Educators of gifted and talented students must be formally trained for homeplace to become a reality: Recommended theories and paradigms

ABSTRACT

Given the abysmal underrepresentation of Black and other minoritized students in gifted and talented programs, there is a need to help them to be more effective with recruitment and retention. In this article, we maintain that the notion of someplace is important in order for educators to reverse underrepresentation. To support them, we share relevant theories and paradigms.

Recently, we (Ford, Hines, et al., 2023) discussed the impact and importance of dispositions for becoming culturally competent—knowledgeable about and skilled to work effectively with gifted and talented (GATE) minoritized students. We focused on teachers and school counselors, and now bring this information to this special issue on homeplace (hooks, 1990). Specifically, we propose that several theories and paradigms must be in place dispositionally and informationally before homeplace can become a reality—a site of resistance in predominantly White institutions (PWIs) such as GATE. Also related to homeplace is the need for GATE educators to be advocates—allies, accomplices, and coconspirators (Jana, 2021) of Black students. Below, we begin this article with a rationale and the status of GATE demographically, followed by an overview of Jana’s ally, accomplice, coconspirator conceptual model. Then, several theories and paradigms to help educators become unwavering advocates are discussed, grounded in GATE being spaces where resistance to Black diversity is all too prevalent.

Connecting Black students’ GATE underrepresentation to educators’ dispositions

As 2 of the most authored scholars on Black students’ underrepresentation in GATE, we have been vigilant about collecting and reporting data on this abysmal representation problem. Every year that data is collected by the Office for Civil Rights, Black students are inequitably underrepresented in GATE programs. For example, in the 2017–2018 school year, Black students comprised 19% of U.S. schools, but only 10% of GATE (OCRdata.ed.gov). Throughout the years, their inequitably low representation hovers around 50–60%. We explain here and elsewhere that anti-Blackness among educators is a fundamental gatekeeper.

The majority of states rely on teacher referrals to screen and identify GATE students (Ford, 2013); annual State of the States reports by the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC; https://nagc.org/events/EventDetails.aspx?id=1723745&hhSearchTerms=%22state+and+state%22). Thus, if not referred for GATE screening and testing, students (frequently Blacks) have little to no probability of accessing GATE. Therefore, teacher dispositions undeniably matter; they serve as the fundamental barrier contributing to Black students’ unjustly low GATE representation. Using the term “discretion,” Grissom and Redding (2016) found in their study that the predominantly White teaching force still under-referred Black students who had the same family demographics, school performance (grades), and test scores as White students for GATE. Racial prejudice and discrimination are operating individually and systemically. Dispositions are willful/conscious beliefs and attitudes that include awareness, meaning intentional thoughts, behaviors, and language. Thus, educators and practitioners enter settings and situations with preconceived dispositions (beliefs and attitudes) that must be explored; that hinder homeplace and all that it encompasses per hooks, (1990) notion of homeplace.

The GATE field has been under heavy criticism and scrutiny, along with litigation (e.g., McFadden v. School District U-46, 2013) for the ongoing, pervasive, and inequitable underrepresentation of Black students. This is a national, state, and district crisis in which Black students are significantly and inequitably underrepresented in GATE (Ford, 2013). We encourage readers to examine national, state, and district demographics for multiple years for their locale; see OCR’s Civil Rights Data Collection (CRCD) (ocrdata.ed.gov).

Advocating for GATE Black students: Beyond allyship

To repeat, homeplace is impossible if educators are not advocates at the highest level(s) for their Black students. Per Jana (2021), allyship is the lowest level, accomplice is mid-level, and coconspirator is the highest level.

Allyship: The thinking and learning stage

An ally supports equal justice in theory (e.g., thoughts, prayers) but does not necessarily take action. Allies become agents of change when they speak up about racial injustices, especially in situations where people actively and openly disagree and/or are oblivious about justice and equity issues and problems. Poignantly, per Jana (2021), “ally privilege” is the ability to care about social justice issues without actually doing anything to disrupt it. Privileged allies frequently lack deep, authentic relationships with people in the demographics and issues they support.

