University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Factors influencing teachers' and administrators' identification of diverse students for gifted programs in Title I schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Factors influencing teachers' and administrators' identification of diverse students for gifted programs in Title I schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content FACTORS INFLUENCING TEACHERS’ AND ADMINISTRATORS’
IDENTIFICATION OF DIVERSE STUDENTS FOR
GIFTED PROGRAMS IN TITLE I SCHOOLS
by
Jennifer Kang-Moon
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2006
Copyright 2006 Jennifer Kang Moon
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3236516
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3236516
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Keong Suk and Moon Sung
Kang, who made me believe that all things are possible if I believe...
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation is the first step of my scholarly life. It could not have been
possible without the guidance and encouragement of people to whom I am
privileged to express my gratitude.
Many thanks must go to my dissertation chair, Dr. Sandra Kaplan. With her
rigorous encouragement and patience, she wonderfully guided me through this
work when I often doubted I would ever finish. Her warm encouragement has not
disguised my problems, yet made me recognize them more clearly. Her penetrating
criticism has never let me down, yet provided strong motivation to resume. Her
abundant knowledge, sophisticated comments, and editorial work helped turn my
half-baked idea into a concrete shape and gave the study whatever virtue it has. She
is a wonderful role model, who showed me how devoted teachers of gifted children
educate their students. All of these really inspired and encouraged me to start and
complete this dissertation. I will not forget her noble role and I sincerely thank her
again.
My committee members Dr. Joel Colbert and Dr. William Me Comas, I am deeply
grateful for their enthusiasm and interest in my study. Their guidance through this
process is greatly appreciated. I could not ask for a better committee to guide me
through this process and I thank both of them for generously offering their vast
expertise in this undertaking. To my dissertation cohort member, Alfredo, thank
you for all your help and support. I would not have been able to complete this task
if you were not there to do it with me. I sincerely thank you.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iv
Special thanks to my wonderful principal, Mrs. Rubin E. White and the
staff at Emerson Elementary School. Thank you for supporting me along the way
and encouraging me to complete my study. All of you truly helped me to learn how
a true educator in an inner city should be. I have never met such hard working
individuals in my education career and yes, I believe that we can make our school
as one of California’s Distinguished School in the following year. Thank you for
being my “family” and helping me in every step of the way.
A final and special thank you to my family for the unending love and
support you have given me throughout this arduous process, and throughout my
life. To my parents, Keong Suk and Moon Sung Kang, who have given so much for
me to become the person I am. Their endless love, selfless patience and heartfelt
prayer enabled me to focus on my study. It is for this reason that this dissertation is
dedicated to them. To my mother-in-law, Dr. Young Moon, I thank her for her
encouraging words and for being both an inspiration and a role model for me to
strive to the utmost abilities. To my husband Steve, I could not have done it without
you. Your support throughout this journey was incredible and my words cannot
encompass my gratitude for all your support. I love you with all my heart and I am
truly blessed to have you in my life. To my sister, Helen, my brother- and sister-in-
law, Jason, Justin, and Shelly, for the encouragement they have given without even
being asked. To all my beautiful supporting friends, I thank them all for always
being there for me and supporting me in everything I do. Finally, to my baby niece
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Michaela, I hope your Auntie Jenn’s accomplishments will serve to inspire
and encourage you to always seek to learn and grow.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................viii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION.................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................12
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................35
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS ...............................................................................51
CHAPTER 5: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .......................................109
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 127
APPENDICES ................................................................................................ 140
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Percentage of Minority Students Enrolled................................................2
Table 2: Interview Data Related to Research Question # 1 .................................. 47
Table 3: Interview Data Related to Research Question # 2 :................................. 48
Table 4: Interview Data Related to Research Question # 3 :................................. 49
Table 5: School Profile ..........................................................................................53
Table 6: Demographic Data: Luther Elementary School in Compton................ 61
Table 7: Demographics Data: Bermont Elementary School in Bell Gardens ....62
Table 8: Summary of Interview Data Related to Research Question # 1 :...........63
Table 9: Summary of Interview Data Related to Research Question #2 ...........83
Table 10: Referral and Nomination of Students ................................................ 104
Table 11 Overview of Participants........................................................................I l l
Table 12Relationship between Teachers’ and Administrators Perceptions.......119
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Teachers’ and Administrators’ First Perception.............................84
Figure 2. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Second Perception ........................... 89
Figure 3. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Third Perception...........................93
Figure 4. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Fourth Perception .........................97
Figure 5. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Fifth Perception .........................100
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ix
ABSTRACT
The number of students served in gifted and talented programs has grown
substantially in the past decades (Ford, 1995). However, it is also clear that
students from economically disadvantaged families and students with exceptional
talents are not being identified in fair proportions compared to the numbers in the
general population. When representation for gifted students is not in proportion to
the total school population, the question of equity and discriminatory factors which
hinder or place minorities at disadvantage emerge (Gallagher, 1995).
This dissertation explored three questions: What are the teachers’ and
administrators’ perceptions of linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse
students’ academic potential in urban Title I schools; what factors contribute to the
perceptions of these teachers and administrators; and what is the relationship
between the perceptions of these teachers and administrators and the factors
influencing the nomination and selection of linguistically, economically, and
culturally diverse students for the gifted education program in urban Title I schools.
The purpose of this study was to explore teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions
and factors which influenced the nomination rate of students of diversity for the
gifted program in urban Title I schools.
Interviews with five teachers, one gifted coordinator, and one administrator
from a school within the Compton Unified School District and Montebello Unified
School District were conducted. Analysis of the transcripts and reviews found
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
following teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of their students: no
support and stability at home, language barriers, economic hardships and barriers,
low achieving and lack of motivation, and poor behavior and disciplinary problems.
Overall, this study indicated that there is no direct relationship between teachers’
and administrators’ perception of their students and the referral process for the
gifted program, but rather, expectation for paper work, differences in district
identification criteria, and lack of teachers’ knowledge of the referral process were
the factors which influenced the teachers’ referral and nomination process for the
gifted program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Throughout recorded history, the accomplishments and abilities of gifted
children have always captured the attention of societies at large (Colangelo &
Davis, 1997). Such attention to giftedness appeared in the U.S in the mid - 1800s
sparkling a movement toward differentiated education for children who
demonstrated superior abilities (Newland, 1976; cited in Valencia & Suzuki, 2001).
Racial and ethnic minority students, especially Latinos and African Americans,
however, continue to be underidentified as gifted (Chinn & Hughes, 1987; Ford,
1998, Harris, Tyson, & Trottman, 2002, Harris & Ford, 1991; Valencia & Suzuki).
Over the years, numerous writers have observed that gifted children are
found in every level of society and in every cultural and ethnic group (Clark, 1993;
Ford, 1994; Renzulli, 1973; Torrance, 1977). Yet, identification of students with
learning or physical disabilities and those from different cultural and ethnic groups
have not been commensurate with their numbers in the total school population.
