Cultural Considerations in the Underrepresentation of Culturally Diverse Elementary Students in Gifted Education

By Milner, H Richard; Ford, Donna Y

Students of color are often underrepresented in gifted education programs. While many educators have sought to reverse or redress this issue, little has changed over the years. In this article, it is proposed that teachers, particularly those working with elementary students, must pursue cultural competence in order to recognize the strengths and potential of culturally diverse students in a variety of learning contexts. Ultimately, teachers’ new (and expanded) insights about their students can result in more culturally diverse students participating in gifted education programs.

In this article, we outline several cultural matters that can hinder teachers’ judgments and decisions in recruiting and retaining students of color1 in gifted programs in elementary school. As we have learned from those focusing on talent development (Ford, 1996; Ford & Harris, 1999), there is an enormous need for elementary- school teachers to identify students of color (namely African American and Hispanic students) for gifted education programs, and once identified, to retain them in those programs. To be clear, we understand that teachers are not solely responsible for the low numbers of African American and Hispanic students in gifted programs. Clearly, policy-makers, administrators, school psychologists, test developers, and families are also involved in the identification and retention of students for gifted programs. The teacher plays just one role in the grand scheme of decisionmaking. However, the teacher’s role in the process is critical-even when she or he is considered just a “check off” point in the process of decision making by other powers.

Teachers can be the voice that will not go away; they can insist that these students be better represented in such programs. In fact, it is their job (to some degree) to be advocates for deserving students and to speak on their behalf when others refuse to consider students of color for gifted programs. Teachers must insist that these students have an opportunity to participate in gifted programs, because it is critical that these culturally diverse students are identified and represented in elementary school. In particular, a focus on students in the elementary years is especially important because students often miss opportunities for gifted, advanced, and accelerated classes in middle and high school if they are not identified in their early years of schooling. Participating in such classes and programs in elementary school, and subsequently in middle and high school, can prepare culturally diverse students for college admission exams and help ensure their entry into the best institutions of higher education. Clearly, the earlier students are identified for gifted programming, the better their chances to take advantage of these programs in subsequent years. However, as Ford (2006) wrote, “Sadly, I have seen little progress relative to demographic changes-Black and Hispanic students continue to be in gifted programs today as they were 20 years ago” (p. 2).

A Look at the Underrepresentation of Culturally Diverse Gifted Students

To have a discussion about students of color in gifted programs may seem inconceivable or even paradoxical at a time when the literature is inundated with accounts of school failure, particularly where African American and Hispanic American students are concerned (e.g., Irvine, 1990; Shujaa, 1994). Furthermore, a wealth of research and conceptual literature exists focusing on the Underrepresentation of students of color in gifted education programs (e.g., Baldwin & Vialle, 1999; Ford, 1998; Ford & Harris, 1999; Frasier, Garcia, & Passow, 1995; Harmon, 2002; Milner, 2002). Thus, attempting to address and understand the Underrepresentation of elementary students of color in gifted programs is certainly not a trivial, mundane, or straightforward endeavor. For instance, almost a decade ago, Ford (1996) wrote:

Black students, particularly males, are three times as likely as White males to be in a class for the educable mentally retarded, but only half as likely to be placed in a class for the gifted. Not only are Black students under enrolled in gifted education programs…[but] Black students are overrepresented in special education, in the lowest ability groups and tracks, and among high school and college dropouts…. (p. 5).

More recently, Ford and Grantham (2003) explained that African American and Hispanic American students tend to be underrepresented in gifted programs by 50% each.

We propose that with expanded and more fully developed knowledge about gifted students of color, the teacher can become an advocate for these students and take a proactive role in the discourse and decision making process. Achieving an expanded and more culturally developed knowledge base is a task that teachers must pursue. In other words, teachers need to pursue cultural and multicultural competence to assist them in the recruitment and retention of students of color in gifted programs.

Cultural and Multicultural Competence

Becoming more culturally competent is a lifetime process; one never becomes fully competent where culture is concerned. Culture is not a static concept. It is not “a category for conveniently sorting people according to expected values, beliefs, and behaviors” (Dyson & Genishi, 1994, p. 3). Rather, culture is dynamic, and it encompasses various other concepts that relate to its central meaning. The supplemental categories that make up culture include, but are not limited to identity, class, economic status, and gender. Drawing on this dynamic concept and the work of a number of researchers and theorists (e.g., Ford, 1996; Hale, 2001 ; Irvine & York, 1995), we conceptualize culture to mean the characteristics of a person that are developed through formal and informal experiences, knowledge disposition, skills, and ways of knowing and understanding that are informed by race (the social construction of one’s skin color), ethnicity (history, heritage, customs, rituals, values, and symbols), identity (how one perceives and represents himself/ herself), class (economic/resource situation), sexuality, and gender.