Accomplice: The reactive response

Accomplices work actively and diligently to disrupt and dismantle systems of oppression using whatever access and means they have to help correct systemic bias. Noticeably, accomplices begin to use their privilege—unearned and earned—in service of justice. Some accomplices do this work with little or no relationships with colleagues of color.

Co-conspirator: The proactive phase

Coconspirators collaborate with the individuals and communities they support. They search for and develop significant relationships with those they support (Jana, 2021). They do not co-opt the problem(s) at hand; instead, they respect the work already underway and offer substantive support. Coconspirators are not seeking to be saviors; they do not see themselves as superior to the people they work with. Instead, they are aware of their privilege(s) and use it to break down obstacles confronting marginalized individuals and groups. Our focus herein is GATE Black students who need educators to be coconspirators proactively and willingly challenge the status quo and take on racial prejudice and discrimination.

Sample theories and frameworks needed for educators to create homeplace

In this section, we describe 8 theories and frameworks clustered into 4 groups: (a) perceptions, expectations, and attitudes; (b) identity development; (c) instruction; and (d) curriculum. The scholarly literature is replete with examples of pros and cons of each presented theory; however, we believe those discussed are most helpful to educator-advocates based on years of scholarship, expertise, and practice in GATE.

Perceptions, expectations, and attitudes: Allport; Valencia; Sue et al.

GATE underrepresentation exists at inequitable percentages when it comes to Black students is educators’ deficit thinking, as noted by Ford et al. (2002) and Ford and Grantham (2003). Deficit thinking is imbued with low and negative expectations. The harmful thinking is a form of “blaming the victim” that views the purported deficiencies or shortcomings of low-income and minoritized groups as the main reason for their academic problems and social failures; structural and systemic injustice are deemed blameless (see Valencia, 1997 for an extensive analysis). Consistent with scholarship on expectations (e.g., Teacher Expectation-Student achievement), deficit-oriented thinking significantly influences decisions and behaviors (e.g., policies and procedures, screening and identification criteria, instruments adopted, and programming). Erroneous and misleading views interfere with curriculum and evaluation, long with what students learn and internalize—academical and psychologically. Problematically, Black students are considered to be genetically inferior, culturally disadvantaged, or both (see Herrnstein & Murray, 1994).

In his seminal theory of prejudice and discrimination, Allport (1954) contended that deficit thinking influences behaviors. It manifests in little or no rigor in the curriculum (e.g., content, literature) for Black students. We believe that deficit thinking is a significant variable in the Black-White achievement gap (Barton & Coley, 2009), as well as underachievement and low achievement (e.g., Ford, 2006, 2011; Ford & Moore, 2004). In GATE, deficit thinking is at work with teachers either not referring or under-referring Black students for screening, identification, and programming (Ford, 2013; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Grissom & Redding, 2016).

Allport (1954) identified 5 degrees of prejudice (thinking) and discrimination (behaviors) from lowest to highest, respectively: (1) antilocution; (2) avoidance; (3) discrimination; (4) physical attack; and (5) extermination. Under Civil Rights laws, the last 3 degrees are illegal/prohibited. Specifically, Title VI prohibits discrimination in programs that receive federal funds. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) exists in educational settings to address discrimination complaints or allegations such as GATE underrepresentation.

Applying deficit thinking to GATE, Allport’s (1954) theory delineates examples of deficit thinking, with attendant behaviors. When using antilocution, educators make disparaging and demeaning comments about GATE Black students, make racialized jokes, and use derogatory names. At the more extreme and dangerous is hate speech. Avoidance consists of educators not ensuring that GATE Black and White students work together (e.g., in same classrooms and events). Outside of education, the most concrete example of avoidance is “White flight” such as the movement of Whites to suburbs to avoid Blacks. While not illegal, it is often stems from prejudicial dispositions. Extermination is the highest and most extreme, such as mass/serial murders, police profiling, and/or sterilization to eradicate the entire or the majority of the targeted group. Homeplace is clearly impossible.

Racial identity development theory (with attention to microaggressions)

Self-perception (in this regard, racial identity) has a significant effect on students’ academic achievement. Individuals with positive self-perceptions are likelier to perform higher in school compared to those with negative self-images. Likewise, students with positive views have social skills and relationships that are more positive.