Students of economic, linguistic and cultural diversity are not adequately
represented in programs for the gifted and talented (LaFontaine, 1987). They have
been underrepresented in programs for gifted students (Castellano, 2003; National
Research Council, 2002). Richert (1998) reported that some districts have an under
representation of minority and low SES students as high as 600 percent for Black
males, some report under-representation as high as 800 percent. Ortiz and Gonzales
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
(1989) testified in a report from the U.S Department of Education Office
of Civil Rights that “minority groups such as African Americans, Hispanics, and
Native Americans are underrepresented as much as 70 % in gifted programs”.
Furthermore, students who are bilingual and with limited English Proficiency lag
father behind in gifted service provisions (Cohen, 1990). See Table 1.
Table 1
Percentage o f Minority Students Enrolled in Regular Educational Programs and
Special Programs in the U.S in 1985
Minority Group General Enrollment Enrollment in Gifted Programs
Caucasians 71.2% 81.4%
Blacks 16.2% 8.4%
Hispanics 9.1% 4.7%
Asians 2.5% 5.0%
Sources: Zappia, (1989); Machado, (1987).
Students with gifted and talented exceptionalities come from all cultural and
socioeconomic backgrounds. Utilizing the data from the 1994 Office of Civil
Rights survey, Valencia and Suzuki (2001) revealed a pattern which showed that
African Americans, Latinos, and American Indians were underrepresented in gifted
programs for the nation as whole and 10 states with the largest combined minority
school enrollment. When representation for gifted students is not in proportion to
the total school population, the question of equity and discriminatory factors which
hinder or place minorities at disadvantage emerge (Gallagher, 1995). In the case of
minority students, only one half of the eligible students are identified and receive
services (Gallagher, 1995). The National Educational Longitudinal Study of the
U.S Department of Education (1991) indicated that the students whose families’
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
socioeconomic status places them in the top quartile of the population are
about five times more likely to be in programs for gifted students than are students
from families in the bottom quartile.
The National Academy of Sciences ( Donovan & Cross 2002), documented
that although there has been large increase in the representation of American
Indian, Native Alaskan, African American, and Hispanic students identified as
gifted, the under representation of these groups continues to plague our educational
system. The report points out that although there is variation among states, African
American and Hispanic students are less than half as likely to be in gifted programs
as Caucasian students. The National Excellence report (U.S. Department of
Education, 1993) documented the under representation of low income students with
National Longitudinal Study data indicating that only 9% of students in the gifted
and talented programs were categorized in the bottom quartile of family income.
Despite the clear statements in national policy documents that outstanding
talents and abilities are present in students from all cultural, ethnic, and educational
backgrounds, the more common belief is that there are few students who come
from diverse families in poverty who are capable of developing into gifted children
and adults or who will exhibit gifted behaviors (U.S Department of Education,
1993). There is an erroneous belief that most of these students of diversity lack the
basic skills or abilities that promote the development of giftedness. (Clasen, 1994;
Frasier, Garcia, Passow, 1995; McCarthy, Lynch, Wallace, and Banally 1991)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
The concerns over recruiting and retaining underrepresented
African American and Hispanic students in gifted education programs have
persisted for several decades. One of the earliest articles to address the under
identification of minority students as gifted was written by Jenkins (1936). Since
that time, other authors such as LaFontaine (1987) and Ortiz and Gonzales (1989)
have focused on the under representation of African American, Hispanic American,
and American Indian students in gifted education.
When making referrals for students to be identified as gifted, teachers often
emphasize such behaviors as cooperation, answering correctly, punctuality, and
neatness (Cox, Daniels, & Boston, 1985). These may not be the behaviors that
gifted minority students demonstrate (Torrance, 1977, Corwin, M. 2001). Likewise,
such characteristics as race, gender, socioeconomic status, and family structure all
influence teachers' perceptions of students (Good, 1981; Irvine, 1991; Winfield,
1986). Many studies that show the nature and extent of teacher referral of
minority students in special education, but much less has been examined regarding
teacher referrals of gifted minority students. High and Udall (1983) found that
number of referrals of African American students for gifted education programs by
Caucasian teachers were subsequently low in number. Burstein and Cabello (1989)
found that 38% of student teachers believed that poor academic achievement and
performance among minority students was due to cultural deficits. These low
teacher expectations and negative perceptions can result in the low referral rates of
minority students as gifted individuals and participants in the gifted program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
Minorities and the disadvantaged have far smaller chance of participating
in gifted and talented programs than do advantaged members of the majority
culture (McKenzie, 1986). It is a reality that problems related to racism,
segregation, and long-held beliefs concerning minority groups have resulted in
doubtful benefits for students whose rights the policies were designed to protect.
(Artiles& Trent, 1994).
Purpose of the Study
The number of students served in gifted and talented programs has grown
substantially in the past decades (Ford, 1995). However, it is also clear that
students from economically, culturally and linguistically diverse families with
exceptional talents are not being identified in fair proportions compared to the
numbers in the general population. Some of the factors contributing to the under
referral of these students are teacher attitude and the type of school these students
are likely to attend (High & Udall, 1983). Research indicates that students,
teachers, and school professionals continue to have low academic expectations for
culturally and linguistically diverse students (Jones, 1988). Such low expectations
have tended to cause teachers to overlook these students when making referrals for
gifted program screening.
This study sought to find more information concerning the reasons why
many of these students of diversity in Title I schools are not referred for gifted
education programs. By investigating these reasons, it has been possible to increase
understanding of teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of minority students in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
urban Title I schools and factors which prevented the identification of
these students as gifted.
Significance of the Study
There has been significantly low number of referrals of diverse students for
the gifted education program (Daniels, 1998). The reasons for this under
representation include:
• teacher perceptions of student expectations
• stereotypes of giftedness
• test bias
• lack of a universal definition of giftedness
• parent’s awareness
• administrative issues (Masten & Plata, 2000)
This study was developed to address the questions related to why there is
low number of students of diversity being recommended and screened for the gifted
program from Title I population. By examining these issues, the researcher was
able to clearly define the factors that influence the nomination and selection of
students of diversity for the gifted education program.
Exploratory Questions
Three questions guided this study:
1. What are the teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of linguistically,
economically, and culturally diverse students’ academic potential in urban
Title I schools?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
7
2. What factors contribute to perceptions of these teachers and
administrators?
3. What is the relationship between the perceptions of these teachers and
administrators and the factors influencing the nomination and selection of
linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students for the gifted
education program from urban Title I schools?
Methodological overview
In order to answer the research questions, qualitative methodology was
used. An interview (Appendices A & B) with both closed and open ended questions
was created to identify the factors that influence the nominations of minority
students for the gifted education program. The researcher contacted one Title I
elementary school in Compton and another in Montebello Unified School District
that have similar social, economic, cultural, and linguistic populations. The
researcher contacted the schools’ principals to get permission to come in and
introduce the study during teachers’ faculty meeting. The researcher conducted an
overview of the .study to explain the purpose of the research and to acquire
participants for the study.