To be clear, teachers should pursue cultural and multicultural competence- because researchers and theoreticians agree that cultural and multicultural education is necessary for academic and social success among students of color (J. A. Banks, 1998; Ford, 1996; Grant & Tate, 1995). Students of color need to encounter and experience curriculum and instruction that highlights, showcases, speaks from the points of view, life experiences, and contributions of people of color, women, and other marginalized groups -not just those of the White mainstream. In considering the importance of students’ cultural and social experiences in the curriculum and teaching, Ladson-Billings (1994) explained that teachers can maximize student learning by “importing the culture and everyday experiences of the students” (p. 117). J. A. Banks maintained that a significant goal of multicultural education was to “increase educational equality for both gender groups, for students from diverse ethnic and cultural groups, and for exceptional students” [emphasis added] (p. 22). Jenks, Lee, and Kanpol (2001) suggested that additional goals of multicultural education involved “knowledge of cultural and racial differences and issues; the critical examination of one’s own beliefs and values regarding culture, race, and social class; and an understanding of how knowledge, beliefs, and values determine one’s behavior…” (p. 88).

Ensuring that various cultural, racial, ethnic, gendered, and linguistic groups of people and their experiences are represented in the curriculum is not the only essential feature in providing access, empowerment, and awareness for students of color. The very nature of this content and how it is actually incorporated into the lessons are also critical. Gay (2000) asserted that students often felt “insulted, embarrassed, ashamed, and angered when reading and hearing negative portrayals of their ethnic groups or not hearing anything at all” (p. 116). Thus, it is not enough to incorporate the historical, political, and social experiences, events, and challenges of various ethnic groups into the curriculum and teaching. But rather, the nature of that curriculum content (what is actually included, how, and why) is very important as students come to understand themselves and others in a pluralistic society.

Teachers can enhance their cultural awareness and sensitivity when they pursue cultural and multicultural competence; although a student’s culture and way of experiencing the world may be different from that of their teacher, it is not necessarily deficient. Teachers should engage in a deep and deliberate search to understand their own and other individuals’ cultural heritage, backgrounds, values, and customs. The pursuit of cultural competence involves an amalgamation of awareness, sensitivity, and consciousness that may assist teachers in uncovering hidden beliefs, biases, prejudices, and values that may cause them to (mis)understand their own and others’ cultural existence in education and, thus, the world.

The lack of cultural and multicultural competence among teachers seems to contri\bute to disproportionately lower numbers of students of color in gifted education. In short, a central reason that some students of color are not represented in gifted programs is due to cultural differences and misunderstandings that often exist between students and teachers. Where cultural misunderstandings and differences are concerned, Ford (1996) explained the following:

Cultural styles and orientations represent patterns learned at an early age, as one grows up in a given family and community context. As individuals move out of the context of the primary socialization, they respond to new situations with previously learned [cultural] behaviors and styles…for [diverse learners] such a new situation may include being placed in a gifted program where teachers and school personnel may not understand their cultural styles and orientations, (p. 85)

The implications of these differences are clear when we consider that the teaching force is overwhelmingly White, female, and middle class, whereas the student population is becoming increasingly diverse (J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks, 2000; Gay & Howard, 2000; Milner, 2003a).

In order to improve the recruitment and retention rate of students of color enrolled in gifted programs, we should think seriously about how intelligence and giftedness actually are acquired, and by what means they are assessed. Getting to the core of these areas requires cultural and multicultural knowledge and understanding. Teachers must delve into what it means to have a culture, and how culture emerges in their own as well as their students’ judgments and decisions in a particular learning context.

In the next section, we discuss a model of culture and demonstrate how conflicts and other cultural issues may emerge in elementary-school classrooms. In our work, we have observed many of the scenarios discussed in the following section. We deliberately share blatant examples of cross-cultural encounters, recognizing that some encounters may not be as easy to describe or as overt.

A Model of Culture: A Discussion of Dimensions

Storti (1989, 1998, 1999), Ting-Toomey (1999), Hofstede (1980, 1991), Hofstede and Bond (1984), E. T. Hall (1959, 1981), E. T. Hall and M. R. Hall (1987), and Ladson-Billings (1994) have presented research-based models and theories on culture. We discuss a synthesis of these models. In particular, we rely extensively on the work of Hofstede, as interpreted by Storti (1999). For a more extensive discussion of this model, also see Ford et al. (2005). In that work, we discussed five dimensions of culture. Four dimensions are presented: personal versus social responsibility, concept of time, concept of self, and styles of communication. These dimensions all have two extreme poles that are not to be interpreted as dichotomous or as separate dimensions. Rather, they are continuous and should be thought about in complementary ways.