Being Black and from another minoritized group, racial identity, like self-concept and self-esteem, must be included under the concept of self-perception. The research-based theory of racial identity by Cross (Cross & Vandiver, 2001) for Black populations gives guidance so that teachers and other educators both better understand and advocate for these GATE students. The theory consists of 3 identity exemplars (i.e., pre-encounter, immersion-emersion, and internalization) comprised of 8 identity types. The Pre-encounter exemplar consists of 3 identity types (assimilation, miseducation/stereotypes, and self-hatred). Movement to the immersion-emersion exemplar results from encounters, specifically, prejudice and discrimination. Encounters are straightforward and brazen, or vicarious and subtle that result from a major event or a series of minor or less egregious experiences. Encounters are verbal (e.g., insults, name calling, jokes, hate speech), visual/non-verbal (e.g., negative and stereotypical images and visuals) and/or behavioral (e.g., discrimination and avoidance, profiling, extermination). Sue et al. (2007) unpacked microaggressions. Many of them are related to Allport’s (1954) theory, described earlier. Microaggressions are divided into 3 categories with 9 examples:

1. Microassaults are blatant, old-fashioned racism; they are verbal or non-verbal attacks to hurt the targeted victim (Recall Allport’s [1954] antilocution).

2. Microinsults are rude and insensitive communications that demean minoritized students’ racial heritage and cultural styles—ways of being.

3. Microinvalidations are communications that exclude, negate, and nullify the lived experiences and ways of being of non-Whites—Black and other minoritized groups.

4. The 9 examples are:

   1. Alien in one’s own land—a minoritized person born in the U.S. is presumed/assumed to be a foreigner and immigrant.

   2. Ascription of intelligence—intelligence is evaluated along racial lines riddled with negative stereotypes (e.g., teacher is surprised that Black student(s) is intelligent, a high achiever, or has an extensive vocabulary.);

   3. Color blindness—race and culture are presumed to be inconsequential and unimportant; the teacher or individual wants to ignore or trivialize race (“I don’t see color. I treat everyone the same”);

   4. Criminality/assumption of criminal status—minoritized student/individual/group is presumed to be dangerous and/or a criminal based on their race.

   5. Myth of meritocracy—assertions made by White individuals to deny or downplay their privileged status—being in positions of power, especially unearned positions and privileges (“If I can be successful, so can you. Just work hard like me”).

   6. Denial of individual racism—statements made to others that he or she is not racist (“I have not referred Black students for gifted and talented education; that doesn’t mean I’m racist or anti-Black. I even have a Black friend”).

   7. Pathologizing cultural values and communication styles—messages that the values and communication styles of the White culture(s) are ideal and normal; the culture of others is substandard and otherwise inferior.

   8. Second-class status—White individual/student/group is given preferential treatment over Blacks. They find it hard to believe that a Black is the professor, doctor, administrator, and so on.

   9. Environmental invalidation—macro-level microaggressions that are more evident systemically and environmentally (e.g., when White students are placed in gifted and talented programs separated from Black and other groups. Policies and procedures disadvantage Black students, limiting opportunities for them to access GATE programs and services).

Keeping in mind racial identity development, Cross and Vandiver (2001) consider immersion-emersion to be the height of Black anger and outrage. The opposing identity types are intense Black involvement or White hatred. This exemplar results from encounters—prejudice and discrimination, such as microaggressions. Intense Black involvement is the embodiment of becoming immersed in the Black community and culture, with a fanatical allegiance and obligation to everything Black. With “White hatred,” Black students have an intense derision for Whites. In this stage, Black students are likely to refuse enrollment in GATE programs and opportunities that are predominantly White.

The internalization exemplar (the most positive and self-affirming self-identity) results when Blacks have many positive interactions with Whites who support them as racial and cultural beings. The 3 identity types—nationalist, biculturalist, and multiculturalist—are dedicated to social justice and activism, accompanied by an allegiance to the Black culture and community.

The nationalist identity is equated with high Black racial salience; the bicultural identity has both high racial salience and commitment to another identity (e.g., gender, income). Last, the multiculturalist identity consists of many identities and commitments (e.g., takes on all “isms”). Noteworthy is that internalized students are interested in participating in GATE programs and opportunities, even if there are few minoritized students. Compared to those with other racial identities, internalized Blacks cope better with alienation and negative peer pressures. They are resilient, which serves a protective factor that helps to improve GATE representation. Educators who understand racial identity are better poised and equipped to provide homeplace.