The principal, gifted coordinator and five teachers who have or had
identified gifted or potentially gifted students in their class and/or school were
asked to participate in the study. To minimize any bias, first five teachers who
volunteered along with a gifted coordinator and an administrator from each school
site were asked to be interviewed. In order to maximize the participation rate, a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
raffle ticket was given to volunteers for the study to win a cash prize of
100 hundred dollars. A pilot study was conducted to validate the research
instrument, which was an interview protocol. Pilot studies are a crucial element of
a good study design. Conducting a pilot study does not guarantee success in the
main study, but it does increase the likelihood and it will provide valuable insight
for the researcher.
Definition Terms
1. Alternative Education Methods: Alternative education is based upon the
belief that there are many ways to become educated, as well as many types
of environments and structures within which this may occur. Further, it
recognizes that all people can be educated and that it is in society's interest
to ensure that all are educated to at least something like an ideal, general
high school education at the mastery level. Alternative education is
recognizing that everyone does not learn in the same way and should not be
taught in the same way using a common curriculum. It is accepting that all
schools do not have to be alike with the same learning environments and
that parents and children are capable of making decisions about what and
how they learn. Alternative education is represented by: (a) alternative
schools, both public and private; (b) alternative programs for students to
pursue common goals through varying approaches within the same schools;
and (c) a set of teaching strategies, beliefs and support services that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
facilitate growth in academic, personal/social and career
development initiatives.
2. Diversity: Amongst humans, particularly in a social context, the term
diversity refers to the presence in one population of a wide variety of
cultures, opinions, ethnic groups, and socio-economic backgrounds
3. Economically and Socially Disadvantaged: Individuals who have been
subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of their
identity as a member of a group without regard to their individual qualities.
4. Gifted - Having superior mental ability or intelligence. A label of potential.
The intellect and emotions of gifted students are both quantitatively and
qualitatively different ( Calif. Ed. Code)
5. Gifted programs - Special academic and social opportunities which try to
meet the needs of gifted students
6. Intelligence quotient (IQ) - A quantitative representation of cognitive
ability which results from testing a sample of cognitive skills. The formula
is intellectual age divided by chronological age, times 100. For example,
someone 10 years old with an intellectual age of 13 would have an IQ of
130. This is called the "ratio IQ." The scales of different IQ tests vary
slightly due to differences in test construction and the sample which
provided the norm. Variation in scores is described by the standard
deviation. Assuming that intelligence is normally distributed, the IQs of
about 95 percent of the population are between 70 (about 2 standard
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
deviations below the mean) and 130 (about 2 standard deviations
above the mean). Below 70 is considered retarded, and above 130 is
considered gifted. Individual tests such as the WISC and Stanford-Binet are
considered the most reliable, but no published test since the older Stanford-
Binet Form LM (1972) is valid above 160. Most IQ tests since 1960 have
reported IQ as "deviation IQ," which adjusts the ratio IQ scale slightly
based on the different means and standard deviations of each age group in
the sample used to construct the test. Ratio and deviation IQ's seldom differ
by more than 4 points.
7. Linguistic: Consisting of or related to language: "linguistic behavior", "a
linguistic atlas", "lingual diversity" or relating to the scientific study of
language: "linguistic theory".
8. Novice Teacher: Teacher who has taught fewer than 5 years
9. Title I: Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides
financial assistance to state and local educational agencies to meet the needs
of educationally deprived, at-risk children. The goal of Title I is to provide
instructional services and activities to meet the needs of disadvantaged
children identified as failing or most at risk of failing the state's challenging
performance standards.
10. Urban: relating to or concerned with a city or densely populated area;
"urban sociology"; "urban development"
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
11. Veteran Teacher: Teacher who has given at least five years of
teaching service.
Delimitation and Limitation
Delimitation:
The study was delimited to elementary school teachers and administrators
in two urban Title I schools that have had potentially gifted or identified gifted
students in their classroom and school.
Limitation:
The study was limited in three ways:
1. The conclusions drawn from this study are applicable only to the
elementary
school teachers and administrators who agreed to be interviewed in urban
Title
I schools in Compton and Montebello.
2. The sample size was relatively small and the data was collected only
from two urban Title I schools.
3. The study is limited to the information acquired from literature reviews
and personal interviews.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The objective of this literature review is to make an examination of
available and relevant literature in relation to the factors that affect the
nominations of students of diversity for the gifted program in urban Title I
schools in relation to language barriers, teacher bias, teacher perception and
other related matters.
Children from culturally, linguistically and/or economically
disadvantaged families and gifted children with disabilities have been
dramatically underrepresented in programs for gifted students (Castellano, 2003;
National Research Council, 2002). The reasons are complex and include an over
reliance on standardized tests, narrow conceptions of intelligence and the
resulting definitions of giftedness, and the procedures and policies that guide
local and state gifted programs. No amount of effort has yet produced a
successful long-term solution; despite decades of efforts, the under
representation dilemma still persists.
There are three important factors which have affected the identification of
the gifted children of diversity. First, there has been an increase in the selection and
use of tests and sophisticated assessment procedures (Fishman et al, 1967; Masten,
1981; Padilla & Wyatt, 1983). Second, there has been an increase in teacher
referrals for special education services because of learning or behavioral problems,
such as language barrier and discipline issues. Third, there has been an increased
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
effort to recognize and develop the potential abilities of culturally
different and minority children (Harris, 1993)
Historical evidence indicate that researchers (Bruch, 1971; Gerken, 1979;
Maker & Schiever, 1989; Perrone & Aleman, 1983; Torrance, 1970) have noted the
importance of discovering and enhancing the talent in various culturally different
groups and have recognized that with the changing demographics of a minority and
majority reversal occurring across the United States (Hogkinson, 1985; Kellogg,
1988; Olsen, 1988; Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1987), it
becomes especially important that the talents of these individuals from minority
cultures not go undiscovered (Maker & Schiever, 1989; Torrance, 1970).
Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement
The teachers and school administrators who work in America's large
cities face the daily challenge of educating children who are poor, English
language learners, and often labeled disadvantaged. Performance of urban Title I
schools is perpetually lower for students who are labeled poor or minority.
Often, the initial reaction is to blame the schools, and more specifically the
teachers who work with the students on a daily basis.
Research into the ways in which teachers interact with their students and
the relationship between those interactions and students' academic performance
(Brophy and Good, 1986; Douglass, 1964; Rowe, 1969; Mackler, 1969; and
others) provide considerable light on how teachers form expectations about their
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
students and, more important, how teachers' expectations influence their
behavior toward their students. Findings of Douglass (1964) and Mackler
(1969), are summarized as follows: "Teachers' expectations about a student's
achievement can be affected by factors having little or nothing to do with his or
her ability, and yet these expectations can determine the level of achievement by
confining learning opportunities to those available in one's track." Teachers who
teach in Title I schools can note the importance of these findings, particularly in
light of the evidence that the student often internalizes teachers' expectations
over time. When this internalization occurs, the student's self-concept and
motivation to achieve may decline over time until the student's ability to achieve
to his or her potential is damaged.
