Inequities of Enrollment in Gifted Education: A Statewide Application of the 20% Equity Allowance Formula

被引:23
作者
Lamb, Kristen N. [1 ]
Boedeker, Peter [2 ]
Kettler, Todd [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Robinson Ctr, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[2] Boise State Univ, Dept Curriculum Instruct & Fdn Studies, Boise, ID 83725 USA
[3] Baylor Univ, Sch Educ, Educ Psychol, Waco, TX 76798 USA
关键词
gifted education; multicultural; equity; identification; Bayesian; STRUCTURE COEFFICIENTS; MINORITY-STUDENTS; IDENTIFICATION; PROGRAMS; REPRESENTATION; POVERTY; RACE;
D O I
10.1177/0016986219830768
中图分类号
G76 [特殊教育];
学科分类号
040109 ;
摘要
Underrepresentation in gifted education for ethnically diverse student groups has been widely recognized. Two recent federal district court decisions defined the lower limits of equitable participation using the 20% equity allowance formula proposed by Donna Ford. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the application of the 20% rule to identify the prevalence of inequity and associated variables in Texas gifted education programs. Using data from the Office of Civil Rights and Texas Education Agency, the authors applied the 20% rule to demographics of K-12 gifted education programs in Texas to identify inequity and used Bayesian regression with district characteristics to investigate contributing factors of inequity. Only 282 of 994 (28.4%) districts met equity standards for Hispanic students. Second, Bayesian regressions with district-level characteristics of students, teachers, and expenditures were used to identify factors associated with inequitable enrollment of Hispanic students. Overall, the model accounted for 12.9% variance (R-2 = 0.129, 95% highest density interval [0.095, 0.170]), with increasing variance explained by district subsets (i.e., city, suburb, town, rural). Furthermore, the results of the regression models revealed the percentage of Hispanic and White teachers were inversely associated with inequity across all district subsets. It is postulated that the mechanism of inequity is in the teacher referral process, frequently used as a determinant of gifted education enrollment. The authors suggest means of addressing this reality.
引用
收藏
页码:205 / 224
页数:20
相关论文
共 73 条
[31]  
Johnsen S.K., 2011, Identifying gifted students: A practical guide
[32]   Defining Rural in Gifted Education Research: Methodological Challenges and Paths Forward [J].
Kettler, Todd ;
Puryear, Jeb S. ;
Mullet, Dianna R. .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ACADEMICS, 2016, 27 (04) :245-265
[33]  
Kruschke J., 2015, Doing Bayesian Data Analysis (Second Edition), V2
[34]  
Kruschke J.K., 2017, BAYESIAN ESTIMATION
[35]   Bayesian Estimation Supersedes the t Test [J].
Kruschke, John K. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2013, 142 (02) :573-603
[36]   The Time Has Come: Bayesian Methods for Data Analysis in the Organizational Sciences [J].
Kruschke, John K. ;
Aguinis, Herman ;
Joo, Harry .
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2012, 15 (04) :722-752
[37]   Universal Screening and the Representation of Historically Underrepresented Minority Students in Gifted Education: Minding the Gaps in Card and Giuliano's Research [J].
Lakin, Joni M. .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ACADEMICS, 2016, 27 (02) :139-149
[38]  
Marland Jr S.P, 1972, ED056243 OFF ED
[39]   A Descriptive Analysis of Referral Sources for Gifted Identification Screening by Race and Socioeconomic Status [J].
McBee, Matthew T. .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ACADEMICS, 2006, 17 (02) :103-111
[40]   The Impact of the Nomination Stage on Gifted Program Identification: A Comprehensive Psychometric Analysis [J].
McBee, Matthew T. ;
Peters, Scott J. ;
Miller, Erin M. .
GIFTED CHILD QUARTERLY, 2016, 60 (04) :258-278