Stereotype threat theory: Racialized test anxiety

High-stakes testing has a deep influence on educational decision making, including GATE. Most students are identified and placed in gifted and talented education based on taking an intelligence and, perhaps, an achievement test (e.g., National Association for Gifted Children [NAGC], 2021). In most cases, only 1 test score is used; in others, a variety of information is collected, but test scores tend to overshadow other corroborating information.

Unfortunately, test anxiety exists for some students, including gifted and talented ones. The work of Steele (1997) on “stereotype threat” is instructive and shed light on underrepresentation. Stereotype threat is akin to confirmation bias that results when a group is told that others like them perform worse than another group before administering the test. Race-based’ test anxiety must be explored in explanations regarding Black students’ lower test scores.

When tests and instruments are less biased and, thus, fairer more Black students get higher scores. Principles and guidelines by professional organizations must be adopted to decrease bias and increase fairness in testing and assessment (see APA’s apology to Blacks for its history of racism, https://www.apa.org/about/policy/racism-apology; Sternberg et al., 2021). Additionally, to decrease stereotype threat, Black students will need guidance in test-taking, test wiseness, time management, and organizational skills, along with reading, writing, and vocabulary skills (Ford, 2004, 2007, 2011).

An understanding of this type of test anxiety will help decision makers with interpreting scores. They will use caution and seek other corroborating information about and from Black students. The Frasier et al. (1995) Panning for Gold model stresses the importance of looking for gifts and talents among Blacks in non-traditional ways, including reducing reliance on test scores. Likewise, Baldwin’s Identification Matrix (Baldwin, 1984) focuses on the importance of comprehensive testing and evaluation when screening and identifying Black students.

Culturally responsive instruction: Afro-centric cultural styles model

Boykin’s culturally-grounded research-guided model (e.g. Boykin, 1994; Boykin et al., 2005, 2006), is useful for recognizing and understanding incongruences among communicating, teaching, and learning styles, and how to become synchronous. It includes spirituality, harmony, affect, movement, verve, expressive individualism, oral tradition, communalism, and social time perspective. Ford and Kea (2009) discussed how to modify instructional styles in response to how many Black students learn best and prefer to learn. When their learning styles are not addressed, understood, and appreciated, their performance and grades suffer; consequently, they can become low achievers or underachievers. Consequently, they are unlikely to be considered GATE (Ford, 2011). With colorblind or cultureblind pedagogy, Black students may be inaccurately viewed, labeled and diagnosed as having disabilities. For instance, movement and verve (being very lively, dramatic, and energetic) can be incorrectly viewed as hyperactive or having ADHD; communalism may be inaccurately perceived as immature, needy, and lacking independence; expressive individualism (creative, resourceful), may be erroneously interpreted as lacking self-discipline, non-conforming, and devoid of critical thinking and problem-solving abilities and skills; affect (strong emotions and feelings) may be misconstrued as being overly sensitive, too angry, and very moody. The aforementioned characteristics and misunderstandings hinder educators’ view that Black students are GATE and require more challenge and supports.

Culturally responsive curriculum: Content matters

We believe that students learn and engage better when the material is engaging, interesting, and culturally relevant. In their study with high-achieving minoritized students, Bridgeland et al. (2006) found that most (88%) had passing grades but dropped out of school due to a paucity of curriculum relevance.

Banks’ (2006, 2008; Banks & Banks, 2019) unique curricular framework has 4 approaches (also called levels) for ways to infuse multicultural content into what is taught: (a) contributions; (b) additive; (c) transformation; and (d) social action. They range from being culturally assaultive and temporary (contributions and additive, respectively) to culturally responsive and empowering (transformation and social action) (Ford, 2010). At the lower levels, a litany of misinformation and stereotypes are created or reinforced in all students. Gay (2010) recommended an end to heroes/sheroes from racial groups that are frequently taught. Students rarely learn about contemporary and living individuals from their and other racial groups. At the higher levels, there are significant modifications in the curriculum such that all students become more informed and enlightened, compassionate, and empowered.

