups who faced direct ("primary")discriminatory practices and secondary cultural differences which includes a cultural reaction to dominant culture after a series of negative experiences, and perpetuated through generations. • Cultural inversion; this is described as avoidance of what minority groups have come to associate as White American behaviors. Some minority students may choose academically negative behaviors to prevent associating themselves to a White culture which their elders and peers may disdain. "Savage Inequalities" is a term the author refers made famous by Jonathan Kozol in proposing causes for this social and cutlrual gap in education and GATE programs in particular:
 * poor identification measures
 * student's lack of success on conventional assessments
 * a thin curriculum that fails to boost student achievement to reveal what students can accomplish
 * teachers who may be blinded by cultural, racial, and socioeconomic stereotypes.

This led to a proposition that perhaps the goals of gifted education can be integrated into traditional education without the need to identify a labeled grouped of "gifted" students. If not, then at least the procedures of identification must continue to strive for social and cultural inclusiveness and employ more open-ended and non-economically biased assessments. As a parallel effort, educators must work at diversifying and intensifying transitional services to chronically underserved groups of youth in order to close the academic acheivement gap.
 * The Promise of Cultural Inclusivity and Accommodation**

Students whose most comfortable language is not English, and who have not yet assimilated to American culture can become more successful GATE candidates and performers if the program embraced multi-cultural education to demonstrate the universality of concepts taught in many content standards. Simulations, role assumptions, debates and interviews allow students to infuse the values and perspectives of their own native cultures while fitting together the pieces of new and complex information they are processing.

Language transition efforts may be the key to success for second language learners who are identified with advanced talents in any area. This involves finding strategies to bridge access to the English language by establishing important content vocabulary, subject specialized knowledge through sophisticated and cognitively rigorous challenges. Conceptual portals which lead to multicultural methods might be drawing sociopolitical parallels, language structures, family life and world-wide graphic and performing arts.In this manner, acclerated language acquisition strategies would be integrated to enhance and support highly advanced learning activities.

One way to address cultural differences in the identification process is to ensure that all students are familiar with test instruction language and high frequency words used in test directions. If students do not understand the directions of the test, accommodations must be made to help students understand what is being asked of them. Minority students often hold multi-generational negative attitudes about high stakes test taking, and experience disproportionately high anxiety than majority students. One method to lower the documented increase in anxiety levels among culturally diverse test takers is an explanation of the purpose of the test and its focus more on providing information on how students learn, rather than on whether the student is GATE-worthy. A pep talk leading students to believe that they are indeed prepared and fully capable of doing well on intelligence and standardized tests has proven to increase test taking motivation and lower anxiety.

Rather than placing the greatest emphasis on a particular assessment, the use of multiple criteria and nontraditional measures figures prominently in many of the proposals to improve the identification and consequent representation of gifted students from minority populations. Use of authentic evaluation, porfolios, and performance assessments, and implementation of culture-specific checklists and rating scales have been suggested as providing more information to the proper identification of cultural diverse GATE candidates. Cultural minority students who exhibit one or more learning disabilities must be screened in even greater detail so as not to allow the disability to distract from or hide existing but as of yet undistinguished talent. Lastly, the regular and creative application of differentiated learning opportunities in all classrooms will help to allow students to fully manifest the extent of their gifts, especially when open-ended projects and freedom of learning options philosophies are apparent.


 * References**

Baldwin, M. Elizabeth. Culturally Diverse Students Who Are Gifted. //Exceptionality//; Jun2002, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p139-147.

Bicknell, Brenda. Gifted Students and the Role of Mathematics Competitions. //Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom//; Oct2008, Vol. 13 Issue 4, p16-20.

Callahan, Carolyn M. Identifying Gifted Students From Underrepresented Populations. //Theory Into Practice//; Spring2005, Vol. 44 Issue 2, p98-104.

Ford, D. Y. (2005, december 01). //Intelligence testing and cultural diversity: pitfalls and promises//. Retrieved from www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/winter05/winter052.html

Frasier, Mary M. A New Window for Looking at Gifted Children. //The Research Center on the Gifted and Talented;// Sep1995, No. RM95222.

Lockwood, Anne. An Agenda for the Future: C//losing the Achievement Gap for Underrepresented Groups in Gifted and Talented Education.// Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Apr2007.

Pierce, Rebecca L. Identification and Cultural Diversity. //Roeper Review//; Winter2007, Vol. 29 Issue 2, p113-118.

Nielsen, Elizabeth. Culturally Diverse Students Who Are Gifted. //Exceptionality//; Jun2002, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p93-1