Topic Two Part B: Identifying Giftedness In Schools

In 2015, I wrote about my personal philosophy of the gifted learner. I stated in my paper that, “Giftedness is not a one, set definition. The definition of gifted must encompass intellect, ability, creative talent as well as emotional awareness. It cannot be micro-managed and be a “one size fits all” definition” (Dauber, 2015). People, who are gifted, need differentiation and opportunity to express, demonstrate and show their giftedness. Educators must be able to provide opportunities for the gifted learner to express his/her abilities and/or talents. Gifted students learn differently and require special educational experiences in order to grow academically and achieve their highest potential. Therefore, the education field must be able to understand not only the cognitive side of a gifted learner but the affective or social/emotional aspects too.

One of the difficulties in identifying the needs of low-income students is the profound cultural barriers which exist that prevent their strengths and deficits from being identified. Children from low-income homes frequently have poorer vocabularies and a weaker basis of the type of knowledge that is frequently considered 'intelligence' on most forms of assessment. A low-income child's IQ may be high, even though he lacks a framework of accepted middle-class knowledge. "In January 2003, the National Academy of Sciences released a report on the seeming overrepresentation of minorities in special education and underrepresentation of those students in gifted education. The NRC reported that, nationwide, 7.47 percent of all white students and 9.9 percent of Asian students are placed in gifted programs. Meanwhile, 3.04 percent of African-American students, 3.57 percent of Hispanic students, and 4.86 percent of American Indian students are classified as gifted" (GT-minority identification, 2003, ERIC Clearinghouse). The discrepancy, the NAS believed, could not be solely explained by talent alone but was at least partially rooted in the methods of identifying students labeled as gifted. Biases in standardized and other tests identifying student strengths, combined with prejudices, however unintentional, amongst educators and administrators lead to under-identification of the gifted

gifted students within those states, and are not consistent across the United States. “Seven states

Gifted students should be provided advanced opportunities to be challenged, to experience both success and growth, to develop higher level study, creativity, and productivity. To develop their interests and talents their individual characteristics, needs, learning rates, motivations for learning, cognitive abilities, and interests must be taken into account. Differentiation can be included in the curriculum by incorporating acceleration, complexity, depth, challenge, and creativity. Students can also be given fewer tasks to master a standard, use multiple resources and higher-level skills, conduct research, develop products, make cross-disciplinary

As a principal I find the limitations to this program are within the scope and sequence. Although separated by grade level, there is no in-depth research of a subject. Critical thinking is not of the highest level; critical thinking is that of evaluation and not of creating. Another concern is that the scope and sequence is not detail and concise with project and research expectations. The way the current scope and sequence is written it leaves the teacher with the understanding that projects are optional and can be completed at any Bloom's level. I argue that if a student is nominated and invited to be in the Gifted and Talented Program their work needs to exceed that of their peers. Class work as well as research projects must meet a higher Depth of Knowledge (DOK).

“Gifted” and “remedial” are two very common labels that we see in the education system. Both,

Using teachers to screen for potential gifted students gives a basis for more formal testing of the students. However, the district must first define their own requirements for a gifted program. Primarily, a higher than average IQ score, general good grades, leadership abilities, and creative abilities should be considered when looking to identify gifted students. While all of these characteristics are important, it is also important to note that students may not possess all of them, and may only have a gifted talent in one specific area of study. When a teacher suspects giftedness, they should refer the student to the guidance counselor or school psychologist, who can then set up a formal assessment to determine if the student has enough of the characteristics to qualify as gifted by the state. After students have been identified, it is then important to secure a GIEP (Gifted Individual Education Plan) and make greater opportunities available. However, as mentioned above, the first step is to use the tools described above to identify students in need of the gifted

In the article, the term “gifted” is a very precise, yet very broad; it is more than a number on an IQ test, hence is termed by the U.S Department of Education as children and youth with outstanding talents and accomplishments, in comparison to others of their age, experience of the environment.

freedom to explore and develop ideas. Students labelled as ‘gifted’ should not repeat what they have learned but stimulated to develop new ideas, through investigating, generalising and making connections. (Stepanek, 1999). Students who are not stretched and challenged enough will lose the interest and motivation and though will not make the expected progress. One reason could be due to lack of subject knowledge of the teachers. If teachers do not have knowledge of the subject themselves how are they going to be able to stretch and challenge their learners?

Simply because the school system failed to recognize this student, and it’s not only a few percentage of students, but a vast amount of students who fall into this category. Instead, we should issue something like an exam that places students into a classroom similar to their abilities so that they can learn at the same pace, but still reach a quality education standard that the other students who classify as advanced by the end of the year. A student categorized as gifted often opts out of learning in the classroom because of the slow pace of the class, due to the lack of challenge in the classroom.

2. The important nature of multiple learning environments for gifted students. This includes creating safe, inclusive, and culturally responsive environments for all students. These environments provide the framework for a continuum of services that respond to individual’s gifts, talents,

Though there were many interviews ranging from elementary to high school teachers who teach gifted children, I chose to reflect on the elementary teacher. I thought this information was the most beneficial to me since I am in an elementary school. The elementary gifted teacher gave me a lot of insight about many of my students and what to expect in their future. The gifted program in the elementary school is from first through fifth grades. Many students are not tested in kindergarten because they want to make sure the giftedness is truly there not just high achieving tendencies. Some students may test at the end of their kindergarten year, but they do not start being served in the gifted program until first grade.

This challenge has proven to be easier said than done, and its solution varies from state to state. For the purpose of this paper, the state of Delaware’s method will suffice. Delaware uses a combination of standardized assessments and teacher nominations in order to suss these children out (Hansen 9). While the state does not promote one method over the other, the Legislative Task Force For Gifted and Talented Education does claim that a physical, tangible measure of intelligence, such as a standardardized assessment score, may be a more concrete identifier (Hansen 9). However, as any high schooler who didn’t score as highly as they had hoped on the SAT can attest to, standardized tests can’t measure everything, and this is why administrators must take additional information into account, such as class performance and recommendations, to determine who is gifted and who is

Students who are gifted and/or talented may often be unidentified; students with learning disabilities may also go unidentified (Al-Hroub, 2013). The characteristics for both of these populations of students are taught in some general education courses that teacher candidates, also known as pre-service teachers, choose to study. Even with training, teachers may have difficulty identifying either students with disabilities or who are gifted/talented (g/t) as well as referring them for the appropriate special programs (Bailey & Rose, 2011). It is easy to understand the possible frustration for both students and teachers when a student has a disability and is g/t, in other words the student is twice-exceptional. Twice-exceptionality has only been

2. The study does discuss the instrument?s applicability for detecting giftedness in kids while comparing the effectiveness of the Brigance K&1 screen to that of the K-ABC test, which is being used to recognize cognitive leanings in schoolchildren. The accuracy of the Brigance K&1 screen has been rated at the above average level.