A discussion of how to differentiate curriculum for GATE students is neither responsive nor complete when multiculturalism is discounted and absent (Ford, 2010; Ford et al., 2011; Pedersen & Kitano, 2006). Ford’s Bloom-Banks Matrix explicitly makes this point by merging Bloom’s Taxonomy of critical and creative thinking with Banks’ multicultural levels. The resulting 6 × 4matrix is comprised of 24 cells that are placed into 4 quadrants. Quadrant 1 is low on both critical thinking and diversity; 2 is low on critical thinking but high on multiculturalism; 3 is low on multiculturalism but high on critical thinking; 4 is high on both critical thinking and multiculturalism.

Summary and final comments: Homeplace via a culturally responsive, anti-racist education framework

Several features/characteristics of culturally responsive education were presented above, namely the discussion about curriculum, instruction, and testing and assessment. An education that culturally responsive is student-centered and culture-centered. Ford’s culturally responsive education model (Ford, 2010; Ford & Harris, 1999; Ford et al., 2011) relies on the scholarship of James Banks, Geneva Gay, Jacqueline Irvine, and Gloria Ladson-Billings. There are 5 characteristics: (a) philosophy (about working with Black students); (b) learning environment (designing a classroom and school building/district that is family and community oriented; that values equity, diversity, and inclusion); (c) curriculum (content and materials that are not cultureblind; that are affirming); (d) instruction (teaching and learning styles are in sync), and (e) evaluation (testing and assessment that are fair, unbiased, and comprehensive). At the heart of culturally responsive education is thoroughness relative to being informed, proactive, and inclusive at responding to the interests and needs of Black students. We regard this as differentiation that does not rely on White normative ideologies, paradigms, and practices. Homeplace becomes a reality.

Culturally responsive educators are intentional and unapologetic at making concerted efforts to ensure that all students feel a sense of belongingness—membership, connectedness, and worth—in their district, buildings, and classrooms. Therefore, GATE Black students are challenged as gifted and talented students and as Black students. This places them in a win-win situation academically and culturally.

Ending the ongoing and widespread underrepresentation of Black students in GATE education must be intentional. There are numerous attitudinal/dispositional and behavioral barriers and gatekeepers. Educators must acknowledge historical and present-day practices that have been ineffective, counter-productive, and unjust. Given that there are many culturally responsive theories and conceptual frameworks or models, there is no reason for educators to be culturally incompetent.

The works shared herein provide important insight and guidance relative to the recruitment and retention of Black students in GATE. Further, the showcased scholarship is useful for understanding: achievement and expectation gaps; underachievement and low achievement/grades; low intelligence and achievement test scores; racial identity development; and stereotypes, prejudicial attitudes and behaviors. The scholarly works explain how these variables and others influence educators’ beliefs, expectations that gravely hinder the equitable and anti-racist participation of Black students in GATE. The research, theories, and models can move the field of GATE closer to rectifying and reconciling underrepresentation.

Additional resources

1. Kendi, I. X. (2023). How to be an antiracist. One World.

 Kendi helps readers to understand numerous types of racism and their impact on minoritized populations. Using law, ethics, and history, he takes readers on his personal journey. In doing so, readers get an in-depth journey designed to guide and assist them in going being awareness to action that is equitable.

2. Hammond, Z. L. (2014). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse student. Corwin.

 In this book, Hammond relies upon neuroscience research to present a visionary approach for designing and implementing culturally responsive instruction that is brain compatible. Her goal is to close the racial achievement gap with a framework for maximizing students’ interest and engagement.

3. Smith, W. A. (2010). Toward an understanding of misandric microaggressions and racial battle fatigue among African Americans in historically White institutions. In E. M. Zamani- Gallaher & V. C. Polite (Eds.), The state of the African American male (pp. 265–277). Michigan State University Press.

 Smith focuses on his racial battle fatigue theory, which is the cumulative emotional, psychological, physiological, and behavioral effects of ongoing racial prejudice and discrimination. The theory is connected to racial microaggressions. Particular attention is focused on Black males in predominantly White institutions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).