User:Callitullis/sandbox

This is a user sandbox of Callitullis. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the place where you work on your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. Visit your Dashboard course page and follow the links for your assigned article in the My Articles section. Get Help

This is the user sandbox of Callitullis. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here. Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

Inequalities and Critiques

Academic acceleration and gifted programs more broadly face critique for significant and consistent under-representation of minority students - particularly students of African American and Latinx decent. In 2009, African Americans comprised 16.7% of students in general education but only 9.9% of students in gifted programs, and Latinx students 22.3% of general education but only 15.4% of gifted programs.^[1] In a majority of gifted programs, the first step is referral from a teacher. However few teachers are trained in identification and thus rely on academic metrics, a metric which is biased towards White students due to systemic inequities in intelligence assessment.^[2] A significant majority of states use some form of standardized or aptitude test. African American, Latinx and Indigenous students consistently perform lower on these exams due to a variety of cultural and institutional reasons.^[3]

Numerous potential solutions have been proposed and tried with varying degrees of success and continuation. Implicit biases and cultural differences contribute to the mis-categorization or oversight of African American, Latinx and other students of color.^[4] Teacher training in racial biases and cultural identification can lessen this discrepancy. Furthermore, universal testing and screening of students raises the representation of minority students but can face significant resource constraints.^[5] However, theories of multiple intelligence have also now led to calls for removal of IQ tests as a standard metric of giftedness. IQ tests prioritize a set binary of intelligence factors which often discounts experiential and contextual expressions. ^[6] Attempts to lessen racial inequality in programs of academic acceleration and gifted education continue in experiments across the United States.

1. Ford, Donna Y. (2014-07-03). "Segregation and the Underrepresentation of Blacks and Hispanics in Gifted Education: Social Inequality and Deficit Paradigms". Roeper Review. 36 (3): 143–154. doi:10.1080/02783193.2014.919563. ISSN 0278-3193.
2. Forsbach, Terri; Pierce, Nicole (April 23, 1999). "Factors Related to the Identification of Minority Gifted Students" (PDF). American Education Research Association.
3. Ford, Donna Y. (April 1, 1998). "The Underrepresentation of Minority Students in Gifted Education: Problems and Promises in Recruitment and Retention". The Journal of Special Education. Vol 32, Issue 1. {{cite journal}}: |volume= has extra text (help)
4. Frasier, Mary M.; Passow, A. Harry; Garcia, Jaime H. (1995). A Review of Assessment Issues in Gifted Education and Their Implications for Identifying Gifted Minority Students. DIANE Publishing. pp. 1–32.
5. Card, David; Giuliano, Laura. "Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
6. Ford, Donna Y.; Webb, Karen S. "Desegregation of Gifted Educational Programs: The Impact of Brown on Underachieving Children of Color". The Journal of Negro Education.