How do teacher expectations affect student outcomes? Researchers accept
Good and Brophy's (1980) description of the process:
• Early in the school year, teachers form differential expectations for
student behavior and achievement.
• Consistent with these differential expectations, teachers behave
differently toward various students.
• This treatment tells students something about how they are expected
to behave in the classroom and perform on academic tasks.
• If the teacher treatment is consistent over time and if students do not
actively resist or change it, it will likely affect their self-concepts,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
achievement motivation, levels of aspiration, classroom
conduct, and interactions with the teacher.
• These effects generally will complement and reinforce the teacher's
expectations, so that students will come to conform to these
expectations more than they might have otherwise.
• Ultimately, this will affect student achievement and other outcomes.
High-expectation students will be led to achieve at or near their
potential, but low expectation students will not gain as much as they
could have gained if taught differently (Restated in Good 1987, p.
33).
The evidence that high expectations for students can also have an impact
has been clearly documented. A study by Edmonds and Frederiksen (1978)
found that teachers in instructionally effective inner-city schools had "high
expectations" for all of their students. Students who are taught with high
expectation tend to do better in school. Other studies have yielded comparable
results (Brophy and Evertson, 1976; McDonald and Elias, 1976; Rutter, et al.,
1979; Andrews, Soder, and Jacoby, 1986; Bamburg and Andrews, 1989).
During spring 1992, the Center for Effective Schools (CES) at the
University of Washington surveyed the staff of 87 elementary and secondary
schools in four urban school districts (Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis, and
Milwaukee) as part of the data collection activities of the Academy for Urban
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
School Leaders, sponsored by the North Central Regional Educational
Laboratory (NCREL). The surveys, based on CES research, were designed to
assess staff perceptions of their school on nine school variables, which were
instructional leadership of the principal, staff dedication, high expectations for
student achievement, frequent monitoring of student progress, and early
identification of students with special learning needs, positive learning climate,
multicultural education, and sex equity. The survey results on the high expectations
for student achievement variable indicated that a large percentage of the 2,378
teachers who responded did not have high expectations for the academic
achievement of students in their schools.
The expectations a teacher has of students under their instruction affects the
outcomes in terms of the achievement of the student. In the Title I Schools,
providing education to students of diversity is required to adhere to certain
standards of provision of education. Brophy (1983) works were inclusive of
literature in relation to self-fulfilling prophecy effects and concluded that teachers
hold expectations that effect the achievement of their students.
Good (1987) found that the teachers’ perceptions of students’ abilities as
well as their interactional manner with the students in the classroom showed a
favoritism of high ability over that of low ability students indicating a need for
teachers to at all times be self-aware so as not to harm the development progress of
the low ability students in their classroom.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
Gaddy (1988) stated findings based on reviews of several major
studies in relation to school effectiveness in clarifying the relationship that exists
between discipline, order, and achievement. One conclusion reached in his study
was that holding expectations that were high for students in learning is a vital part
of what forms an effective climate in school. Limited English Proficient (LEP)
students that participated in successful gifted program learned in part through the
program enabling them to further the development of individual talents valued on a
global basis culturally and in the acquisition of skills that would provide mobility
“between and within at least two cultures, and to develop their sense of
identity”(Frasier, 1997, p. 501). >
Two Decades o f Research on Teacher’ s Expectations: Finding and Future
Directions states, “studies have shown that teachers’ expectations are often an
accurate assessment of student ability and behavior.” Further related is that the
expectations of the teacher may often be based on the lack of information or upon
misinformation or “inappropriate knowledge” (Good, 1987) of the manner of
proper response to students who experience learning difficulties. The following
factors were noted: Teachers form differential expectations for student behavior as
well as student achievement, different behavior of teachers toward different
students which is consistent with the differential explanations, the teacher’s
treatment of student expresses expectations for the student behavior and
accomplishment in the classroom, and if there is consistent treatment by the teacher
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
over a period of time and if the students are not resistive to the treatment it
will likely affect the behavior and achievement motivation of the student (Good,
1987).
Factors Related to Underachievement
All individuals have the ability to learn and attain self-fulfillment,
however many children are at risk of failing to achieve their academic potential.
Gifted students are one group of exceptional learners who are not normally
considered at risk for academic failure. However, the underachievement of
academically gifted students is an area of concern and frustration for many
parents, teachers, and counselors
Early researchers (Raph, Goldberg, and Passow, 1966) and some recent
authors (Davis and Rimm, 1998) have defined underachievement in terms of a
discrepancy between a child's school performance and some ability index such as
an IQ score. Underachievement is academic performance that is significantly lower
than predicted, based on some reliable evidence of learning potential. There is a
range of mild to severe underachievement. When the discrepancy appears to be
significant to the teacher and parents, attention should be given to the student's
specific needs for modification of educational programming.
S students of color, such as African American, Hispanic American, and
Native American are often underachievers and low achievers in American school
settings (Diaz, 1999; Ford, 1995; Grantham & Ford, 2003; Moore, 2003; Ogbu,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
2003; Pewewardy, 1993). In comparison to their White student
counterparts, students of diversity are likely to perform poorly on high-stakes tests,
earn lower grades, drop out of school at unreasonable rates, and otherwise fail to
achieve at levels commensurate with their academic ability (Dembo, 2002; Shaffer,
Ortman, & Dembo, 2002).
The idea of an underachieving gifted student can seem contradictory if
intellectually gifted students are seen only as those who excel in school at high
levels of academic achievement. However, since the new federal definition was
formulated in the early 1970s, there has been growing support in the field for
defining intellectual giftedness as exceptional potential for high academic
achievement, whether or not it has been demonstrated at school. It is assumed that
the gifted underachiever has exceptional potential. A student may be gifted in one
or many areas of learning or cognitive processing; however, few mentally gifted
students have the capability of truly excelling in all subjects and on all kinds of
academic tasks.
Gifted underachievers apparently have three patterns of behavioral
responses to the school setting: non-communicative and withdrawn, passively
complying to get by, and aggressive and disruptive problem students (Whitmore,
1995).Behavior patterns of all three groups tend to reflect feelings of low self
esteem, a lack of belief in their ability to influence outcomes in school, an
unrealistic self-concept, and negative attitudes toward school. Generally, these
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
students tend to be loners who have difficulty making or maintaining
friendships. Apparent underachieving problem may be masking serious physical,
cognitive, or emotional issues, such as learning disability (Moon & Hall, 1998;
Reis & Me Coach 2002) and student with learning disabilities often exhibit poor s
academic self confidence (Baum 2004; Stone & May 2002).
The most confounding group of gifted underachievers are those who are not
recognized while in school (Butler, 1987) Awareness of this group has developed
primarily through the identification of adults with superior intellectual abilities
whose school records show mediocre or poor academic performance. Some of the
causes of underachievement are: First, lack of motivation (Covington, 1984): Many
highly gifted and creative children have learning styles that are incompatible with
common instructional methods. In addition, the level of instruction may be
inappropriate for these students and the restrictions on learning in the classroom
discourage their full participation.
Second, values of conflict: Students may not want to participate in school
because of conflicts between the values of the school or the gifted program and the
values held by the individuals and the cultures from which they come. For
example, female students from cultures in which a college education or a career is
not expected may underachieve may not try her best to attend college.
Third, lack of environmental support of intellectual potential: Low
socioeconomic status families often fail to provide exposure that stimulates the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
development of higher level thinking skills. Enriching experiences such as
travel, educational activities, and shared problem solving may be neglected due to
financial burden. Such students may be from isolated rural settings, economically
disadvantaged urban sites, or specific ethnic or cultural minorities that do not
encourage intellectual development.
Fourth, developmental delays or chronic poor health: These students are
characterized by relatively low energy levels or interfering hyperactivity. They may
have a mild delay in perceptual motor skill development or a general immaturity in
all areas. Often these students have entered school as the youngest in their class.
Finally, specific disabilities (Flowers, Milner, & Moore, 2003; Ford et al., 2002):
Impairment due to specific learning disabilities, brain damage/cerebral dysfunction
or neurological impairment, or lack of normal hearing or visual perception may be
the cause of underachievement. Some of these students can be dyslexic or
neurologically disabled. It is not the disability that produces that underachievement
but the lack of appropriate programming that supports these students. These
students are not adequately challenged or encouraged to develop their intellectual
abilities because of low expectations and a narrow curriculum.
Test Bias and Student Selection Process for the Gifted Program
Children from culturally, linguistically diverse and/or economically
disadvantaged families have been dramatically underrepresented in programs for
gifted students (Castellano, 2003; National Research Council, 2002). One of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
reasons includes an overreliance on standardized tests.
Underrepresentation of cultural and ethnic participation in programs for the gifted
is most frequently attributed to biases in standardized testing (Bernal, 1980;
Richert, 1987, 1991). Assessment issues related to the identification of gifted
children from different cultural and ethnic groups highlight the difficulties with
traditional methods in recognizing the talents of students from diverse groups
(Callahan & Mclntire, 1994).
High stake test scores are kept in students' files and it provides the basis for
high-stakes decisions concerning placement, selection, certification, and promotion.
These decisions are made without consideration of the inequities surrounding
testing in general and testing culturally diverse students in particular.
Korchin (1980), and others state that standardized tests have
contributed to the perpetuation of social, economic, and political barriers
confronting
students of diversity (Padilla & Medina, 1996; Suzuki, Meller, & Ponterotto, 1996).
Many school districts rely on a single test score to place students in gifted
education programs, and given the lower performance of diverse groups on tests,
this practice does not allow students of diversity to receive benefits of the gifted
education program.
To establish fair identification procedures that extend to underrepresented
populations, educators may need to consider alternative measurements beyond
traditional intelligence tests. Some of these measures can include:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
• Multiple types of information: indicators of student's
cognitive abilities, academic achievement, performance in a variety
of settings, interests, creativity, motivation; and learning
characteristics/behaviors.
• Multiple sources of information: test scores, school grades, and
comments by classroom teachers, specialty area teachers,
counselors, parents, peers, and the students themselves.
• Multiple time periods to ensure that students are not missed only one
identification procedures that often take place at the end of second
or third grade.
Teacher Biases toward Minority Students
Identifying Gifted Students: A Practical Guide. (Johnson, 2004) provides a
good overview of current methods and procedures for effectively identifying gifted
and talented students. One of the chapters is devoted to important issues with
regard to “culture-fair and nonbiased” assessments. Non stereotypical gifted
students are hard to find. Negative behaviors, such as truancy, underachievement,
and violent acts actually intervene in the identification process. Culturally different
students and students from low income families, such as students in Title I schools
are particularly vulnerable to exhibiting negative behaviors.
Students from low income families have the most difficulty in being
selected for gifted programs (Clark, 1997). Home influences, such as family
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
members’ negative experiences with school help make this group of gifted
students particularly vulnerable to becoming underachievers in school (Baldwin,
1973). Some estimate that African American, Hispanic American, and Native
American students are underrepresented in gifted programs by as much as 50%
(Ford, 1996).
Ford-Harris et al. (1991), in their study of gifted African American students,
asserted that gifted African American students encountered more obstacles to
identity development than did gifted White students, and they often experienced
more psychological and emotional problems than non gifted African American
students.
Agbenyega and Jiggetts (1997) addresses the trends in ethnic demographics
that illustrate African American students are three times more likely to be labeled
mentally retarded, two times more likely to be labeled emotionally disturbed and
African American boys are labeled mentally retarded four times more often than
are non-minorities. Native American students are four times more likely to be
labeled speech or language impaired and Hispanic students are more likely to be
identified when attending schools with high numbers of ELL students and less
likely to be eligible for services if attending schools with lower numbers of ELL
students. High stakes testing also has shown bias in the test due to the fact that it
mirrors the experiences of middle class children and it is based on the author’s
cultural, linguistic and experiential background. The tests are generally
administered by non-minority professionals and often it not written or administered
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
in the native language of the students. Many of the biases in the high-
stakes test are those which are built-in. Characteristics of teacher bias are lowered
behavioral and academic expectations, expectation of failure, teacher experience
and training, instructional quality, classroom management, unconscious racial bias,
and lowered or stereotypical expectations.
Identification Process of Gifted Education Program
Another area of concern regarding assessment and identification of children
from cultural and ethnic groups is in the referral process. It has long been
recognized that minority students are simply not referred for programs for the
gifted to the same extent as majority students. Factors contributing to the
underreferral of these students are teacher attitude and the type of school these
students are likely to attend (High & Udall, 1983). Research indicates that students,
teachers, and school professionals continue to have low academic expectations for
culturally and linguistically diverse students (Jones, 1988). With low expectations,
teachers tend to overlook these students when making referrals for gifted program
screening.
Most procedures for identifying gifted and talented students have been
developed for use with middle class children who are native English speakers.
(Chan & Kitano, 1986). Such procedures have in part led to an underrepresentation
of minority language students in gifted and talented programs, which in turn
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
prevents our schools from developing the strengths and abilities of this
special population.
The display of giftedness may be unique to each ethnic group and unlike
that of Anglo children (Baldwin, 1991). Therefore, it is best to describe giftedness
within the context of a culture (Leung, 1981; Marquez, Bermudez, & Rakow,
1992). Identification procedures must consider linguistic and cultural behaviors that
could mask giftedness, such as nonverbal cues that are different in different
cultures (Bermudez & Rakow, 1990). Even though some bilingual children have a
functional command of the English language, assessing them through a qualitative
method encompassing cultural and linguistic factors gives them the opportunity to
show their genuine cognitive abilities and potentials (Gonzalez, Bauerle, & Felix-
Holt, 1994). In one study by Bermudez and Rakow, 78% of the respondents
acknowledged the need to use alternate means of assessment, such as self-report,
observations by members of the same cultural groups, parent and teacher
observations, parental interviews, and checklists developed with community input
(Bermudez & Rakow, 1991). In the same study, 70% of the respondents reported
using multiple sources in identifying gifted LEP students, but only 32% found
their processes successful. Unfortunately the majority of respondents indicated they
had excluded community input in the identification process. Attempting to
determine a LEP child's intellectual potential by using English-based assessment
instruments can lead to erroneous conclusions and assessment in English is more
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
likely to reflect knowledge of English than general intellectual potential
(Harris, 1993).
Under representation of cultural and ethnic participation in programs for the
gifted is most frequently attributed to biases in standardized testing (Bernal, 1980;
Richert, 1987,1991). Charges of test bias may stem from the content and format,
performance differences among groups, and the purposes for which the test results
are used. However, there is some agreement (Anastasi, 1988; Kamphaus, 1993;
Reynolds & Kaiser, 1990; Thorndike & Lohman, 1990) that there is little or no
substantiating evidence in the claims of bias in most well-constructed modern tests
of intelligence.
Tamaoke, Saklofske, and Ide (1993) indicated that nonverbal tests can be
used as fair evaluation instruments of culturally and linguistically different
children. "Mexican American children performed significantly better on nonverbal
than on verbal intelligence tests" (Clark, 1992, p. 222). The use of nontraditional
and culturally sensitive methods of observation will allow more students to be
identified as gifted (Irby, et al., 1997). Borland and Wright (1994) suggested using
observation, portfolio assessment and case study methods, especially with
economically disadvantaged students. Whoever makes the assessment of Hispanic
students should speak their native language and have an understanding of the
cultural and linguistic differences (Ortiz & Gonzalez, 1989). Informal and dynamic
assessment procedures providing a holistic measure of a student's performance in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
many different contexts should be used to identify gifted LEP students, so
that these students do not remain in ESL or bilingual classrooms without being
redesignated (Robisheaux & Banbury, 1994). Effective solutions depend upon a
change in our views about giftedness in minority groups, how we use these new
views to develop procedures that better address giftedness in the diverse groups,
using multiple assessment procedures that are culturally and linguistically
appropriate, and preparing teachers to recognize the creative behaviors of minority
students (Frasier, 1997). We need to incorporate cultural features in verbal and
nonverbal cognitive development, rely more on nonverbal measures of intelligence
rather than on verbal measures, and include people from the community of the
child as informants in the nomination process. Teachers should provide information
about students' strengths, and provide situations where students can display skills
other than verbal and logical, and provide a checklist that includes characteristics
shown to be traits for gifted minority students, and observe students in school and
other settings (Harris & Weismantel, 1991).
The sole use of achievement tests alone may not be the best indicators of
these gifted students. Intelligence tests do not measure innate ability; rather they
sample already-learned behaviors to predict future learning (McLoughlin & Lewis,
2001). These tests may, as well, include high verbal content and thus identify even
fewer culturally or linguistically diverse students. Torrance (1969) developed a list
of “creative positives” a teacher might observe. In science class, these might
include the ability to improvise, originality of ideas, articulateness in role-playing
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
or story-telling, persistence in problem solving, fluency and flexibility in
figural media, and humor. Frasier and Passow (1994), however, suggested that all
gifted students, no matter their cultural backgrounds - exhibit a strong the same
positives: desire to learn; an intense, sometimes unusual interest; and an unusual
ability to communicate with words, numbers or symbols; effective (sometimes
inventive) strategies for problem solving; a large storehouse of information; a quick
grasp of new concepts; logical approach to solutions; many highly original ideas;
and an unusual sense of humor.
Educators who work closely with minority language students argue that
using standardized IQ tests as a primary measure of giftedness does not fairly
accommodate the linguistic and cultural differences of these students. These
educators look to identify the "able learner" rather than the more narrowly defined
gifted student who scores in the top 3% on IQ tests. Able learners are defined by
some educators as students in the top 10% of their class who have shown some
extraordinary achievement in one or more areas such as science, mathematics, or
the performing arts (Ernest Bernal, personal communication, September 13, 1988).
. Interviews and observations hold the most promise for the identification of gifted
students from low-income or culturally diverse backgrounds.
Classroom teachers can help gather useful, observational data to increase
and improve the identification of culturally different students. Reliance on IQ tests
to identify giftedness greatly diminishes the potential number of gifted students.
Renzulli (1978) indicated that "more creative persons come from below the 95th
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
percentile than above it, and if such cut-off scores are needed to determine
entrance into special programs, we may be guilty of actually discriminating against
persons who have the highest potential for high levels of accomplishment" (p. 182).
Three percent is a conservative estimate of the percentage of the population that is
considered gifted. However, in Arizona, for example, only 0.14% of the students in
gifted and talented programs come from language minority backgrounds (Maker,
1987). Using the 3% criterion, one would estimate that 2,900 limited-English-
proficient (LEP) students in Arizona should be receiving some type of services for
giftedness or at least have been identified. An assessment of needs, however,
revealed that only 143 LEP children were participating in gifted programs, despite
the fact that minority language students represent 16.17% (96,674) of the school-
age population. Other studies indicate that the proportion of Blacks, Hispanics, and
American Indians identified as gifted represents only half that expected (Chan &
Kitano, 1986).
The National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS) of 1988 looked at 8th
graders throughout the nation and found that 65 percent of the public schools
(serving 75 percent of all public school 8th graders), had some kind of opportunity
for gifted and talented students. The NELS study found that about 8.8 percent of all
8th-grade public school students participated in gifted and talented programs, and
that some minority groups were more likely to be served than others. According to
the NELS data, economically disadvantaged students were significantly
underserved.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
In January 2003, the National Academy of Sciences released a
report on overrepresentation of minorities in special education and
underrepresentation of those students in gifted education. The NRC reported that,
nationwide, 7.47 percent of all white students and 9.9 percent of Asian students are
placed in gifted programs. Meanwhile, 3.04 percent of African-American students,
3.57 percent of Hispanic students, and 4.86 percent of American Indian students are
classified as gifted. The number of students served in gifted and talented programs
has grown substantially in the past decades, in part due to a focused effort by the
states and funding by the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education
Program ('http://www.ed.gov/prog info/Javits/index.html). However, it is also clear
that students from economically disadvantaged families are not being identified in
equitable proportions.
Poverty and Identification of the Gifted
Compared to more economically advantaged children, those from poor
families are less likely to succeed educationally, have poorer jobs as adults, and
have more personal adjustment problems. Their early life conditions put them at-
risk for later accomplishments (Salend, 2002). Students living in poverty have a
harder time meeting the expectation of them in the school system. This group lack
motivation, problem solving skills, and communication skills just to name a few.
According to Keogh’s study, these students parents tend to be absent from the
home for a long period of time. Factors of not being home include, working more
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
than one job as a single parent, getting in trouble with the judicial system,
or lack of parental skills.
Students who come from poverty backgrounds have not had the same
opportunities as middle class students and the identification processes in most
school districts do not factor in environmental differences. Most schools have
systems that operate from middle-class values. When traditional methods are used
to identify gifted students, such as standardized instruments and performance
samples, the outcome is predictable: a large majority of gifted students will come
from the middle class. Variables such as language, poverty, assessment practices,
systemic inequities, and professional development opportunities for teachers have
been cited as factors that play a role in disproportionate representation.
An identification process that takes home environment factors into account
is essential if the process is to address the equity issue. Students from enriched
backgrounds typically perform better in school than those from poverty.
Conclusions
The U.S. Department of Education shows three groups that are consistently
underrepresented in relation to giftedness. Those three groups are: Native
Americans, Hispanics, and African Americans (National Excellence, 1993).
The reasons for this under presentation are teacher expectations,
perceptions and bias, test bias, lack of a universal definition of giftedness,
parent’s awareness and administrative issues. Teachers are noted to perceive
Hispanic and African American students social and academic behavior as less
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
favorable than Anglo students, perceive them as having lower academic
potential, and teachers further interact less affirmatively with Hispanic and
African American students than with Anglo students.
Intelligence tests are stated to be very strongly biased against culturally
disadvantaged students because they emphasize rapid response, verbal
comprehension, and answers that are acquired in the dominant middle class
culture. Some recommendations for assigning a student as gifted were the use of
test scores from several instruments such as progressive matrices, SOI Screening
Form for Gifted, System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment, Culture Fair
Intelligence Test, student portfolio, and inclusion of people from diverse cultural
backgrounds in the assessment process. Other recommendations include the
education of teachers on the characteristics of gifted students in different
cultures such as the experiences and abilities of minority children as well as how
those experiences enhance skills, talents, traits and values attached to giftedness
and knowledge of how acculturation influences teacher’s ratings. Further
recommendations included the training of assessment personnel as to bias in
behavior rating scales, encouragement of parents to be a part of the process of
evaluation, the recruitment of teachers of color and finally the education of
parents in relation to the process and characteristics of gifted children. Educators
must interact with all students as consistently, compassionately, and be as
culturally informed as possible. Educators must make intelligent, individualized
assessments of student strengths and needs and educators must commit
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
themselves to the continuation of professional growth and development
cultural diversity, special education, and differing learning modalities.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Students who are gifted and talented can be found in all cultural, linguistic,
and economic backgrounds. Gifted students can be described as possessing an
abundance of certain abilities that are most highly valued within a particular society
or culture (Cohen, 1988). Many students of linguistic diversity have special talents
that are valued within their own cultures but unfortunately, these students are often
not recognized as gifted and talented (Cohen, 1988). "Many potentially gifted
minority students are never considered for gifted programs due to a lack of referrals
and ill-conceived teacher attitudes concerning minorities" (Lashaway-Bokina,
1996).
Reasons given by researchers for the underrepresentation of minority
students in gifted education programs include: 1) teachers' and appraisers' lack of
knowledge and cultural sensitivity; 2) bias in the standardization process; and 3)
identification of students based on a single test (Sawyer, 1993). (Barkan and
Bernal, 1991) stated, "The historical problem of having too few children from
nondominant ethnic groups in gifted programs derives precisely from decisions
about what evidence of actual or potential giftedness one requires" (p. 144). For
many years, no adequate identification measures have existed for students who are
not middle class native English speakers (Bermudez & Rakow, 1990) since
screening and identification procedures often rely on norms which exclude
minority learners (Marquez, Bermudez, & Rakow, 1992). This study will examine
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
the reasons underlying the low number of students of diversity being
nominated for the gifted education program in urban Title I schools.
Research Questions
This study sought to investigate the factors that influence the nomination of
minority students in two urban Title I elementary schools. Three questions guided
this study:
1. What are the teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of linguistically,
economically, and culturally diverse students’ academic potential in urban
Title I schools?
2. What factors contribute to perceptions of these teachers and administrators?
3. What is the relationship between the perceptions of these teachers and
administrators and the factors influencing the nomination and selection of
linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students for the gifted
education program from urban Title I schools?
Addressing the first question identified the factors that result low or high
referral rates of students of diversity in urban Title I schools for the gifted
education program. The second question provided the understanding of how and
why teachers and administrator’s perception of students of diversity are formed.
The third question clarified how teacher and administrator’s perception is related to
the actual nomination of gifted students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
Fit o f the Inquiry Paradigm to the Focus
Because this study was an attempt to identify the participants’ perceptions
of students in their Title I school and how the factors influence the nomination of
the students for the gifted program, it was determined that a qualitative approach
would be most appropriate. The purpose of qualitative research is to seek answers
to questions that stress how social experience is created (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994).
An interview questionnaire with both closed and open ended questions was
created for an interview for maximum use of ideas, thoughts, and memories in the
participants' own words rather than words of the researcher (Reinharz , 1992). This
study provided more descriptive picture of the relationship between teacher and
administrator’s perception of students of diversity and the nomination and
selection of students for the gifted program. The researcher compared the analysis
between two urban Title I schools and distinguished the differences and
similarities between two schools. This chapter includes the research questions and a
description of the research methodology. The latter includes the sampling
procedure and population, instrumentation, and procedures for data collection and
analysis.
The Researcher
The researcher is a third grade teacher in an urban Title I school and has taught in
Title I schools with high number of students of diversity for over five years. The
researcher became interested in students of diversity in the gifted program when
she realized that none of the 950 students in her school were identified as gifted.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
She began to question why the students in her school and other schools in
the district were not getting appropriate services for the gifted program like some
other Title I schools with similar demographics. The researcher wanted to
investigate the reasons why the teachers do not nominate their students for the
gifted program and to investigate if teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions have
any relations to the actual nomination process of the gifted students for the
appropriate program.
Participants
The participants were from two K-5 urban Title I school teachers and
administrators in Compton Unified and Montebello Unified School Districts, who
have or had gifted or potentially gifted students in his or her classroom and school
for at least one year. All teachers, as well as gifted coordinators, and principals
from both schools were afforded the opportunity to participate in the study. The
researcher visited the two school sites to introduce the study and to seek possible
participants for the study. The researcher explained the study and the process
during a faculty meeting. First five teacher volunteers, as well as the principal and
gifted coordinator from each school site participated in the interview. The
researcher contacted each potential participant in person or by phone to determine
a time and place for the interview.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
Research Design
The qualitative approach to this study allowed the researcher to describe in
depth the factors that result in low referral rates of students of diversity in Title I
schools or the gifted education program and how teacher and administrator’s
perception of the students of diversity in the Title I schools reflect the nomination
and selection process of these students for the gifted program. The primary data
sources were interviews with both close-ended and open-ended questions
(Appendices A and B). The data collected through the open ended questions were
reported in the participants’ own words through the process of tape recordings and
transcriptions. The text of the interviews and questions served as the primary
source for interpreting and analyzing data. The role of the interviewer was vital and
was to make it possible for the person being interviewed to bring the interviewer
into his or her world. The quality of the information obtained during an interview
was largely dependent on the interviewer. How the interviewer saw his or her role
and the participant’s role and how the interviewer constructed questions and
conducted the interview made the interviewer the most crucial tool in the research
process (Patton, 1990). To be trustworthy, qualitative studies must satisfy the
constructs of credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To ensure trustworthiness, all interview questions were
piloted. The researcher kept the names of schools and teachers confidential and all
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
names of persons and places throughout the study have been replaced
with pseudonyms to protect the privacy of participants and to assure their
continued anonymity.
