Achieving Equity in Gifted Education: Ideas and Issues

Abstract

The disproportionality in the ethnic-racial and socioeconomic make-up of students in gifted and talented education (GATE) programs has been identified by many scholars as the most critical and the most intractable issue facing the field of gifted education (e.g., Grissom & Redding, 2016; Olszewski-Kubilius & Steenbergen-Hu, 2017; Plucker & Peters, 2016; Worrell & Dixson, 2018). Considered a fundamental equity issue by many (e.g., Peters & Engerrand, 2016)—that is, an issue of fairness—there is a growing body of scholarship on what should be done (Ford, 1998; Grissom et al., 2019). However, despite the efforts of many researchers and educators (e.g., Horn, 2015; Lee et al., 2009), this disproportionality has not been remedied (Peters, Gentry, et al., 2019), and indeed, the problem is perceived as more urgent in the sociohistorical context of 2021, with the increased focus on civil rights and social justice. As academics, we put forward different theoretical frameworks and ideas to solve problems, we test competing hypotheses, and we engage in robust debates about the most appropriate solutions to problems. These research endeavors are systematic attempts to solve complex problems, such as the issue of disproportionality in gifted education. Given the ongoing concerns about this issue and in keeping with the scientific underpinnings of the field, the editors of Gifted Child Quarterly decided to devote a special issue to the topic of equity in gifted education. The goal of the special issue is to bring together ideas from across the field to better understand disproportionality in GATE in hopes of making progress on this pernicious issue. The format of the special issue includes a target article on equity within GATE, commentaries on the target article solicited from a wide variety of stakeholders, and a response to the commentaries by the author of the target article. The authors of this introduction were asked to serve as guest editors for the special issue. In choosing a scholar to write the target article, we considered the conceptual and empirical contributions of several individuals who regularly publish on equity within GATE. In addition, we also considered these individuals’ engagement with the extant empirical literature. After considering these and other factors, we invited Dr. Scott Peters to write the target article. We felt that Dr. Peters’ contributions to several theoretical frameworks on gifted education (i.e., advanced academics and excellence gaps; e.g., Peters et al., 2014; Plucker & Peters, 2016) as well as his conceptual and empirical research on multiple models of identification aimed at diversifying GATE (e.g., McBee et al., 2014; Peters & Engerrand, 2016; Peters, Rambo-Hernandez, et al., 2019) made him an excellent choice for the target article. Equity is a broad term that can have a different definition for different people. Within the GATE literature, there are many different definitions and perspectives on what equity is and what it means. As noted above, inequity in gifted education is frequently defined as the disproportionality of representation by students of color and students from low-income backgrounds within GATE programs relative to their representation within the student population. And it is this issue that Peters (2022a) chooses to address in his piece. In the target article, Peters begins with a discussion of the context of underrepresentation and then provides several overarching (and subordinate) reasons for underrepresentation and the difficulties in combating this concern. He outlines several ways that inequality is pervasive in American society (e.g., unequal academic opportunities, institutional racism) and how this inequality contributes to the disproportionality present in GATE. In the third major section of the article, Peters proposes several ways in which GATE programs, and American society, can move forward to achieve more equity in GATE. Following Peters’ (2022a) target article are 28 commentaries from a diverse group consisting of academics, students, and practitioners. We have grouped the commentaries on the basis of content. For example, some of the responses extend on or amplify Peters’ (2022a) comments, whereas others are focused on specific topics such as identification protocols, racism, and social justice. Some of the commentaries are focused on a subject area (e.g., mathematics) or a subpopulation (e.g., twice-exceptional students), or other national contexts, and one commentary includes the perspective of journal editors. In his response to the commentaries, Peters (2022b) articulates two of the major themes that he saw in the responses and engages with those themes thoughtfully. The purpose of this special issue is to engage in a conversation about a pressing issue in the field of gifted education, the disproportionally low enrollment of students from some ethnic-racial backgrounds and from low socioeconomic 1068551 GCQXXX10.1177/00169862211068551Gifted Child QuarterlyWorrell and Dixson editorial2021