Cultural behaviors can fall anywhere along the continuum, with some groups falling along the center of the continuum.3 Therefore, it is important to note that the poles are not mutually exclusive – individuals and groups could possess cultural characteristics found on both ends of the pole. Moreover, individuals may fall someplace along the continuum closer to one end but possessing characteristics from the opposite end. For instance, students could be both monochronic and polychrome, depending on the context. What is critical for teachers to understand is how culture works among their students and how best to address the various cultures in their classroom. Discussion of the senarios is meant to help teachers think about how they make decisions for student learning and how they perceive giftedness among their students.

Personal vs. Social Responsibility

People often wrestle with how to balance personal responsibilities (with family, close friends, and colleagues) with responsibilities to the larger society. Two opposing poles – universalism and particularism-are presented with this in mind.

Universalism. At this end of the spectrum, people believe there are certain absolutes that apply, regardless of the circumstances, context, or situation. What is right is always right, and rules should be applied to everyone in similar situations. Being fair means treating everyone the same and not making exceptions, even for family and friends. Personal and subjective feelings are laid aside in order to be objective in examining situations.

Particularism. At this end of the spectrum, how one behaves in a given situation depends on the circumstances what is right in one situation may not be right in another. Family and friends are given the highest regard, and the rest of the world can take care of itself. There is the belief that there will always be exceptions made for certain groups based on the situation or the idiosyncrasies inherent in a situation, and to be fair is to treat every person and case as unique. Personal feelings should not be laid aside, but rather relied upon for making decisions.

Teachers should understand that students/people do not have to be either one or the other but will likely possess some cultural characteristics and dimensions of both poles.

Paul’s Scenario

Mr. Jones, a fourth-grade teacher, is no-nonsense when it comes to rules and expectations; exceptions to rules are rare. Therefore, students must follow his guidelines and requirements when solving long-division problems; students who deviate from the prescribed process/steps lose points. Paul, a student in his class, thinks differently about solving division. At home, Paul’s father has been working with him for months on long division using two or more different approaches. Paul is not always linear in his thinking and likes to “play with” the numbers as he attempts to solve the problem. Mr. Jones has presented one formula to students and this is what he expects them to use. Paul is not doing well in Mr. Jones’s class at this time.

Concept of Time

Another way that cultures differ is how people conceive of and handle time, and how their concept of time influences their interactions. The two poles of this continuum are monochronic and polychrome orientations.

Monochronic. At this end, time is viewed as a commodity; it is quantifiable and there is a limited amount of it. Therefore, people who lean toward being monochronic consider it essential to use time wisely and to not waste it. A premium is placed on efficiency and using time well. When one is monochronic, time is the independent variable; people are the dependent variable-people change and adjust to suit the demands of time; the amount of time does not change so we must change. Accordingly, efficiency means doing one thing at a time and doing it well, and interruptions are considered a nuisance, a distraction, and something to be avoided.

Polychrome. People with this orientation consider time as limitless and not necessarily quantifiable. There is always more time, and people are never too busy. Time is the tool of people, and it is adjusted to suit the needs of people. In this sense, both time and people are dynamic, and time is adjustable just as are individuals. Schedules and deadlines often get changed, and people may have to do more than one thing at a time; being able to multi- task is a sign of being efficient, maximizing time, and using time wisely.

Ideally, people define the importance of their time by the situation. For example, people may tend to be more monochronic when it comes to business or their jobs. They realize they must be on time to work and that it is necessary to get assignments completed and submitted on time. This same person, however, may be less structured about time with their children and friends, or be less stressed about time when having dinner with their family.

Jane’s Scenario

Jane, a fifth grader, is a very punctual and precise individual. She grew up in a household with a lot of structure. Breakfast was always served at 7:00 a.m.; homework was to be completed immediately after school; dinner was served at 6:30 p.m.; and she was in bed by 8:30 p.m. Mrs. Miller enjoys a good joke at the beginning of class, and it seems to Jane that she often “wastes time.” Jane does not enjoy or value the 15 minutes Mrs. Miller spends telling jokes and reviewing the main components of the lesson from the previous class session. It is important to note that the effective/best practices literature supports teachers’ use of humor and the reviewing of material from the previous class session. We are not attempting to discredit that important research. We are attempting to show that there are no “one-size-fits-all” approaches to teaching, and teachers must be aware of this. Jane shuts down when this occurs, and she stops participating in class because she does not believe that Mrs. Miller is moving fast enough or is structured enough. In short, Jane thinks that Mrs. Miller is not organized, so she withdraws completely from this part of the class.

Concept of Self

People from different cultures have different ideas, values, and perceptions of personal identity, ranging from collectivism at one end to individualism at the other.

Individualism. At this end of the continuum, the individual is the smallest unit. Being independent and self-sufficient guarantees or enables the well-being of the individual and, ultimately, the group. Independence and self-reliance are emphasized and valued, and personal freedom is highly desired at this end of the continuum. For example, the individualistic student seeks and celebrates good grades and the successful completion of tasks that are accomplished without the assistance of others.

Collectivism. At this end, the primary group, often the immediate family, is the smallest unit of survival. The individual’s identity is largely a function of his or her membership and role in a particular group. Harmony and interdependence of group members are stre\ssed and valued, and there is relatively little psychological or emotional distance between group members. This is an interdependent orientation, one that allows people to think in group and social terms. For instance, students who are collectivists are rejuvenated by the collective success of their classmates at school. The notion of “your success is my success” is more likely to be evident here.

Again, it is critical to remember that depending significantly on the context, people may find themselves some place in the middle or possessing both individualistic and collectivistic cultural characteristics. In fact, it is likely important for individuals to possess some of both characteristics.

Ben’s Scenario

Assuming that Ms. Banks, a third-grade teacher, tends towards individualism and Ben, a third grader in Ms. Banks’s class tends toward collectivism: significant conflicts, differences, and misunderstanding may ensue. At home, Ben is expected to participate and work collaboratively with his four siblings in completing household chores, completing homework, and playing. He plays a key role in the family as an additional source of support for his siblings and other relatives. Ms. Banks values individual effort and independent work in the classroom, but Ben enjoys working in groups and helping others. Ben prefers working with his peers, regardless of the assignment or task. Ben’s performance and achievement are much stronger when he works in groups or with other students; he is less motivated and engaged when asked to work independently. The cultural differences, judgments, and misunderstandings that result from these differences in concept of self, may prevent Ms. Banks from realizing Ben’s abilities, strengths, and giftedness.

Styles of Communication

Communication is the sending and receiving of messages. What people say, how they say it, and what they do not say are deeply influenced by culture. Communication styles fall along a continuum of indirect and direct styles, and high and low context.

Indirect. Those with this orientation tend to infer, suggest, and imply rather than say things directly. There is a tendency toward indirectness, and people tend to avoid confrontation and disagreements.

High-context. This intuitive understanding is known as “context.” In high-context cultures, words are not needed to convey messages; nonverbal communication is often enough, and what you do is just as important as what you say. People with this orientation are sensitive to the setting and are watchful of the behaviors of others. Personal space, touching, eye contact, affect, tone when speaking, and other nonverbal cues receive much attention as ways of communicating, because they help convey messages.

Direct. Direct cultures tend to be more individualist. People need to spell things out; that is, people need to be explicit and overt in communicating their needs, desires, likes, dislikes, and feelings. People with this orientation say exactly what they mean rather than inferring, suggesting, or implying their message; thus, the spoken word carries most of the meaning. Inferences are not as necessary as they are in the indirect group.

Low-context. In low-context culture, the primary mode of communication is verbal. Contextual cues, unique situations, and special circumstances are less likely to be noticed because of the reliance on what is said rather than what is done.

Xavier ‘s Scenario

Ms. Patterson is very indirect in her classroom management style and other related matters in her first-grade classroom. Xavier is accustomed to very direct instructions and guidance in his home: instead of his parents asking Xavier if he is ready to do his homework, they tell him that it is time to do his homework.4 When Ms. Patterson asks Xavier if he is ready to complete his assignments, Xavier responds with honesty, “No.” Ms. Patterson is perplexed and might assume that Xavier is lazy or that he does not wish to complete his assignment because he is incapable. She may also consider him to be disrespectful for refusing to follow a request, even if her request is posed as a question. Xavier may not be mature enough to sift through what we are calling “questions of command” and decide whether or not Ms. Patterson is asking him a question for which she wants an honest answer. Both Ms. Patterson and Xavier are confused, and he is often put in time out for being disrespectful and uncooperative.

Moving Beyond Culture-Blindness

As is evident in the scenarios presented in the previous section, teachers must develop new curricula and instructional insights as they pursue cultural competence. Teachers must move beyond culture- blindness (Ford et al., 2005) in their work with students and think about how both their own and students’ cultures influence what happens in the classroom. Teachers can no longer act as if culture is neutral and static, or believe that all students are the same. Culture-blindness is an unrealistic attempt to not see differences. Because many students of color experience the world in very different ways than their teachers and White student counterparts, teachers should recognize and acknowledge students’ cultures. When cultureblind ideologies are adopted, young children of color are rendered invisible; their differences are ignored and their strengths may not be seen. Again, the scenarios presented demonstrate how teachers’ cultural misunderstandings of their students automatically placed their students at a disadvantage.

The negative influences of color-blindness and cultureblindness have been well documented in the literature (see Johnson, 2002; Lewis, 2001). For instance, when teachers do not “see color or culture” or at least acknowledge that race and culture matter, there may be “ignored discriminatory institutional practices toward students of color such as higher suspension rates for African American males” (p. 154) in conjunction with students of color being referred to special education and lower tracked courses. J. A. Banks (2001) explained that,

A statement such as ? don’t see color [or culture]‘ reveals a privileged position that refuses to legitimize racial identifications that are very important to people of color, and that are often used to justify inaction and perpetuation of the status quo. (p. 12)

Consequently, because of the students’ out-of-school cultural experiences, teachers should avoid cultureblind ideologies. One of the most effective ways to avoid being culture-blind is for educators to diligently pursue cultural competence. In light of this discussion, elementary-school teachers in particular must examine and attempt to understand their own level(s) of competence, and pursue higher levels of sensitivity to culture. This increased cultural competence can only improve teachers’ perceptions of culturally diverse students and should (a) lead to a greater recognition that students and teachers from different backgrounds bring different experiences into school settings (and these differences do not have to be deficits), (b) contribute to greater recognition of gifts and talents in diverse students, (c) lead to increased referrals of diverse students for gifted education screening and assessment, (d) contribute to increased efforts to understand and support diverse students, and (e) contribute to more positive relationships with diverse students, their families, and their communities.

To be clear, teachers of all cultural backgrounds-not only White teachers -should examine themselves and their students, and reject notions of culture-blindness. Moreover, teachers from any racial, cultural, or ethnic background can be successful teachers of culturally diverse students (Ladson-Billings, 1994). As Gay (2000) asserted, “Similar ethnicity between students and teachers may be potentially beneficial, but it is not a guarantee of pedagogical effectiveness” (p. 205). In other words, teachers from any ethnic, cultural, or racial background can be successful with any group of students when the teachers have the appropriate knowledge, attitudes, dispositions, and beliefs about teaching, learning, and their students. As the research of Gay pointed out, “members of one ethnic group [can be] successful teachers of students from other ethnic and racial groups” (p. 205). Furthermore, just because teachers come from the same culture as their students does not mean that they are culturally (or racially) connected or competent. As Tatum (2001) explained:

In a race-conscious [and culture-conscious] society, the development of a positive sense of racial/ethnic identity not based on assumed superiority or inferiority is an important task for both White people and people of color. The development of this positive identity is a lifelong process that often requires unlearning the misinformation and stereotypes we have internalized, not only about others, but also about ourselves, (p. 53)

Moreover, as described in the scenarios, when attempting to understand culture, the cultural context must be considered (Milner, 2003a; Rios, 1996). In other words, we cannot categorize and stereotype individuals based on their racial, cultural, and ethnic heritage. The cultural contexts in which people live are critical spaces that help shape individuals’ perspectives, experiences, and life worlds. For instance, a Hispanic student growing up in a rural community may be different from a Hispanic student growing up in an urban setting. Thus, the physical, psychological, and social spaces in which students live must be taken into consideration as we think about how culture emerges.

We have written about the necessity for deep levels of reflection as teachers attempt to meet the needs of diverse learners (see Milner, 2003a) and pursue cultural competence (Ford et al., 2005). In that work, it is suggested that teachers engage in a deep level of self-reflection as they develop judgments and decisions concern\ing students of color in both general and gifted education. Several interrelated questions may prove helpful as teachers pursue cultural competence with the goals of developing knowledge to reject culture-blindness and to recruit and retain students of color in gifted education:

1. How might my own culture influence my judgments, decisions, and beliefs about diverse learners?

2. How might my students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences influence their beliefs, behaviors, participation, and effort in the learning context?

3. How do I, as the teacher, situate my cultural self in the education of others, and how do I negotiate my cultural power in classes to allow students to reach their potential?

4. How might cultural influences impact my and my students’ interests in the classroom? Moreover, how might I connect with my students in meaningful ways that build on both the students’ and my (as teacher) cultural background?

5. Do I believe that my students bring expertise into the classroom? If so, how do I scaffold that knowledge into the teaching and learning that occurs in the classroom?

These reflective questions allow elementary-school teachers to delve into their own as well as their students’ cultural situations, and allow them to think about and centralize culture as they contemplate giftedness and talent.

Recommendations

The discussion shifts now to provide some recommendations for reversing the underrepresentation of elementary students of color in gifted programs. Merely identifying some of the pervasive problems inherent in the identification and retention of gifted students is insufficient. We must develop concrete and relevant strategies to address cultural conflicts as outlined above.

It is critical for teachers to engage in professional development opportunities that educate them about culture, diversity, giftedness, and teaching. In particular, professional development programs need to focus specifically on giftedness and students of color to help teachers’ pursue cultural competence. Many teachers who lack cultural awareness and understanding cannot see students of color as anything other than remedial or average. Helping teachers recognize creativity, talent, and giftedness can help them teach more effectively in their classrooms.

Identifying Gifted Culturally-diverse Students

In light of how culture can emerge in students’ and teachers’ conceptions and perceptions of knowledge, learning, and ability, teachers need to rethink what giftedness actually means and how it is conceptualized. That is, research has made it clear that standardized tests and other measures often prevent students of color from being identified as gifted, and consequently denies these students the opportunity to participate in gifted programs (e.g., Ford, 1996; Frasier et al., 1995). Teachers must rethink how they define and evaluate students’ academic potential as they see students and themselves through cultural lenses and pursue cultural competence.

Teachers working with young students in particular may find the following definition useful as they think about culturally diverse students and search for talent among all their students:

Children and youth with outstanding talent perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment. These children and youth exhibit high performance capacity in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, and unusual leadership capacity, or excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor. (U.S. Department of Education, 1993, p. 26)

For at least three reasons, this inclusive definition of giftedness has positive implications for all students, but particularly students of color. First, the definition is one of talent development because of its focus on potential (Ford & Harris, 1999). The early recognition (as in elementary school) of student potential is critical for teachers because they have the opportunities to help students more fully develop their potential if detected early in the students’ development. second, the definition notes the importance of considering differential experiences and opportunities in the development of gifts and talents. Third, the definition recognizes that no group has (or should have) a monopoly on giftedness. In short, if teachers are serious about improving the representation of culturally diverse students participating in gifted programs, this broader, more encompassing definition of what it is to be gifted can begin to shape their decisions, judgments, and beliefs about culturally diverse learners.

An important step in identifying students of color may be through teachers’ becoming open to students who deviate from traditional ways of thinking and communicating. As made evident in the scenarios discussed earlier, students may communicate and comprehend information differently – inconsistent with their teachers’ expectations. Gifted students of color may be highly creative and, as a result, their assignments may follow more artistic, less formalized, linear patterns. Alternative perspectives in assigning tasks and assessing them should be part of a teacher’s repertoire. Teachers need to develop alternative ways of understanding students’ creativity and intellectual gifts-all in pursuit of cultural competence. Indeed, there has to be some form of structure and coherence in assignments, but teachers have to move beyond rigid expectations and allow students to blossom using their creative genius. In other words, just because it works for teachers, their own children, and culturally similar students does not mean it will work for their culturally diverse learners. Furthermore, teachers may have to discard lesson plans and assessment tools that they have used for years and even decades. Both students and teachers are different today than they were 20 or 30 years ago, and teaching and learning must reflect these changes.

In addition, knowledge of family structure is important for understanding gifted students of color. Clearly, parental involvement may be a key ingredient in identifying high achievers. In this sense, teachers may need to work to build partnerships with parents to understand their cultural patterns. Parents who are actively engaged in their children’s education typically are more supportive of their students, and challenge their children to reach their highest potential (Siddle-Walker, 1996). Developing and sustaining parental involvement cannot occur if teachers, principals, and schools do not promote environments of trust, acceptance, and warmth for parents coming from different cultural backgrounds. In summary, an important component of identifying gifted students of color may emerge from culturally sensitive and responsive (Gay, 2000) teacherfamily connections. This means that teachers may need to go out into the community to develop relationships with diverse parents that may facilitate and foster these connections for the sake of students.

As expressed previously in this article, it is essential that teachers understand the contextual nature of their teaching environments well. What may work in a suburban, more affluent environment would likely not work in an innercity school. Teachers must assume the role of learner in contexts that are confusing to them in order to meet the needs of all their students. Teachers’ adoption of the learner role is critical in their quest for cultural competence. For gifted students, motivation may come from a teacher taking an interest in them outside of regular classroom hours (see Suskind, 1998), and it may take this type of inspiration for teachers to identify certain students as gifted. Again, the teachers’ commitment to their students outside of the regular classroom allows the teacher to learn about and to pursue cultural competence. There must be factors other than test scores that provide evidence that a student is gifted (Ford, 2004). Teachers must go beyond traditional roles, and extend themselves to become advocates and voices for students who do not have a seat in the decision-making process (Freire, 1998).

Retaining Gifted Students of Color

Too often, teachers enter classrooms cross-racially, ethnically, and culturally incompetent. They have not had significant interactions with teachers and students from different backgrounds and, as a result, their levels of expertise are tenuous. As teachers work to retain gifted culturally diverse students, they should consider watching the television programs their students watch and even listening to their students’ choice of music from time to time. By attempting to enter into and engage in their students’ worlds, teachers are pursuing cultural competence. When teachers step into their students’ shoes, they move closer to gaining cultural knowledge; they begin to develop basic understandings of students based on students’ interests and experiences.

In today’s pop culture, students are very affected by music and what they hear on radio stations. A teacher actively seeking cultural competence may tune into radio stations that are more attractive to their students of color. Teachers can use this new knowledge as a way to link out-of-school experiences with inschool learning. Teachers can develop ways to connect lessons to their students of color as they attempt to retain them in gifted programs.

Teachers should also develop learning environments that display communal quests for knowledge, answers, and meaning making. This may require that we as teachers have to relinquish some of our control and decide that students are also knowledgeable, and thus capable of contributing to the knowledge development and constructi\on in the classroom. In this way, the teacher is not the only (nor the main) arbiter of knowledge. Teachers realize that diverse students have a right to think as individual scholars in the world, even when their points of view are unpopular and inconsistent with dominant views. This allows students the opportunity to theorize and substantiate their expertise from their experiences in the world, hooks (1994) makes an important point regarding issues of voice, experience, and perspective:

As a teacher, I recognize that students…enter classrooms within institutions where their voices have been neither heard nor welcomed, whether these students discuss facts-those that any of us might know-or personal experience. My pedagogy has been shaped to respond to this reality. If I do not wish to see these students use the “authority of experience” as a means of asserting voice, I can circumvent this possible misuse of power by bringing to the classroom pedagogical strategies that affirm their presence, their right to speak, in multiple ways on diverse topics, (p. 84)

Gifted, culturally diverse students may feel more empowered, comfortable, and equipped in these types of contexts, and may be more likely to remain there. Even when a gifted student’s intellectual growth is stifled by lack of a structured program, teachers can assist the student by developing a set of experiences that intensifies their education. The lack of resources, then, should not be a dead end for teachers and students in schools with meager assets. This may mean that teachers alone have to develop lessons and experiences that validate the richness of individual students. Teachers can acknowledge what diverse students bring into the classroom (their expertise and strengths), even without the formal label of “gifted.”

Conclusions

Too often, students of color bring into classrooms a set of experiences that are misunderstood and inconsistent with their teachers’ experiences. Experiences among students of color influence what these students have come to believe, the effort that they display in their academics, how they interact with their classmates, and how they interpret and negotiate other matters inside and outside of school. It is clear in the literature that teachers’ experiences and their beliefs also significantly impact how they perceive their students’ potential and their decisions regarding students (see, for instance, Milner, 2003b; Woolfolk, 2004). Thus, helping teachers understand their beliefs and providing them with new (and perhaps more appropriate) lenses to view their students’ strengths and talents can enable them to rethink their definitions and meanings of giftedness and talent.

There is a level of urgency associated with identifying and retaining culturally diverse students in gifted education. If elementary-school teachers continue to think about, perceive, and make decisions relative to students of color in the same ways they have in the past, we will continue to see the underrepresentation of culturally diverse students in gifted programs. Elementary teachers, because they come into contact with learners at such an early age, can reverse (Ford, 1996) the scarce representation of students of color in gifted programs. Moreover, African American students appear to achieve at and engage in learning until they reach fourth grade. The elementary teacher can play such an essential role in these students’ educational and societal success. As a result of elementary-school teachers’ pursuit of cultural competence, culturally diverse learners reap the benefits in subsequent years. Indeed, we must begin seeing the genius in young students of color, so that they can reach their full potential in their lives.

Finally, this discussion is not meant to blame teachers for the underrepresentation of culturally diverse students in gifted programs or their attrition from these programs. On the contrary, there are many different players (from individuals to tests) responsible, and there is a need to address these different participants. The teacher, however, is a key player in the recruitment and retention of culturally diverse students in gifted education, and more research and discussion are needed to better prepare all who are involved in the future of gifted students.

Manuscript submitted May 26, 2005.

Revision accepted January 27, 2006.

Endnotes

1 We understand that there is a huge range of diversity even within racial and ethnic groups. The references to “students of color” in this article are not references intended to generalize about any group of students. On the contrary, these references are grounded in our own research and conceptual work (see Ford, Moore, & Milner, 2005; Milner, 2002, 2006) and are intended to shed light on complicated issues that need more attention in research and writing.

2 Throughout this article, we use The terms cultural competence and multicultural competence. While culture and multicultural have similar meanings, much of the literature discusses multicultural competence instead of cultural competence. We have found the two concepts interrelated, and we thus use the terms interchangeably throughout this article.

3 For an extensive discussion of research that summarizes where specific cultural groups fall along the continuum, see Hofstede (1980. 1991), Storti(1998, 1999), and Ting-Toomey (1999).

4 Delpit (1995) wrote about what she called the culture of power in her book, Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflicts in the Classroom.

REFERENCES

Baldwin, A. Y., & Vialle. W. (1999). The many faces of giftedness: Lifting the masks. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Banks. J. A. (1998). Curriculum transformation. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), An introduction to multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 21- 34). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Banks. J. A. (2001 ). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 5-16.

Banks. J. A.. & Banks, C. A. M. (2000). Multicultural education: Issues & perspectives. (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Delpit. L. ( 1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.

Dyson. A. H., & Genishi, C. (1994). The need for story: Cultural diversity in classmom and community. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Ford, D. Y. (1996). Reversing underachievetnent among gifted Black students: Promising practices and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.

