Stop Eliminating Gifted Programs and Calling It ‘Equity’

The case for expanding opportunities for brilliant Black and brown children.

by Colin Seale

for Teach for America

I often get the side-eye when I mention gifted education and equity in the same sentence. After all, gifted programs have a well-deserved reputation for concentrating resources on already-privileged students, and students of color are significantly underrepresented.

So before I dive into my case for expanding—rather than eliminating—gifted education programs, I want to lay a brief foundation for how to think through this issue. Here is a simple, three-part premise to frame this conversation:

  1. All students have gifts and talents.
  2. Some, but not all, students are academically gifted and talented.
  3. The current population of students we identify as academically gifted and talented is unacceptably whiter and wealthier than the actual student population of academically gifted and talented students should be.

I do not anticipate much disagreement with my first point about all students having unique gifts and talents. Classroom teachers would not dispute my second point about the existence of out-of-this-world brilliant students who are rarely challenged by the content and instruction delivered in the standard classroom environment. Whether we choose to meet or even acknowledge these students’ needs, however, often depends on our comfort level with labeling children based on their advanced academic needs—an inconsistent objection given all the ways public education sorts and labels children in just about every other context.

And my last point is indisputable. Advocates and experts have highlighted the stubbornly persistent equity issues in gifted education for decades. Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores. Black, Latinx, and Native American students are far less likely to attend a school that even offers a gifted program. These are just some of the issues with which the gifted education field must grapple.

It is therefore not surprising that school system leaders prioritizing equity would want to do something about the inequities in gifted education. My concern is that more and more of these leaders are doing the wrong thing. From Anchorage to Boston, school systems are making the decision to contract or eliminate their gifted education and advanced academic offerings.

 

Keep reading at Teach for America

Ready to request a quote for our award-winning curriculum and/or professional development?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *