Recruiting and Retaining Culturally Different Students in Gifted Education
One pervasive educational issue is the national underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic students in gifted education. Virtually every school district is grappling with having too few students from these groups identified as gifted and served in gifted classes and programs. Recruiting and Retaining Culturally Different Students in Gifted Education addresses this long-standing national problem through the dual lens of recruitment and retention. The focus is on how to equitably recruit (screen, refer, and/or assess) culturally different students and, just as importantly, to retain them. Recruitment and retention require providing academic, cultural, and social supports to culturally different students and ensuring that educators are willing and able to address issues and barriers. No time is better than now to address and correct the underachievement albatross, and the focus on recruitment and retention holds the greatest promise.
Nominated for a 2014 NAACP Image Award in the Outstanding Literary Work-Instructional Category
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements Introduction A Mind Is a Terrible Thing to Waste and Erase Chapter 1 Beyond Colorblindness Culture and Cultural Differences Among Black and Hispanic Students Chapter 2 Recruitment and Retention Desegregation and Integration to Address Underrepresentation Chapter 3 Underrepresentation and Equity Formulas Examining Data and Setting Minimal Goals Chapter 4 Subjectivity and Underrepresentation The Dangers and Tragedies of Deficit Thinking Chapter 5 Tests as Gatekeepers Pitfalls and Promises With Recruitment Chapter 6 Policies and Procedures Culturally Irresponsive Chapter 7 Gifted Programs and the Learning Environment Retention and Integration Chapter 8 Summary and Conclusions Journey to Equity—The Future Is Now References Appendix A Position Statement The Role of Assessments in the Identification of Gifted Students Appendix B Position Statement Identifying and Serving Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Gifted Students Appendix C Position Statement Snapshot Survey of Gifted Programming Effectiveness Factors About the Author
Donna Y. Ford, Ph.D., is a professor in the Peabody College of Education and Human Development at Vanderbilt University. She holds an appointment in the Department of Special Education and the Department of Teaching and Learning. Ford has been a professor of special education at the Ohio State University, an associate professor of educational psychology at the University of Virginia, and a researcher with the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. She also taught at the University of Kentucky. Ford earned her doctoral degree in urban education (educational psychology), master's degree (counseling), and bachelor's degree in communications and Spanish from Cleveland State University.
Dr. Ford conducts research primarily in gifted education and multicultural/urban education. She is highly published and has a extensive line of scholarship. Specifically, her work focuses on closing the achievement gap in five major ways: (a) recruiting and retaining culturally different students in gifted education, (b) developing multicultural curriculum and instruction, (c ), reversing underachievement among gifted Black students, (d) increasing Black family involvement, and (e) developing culturally competent educators. She consults with school districts and educational organizations nationally, and serves in several leadership roles in both gifted and urban education.
Ford presents a clear, well-organized position on the current status of gifted education recruitment practices, methods of retention, and the discrimination that often results from the continuation of practices that produce inequitable outcomes. She provides compelling examples of students she has encountered throughout her research, personal, and professional experience who have been subjected to discriminatory practices during the screening and/or identification process. Practical examples are offered in the text, including tools to measure the level of discrimination within a given population so that program administrators are able to quantify the extent to which they are deficient and to track progress. ,Anthony Washington,Roeper Review, 9/1/14