Ford, D. Y. (1998). The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. Journal of Special Education, 32, 4-14.

Ford. D. Y. (2004). A challenge for culturally diverse families of gifted children: Forced choices between affiliation or achievement. Gifted Child Today, 27(3), 26-29.

Ford. D. Y. (2006). Identification of young culturally diverse students for gifted education programs. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 20(1), 2-4.

Ford, D. Y., & Grantham, T. (2003). Providing access for culturally diverse gifted students: From deficit to dynamic thinking. Theorv into Practice, 42, 217-225.

Ford, D. Y., & Harris, J. J., III. (1999). Multicultural gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Ford, D. Y., Moore, J. L., & Milner, H. R. (2005). Beyond culture blindness: A model of culture with implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 27, 97-103.

Frasier, M. M.,Garcia, J. H.,& Passow, A. H. (1995). A review of assessment issues in gifted education and their implications for identifying gifted minority students. Storrs: The University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally, responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Gay. G., & Howard, T. (2000). Multicultural teacher education for the 21st century. The Teacher Educator. 36, 1-16.

Grant, C. A., &Tate, W. F. (1995). Multicultural education through the lens of the multicultural education research literature. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 145-166). New York: Macmillan.

Hale, J. E. (2001 ). Learning while black: Creating educational excellence for African American children. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. New York: Doubleday.

Hall, E. T. ( 1981 ). Beyond culture (2nd ed.). Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

Hall, E. T., & Hall. M. R. (1987). Hidden differences: Doing business with the Japanese. New York: Anchor Books.

Harmon, D. (2002). They won’t teach me: The voices of gifted African American inner-city students. Roeper Review, 24, 68-75.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related values, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1991 ). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. (1984). Hofstede’s culture dimensions. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 15, 417-433. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

Irvine, J. J. (1990). Black students and school failure. New York: Greenwood Press.

Irvine, J. J..& York, D. E. (1995). Learning styles and culturally diverse students: A literature review. In J. A. Banks & C. A. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 484-497). New York: Macmillan.

Jenks.C.. Lee, J. O., & Kanpol, B. (2001). Approaches to multicultural education in preservice teacher education: Philosophical frameworks and models for teaching. Urban Review, 33, 87-105.

Johnson, L. (2002). “My eyes have been opened”: White teachers and racial awareness. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 153-167.

Ladson-Billings. G. ( 1994). The dreatnkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lewis, A. E. (2001). There is no “race” in \the schoolyard: Colorblind ideology in an (almost) all White school. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 781-811.

Milner, H. R. (2002). Affective and social issues among high- achieving African American students: Recommendations for teachers and teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 24(1), 81-89.

Milner. H. R. (2003a). Teacher reflection and race in cultural contexts: History, meaning, and methods in teaching. Theory info Practice, 42, 173-180.

Milner, H. R. (2003b). A case study of an African American English teacher’s cultural comprehensive knowledge and (self) reflective planning. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18, 175- 196.

Milner, H. R. (2006). Effective pedagogical strategies and philosophies for gifted students of color. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 20(1),4-8.

Rios.F. A. (1996). Teacher thinking in cultural contexts. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Shujaa. M. J. (Ed.). (1994). Too much schooling, too little education: Paradox of black life in white societies. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Siddle-Walker, V. (1996). Their highest potential: An African American school community in the segregated south. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Storti.C. (1989), The art of crossing cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Storti, C. ( 1998), The art of crossing cultures (2nd ed.). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Storti, C. (1999). Figuring foreigners out: A practical guide. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Suskind, R. (1998). A hope in the unseen: An American odyssey from the inner city to the ivy league. New York: Broadway.

Tatum, B. D. (2001). Professional development: An important partner in antiracist teacher education. In S. H. King & L. A. Castenell (Eds.), Racism and racial inequality: Implications for teacher education (pp. 51-58). Washington, DC: AACTE Publications.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford Press.

U.S. Department of Education. Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s talent. Washington, DC: Author.

Woolfolk, A. E. (2004). Educational Psychology (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

H. Richard Milner. PhD, is Betts Assistant of Education in the Language, Literacy, and Culture program in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. His research interests focus on teacher learning and change in curriculum development, urban education, and equity, race, and racism in education. E-mail: rich.milner@vanderbilt.edu

Donna Y. Ford, PhD, is Betts Chair of Education and Human Development at Vanderbilt University. She teaches in the Department of Special Education. Professor Ford conducts research primarily in gifted education and multicultural/urban education. Specifically, her work focuses on: recruiting and retaining culturally diverse students in gifted education: multicultural and urban education; and minority student achievement and underachievement. E-mail: donna.ford@vanderbilt.edu

Copyright Roeper Review Spring 2007

(c) 2007 Roeper Review. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.