Instrumentation
Interview protocol was developed by the researcher and her dissertation
chair, Dr. Sandra Kaplan to be used during interviews with teachers and
administrators. Each protocol consists of 16 questions which will help the
researcher determine teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of their students of
diversity and the factor which influence their perception. (Appendices A and B)
Content Validity and Reliability of Instrument
An instrument is judged reliable if it is capable of being replicated by
another inquirer (Schwandt 1997). As suggested by Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996),
the researcher conducted pilot study to pretest the instrument (teacher and
administrator interview). The researcher discussed the intent, content, and clarity of
each question with the test participant after each session. The researcher revised the
instrument after the pilot study to arrive at the final instrument used.
There are two practical approaches which can reduce variability. One
method produces a standardized instrument in which interviewers are trained and
they conduct interviews with the same format. For this study, the researcher chose
to reduce the potential for variation by conducting all interviews alone, utilizing the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
same format. The researcher took notes during and after all sessions and
the interviews were recorded. To ensure that the researcher’s understanding of
study participants was accurate, the researcher had two participants to review the
transcripts of their session. Participants provided clarifying comments and both
participants indicated that the transcriptions accurately depicted their attitudes and
perceptions regarding their questions asked during their interview.
One concern in qualitative research design regarding validity is researcher
bias. One approach to overcoming such bias is by disclosure and self awareness
(Altheide & Johnson 1994). The researcher controlled her bias in the study by
utilizing and applying more rigid interview format and by prechecking the
instrument through pilot study and verifying data through participant review.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
42
Data Collection
Data collection for this study proceeded in phases. First the researcher
designed an interview protocol which consisted of one for teachers and another for
administrators. Once the researcher’s study was approved from the IRB, the
researcher spent a month of March 2006 interviewing teachers and administrators
from Compton, as well as Montebello.
Second, the researcher received consent forms from participants which
allowed the researcher to audiotape the interviews. Each interview was audio taped
with a digital and analogue tape recorder and was sent to Ms. Chris Conrad in San
Diego, California to be transcribed. Once the transcriptions were ready, they were
carefully read and studied by the researcher to be coded.
Lastly, the transcriptions were coded to find a common theme and
categories. Data coding represents the first phase of data analysis. Glaser (1978,
p.57) described a set of three questions that should guide the open coding:
• What are these data a study of?
• What category does this incident indicate?
• What is actually happening in the data? What is the basic
social psychological problem(s) faced by the participants in
the... scene?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
Data Analysis
The data were analyzed using ground theory methods. Ground theory
methods are based on the constant comparison method of data analysis. This
method involves inductive, concept building processes that are consistent with
qualitative research (Merriam, 1998). Ground theory is comprised of categories,
properties, and hypothesis that link the concepts of each one of these aspects of the
ground theory. The constant comparative method does what the term suggests. The
researcher constantly compared the data with analysis of other data to compare it
with the preliminary categories and properties already derived from the data.
The researcher began with an event in an interview and compared it with an
incident or event from another interview. From these comparisons, emerging
categories began to form. Comparisons of these categories continued until a theory
developed (Creswell 1998; Merriam 1998). The process involved a continuous
cycle of data collection, coding, and analysis.
Results of a Pilot Study
A pilot study is a small-scale tryout of the proposed research study and is a
development from the prospectus already developed. The intent of the pilot study
is to find out where the weaknesses in and the potentialities of the design are
located. Mason (2004) discusses the need to conduct a pilot study for qualitative
inquiry to test
intellectual concerns with practicality in the field.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
The purpose of this pilot study was to test the validity of the
research questions for the actual research study. The pilot study was conducted in a
Title I elementary school in Compton Unified School District, which had similar
social economic status, student population, and student demographics as the two
schools which were part of the actual study.
. The interviews were conducted with five teachers who has or has had
gifted students in his or her classroom and who has been working in a low income
Title I school for minimum of three years.
School:
Emerson Elementary is a low income Title I school in the city of Compton.
There are a little under 900 students in the school, with 69 percent being Hispanics,
26 percent being African Americans, 4 percent being Pacific Islanders and 1
percent being unknown. There are 57 percent of English Language Learners,
which compared to 25 percent of state average; percentage of English language
learner is relatively high. There are 95 percent of students participating in state’s
free and reduced lunch program. The mobility rate, which is the percentage of
students who entered this school for the first time during the 2004-2005 school year
was 12 percent.
Participants:
Five teachers who has or has had identified gifted students or potentially
gifted students in his or her classrooms were selected. The study was explained to
the teachers during a faculty meeting held on Wednesday, February 8, 2006 in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
45
Emerson Elementary School’s faculty lounge. Out of 45 teachers, 7
teachers volunteered to be interviewed for the pilot study. Out of those 7, first 5
who responded were contacted by telephone to arrange a place and time to be
interviewed. Those 5 teachers have worked in Title I schools in average of 3-5
years and had or have identified gifted or potentially gifted students in his or her
classroom.
Methods of Data Collection:
The purpose of the interview was to gain better understanding of the
factors that influence the nomination of the students of diversity for the gifted
program at their school. Each interview lasted about 15 to 20 minutes long and it
was conducted during teacher’s lunch hour and after school hours in individual
teacher’s classrooms. The participants were asked total of sixteen questions (See
Appendix A) which addressed the topic of teacher’s perception which affect the
nomination of the students of diversity in Title I school for the Gifted and Talented
program. The five interviews took total of seven school days. Even though the
interview itself was relatively short in length, it was difficult to find time to
interview the teachers because of their individual prior engagements and schedules.
Analysis:
The audio recording tapes from the interview were transcribed by the
researcher. The data was coded for categories and themes which would serve to
respond to the research questions studied. The researcher used the constant
comparative analysis method to analyze the data (Creswell,1998; Merriam, 1998).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
46
Findings:
Three research questions guided this study. First question was “What are
the teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of linguistically, economically, and
culturally diverse students’ academic potential in urban Title I schools?” After
analysis of the data, three themes or categories emerged concerning the perception
of the teachers and administrators in this particular Title I school. (See Table 1) All
teachers and an administrator from the school site believed that students do not get
much support from home. Three teachers stated that students lack motivation and
skills to perform at grade level, therefore do not meet the criteria to be nominated
for the gifted program. All teachers mentioned that it is difficult to communicate
with their students’ parents. One teacher explained that teachers have hard time
getting the parents to get involved in their child’s education.
I even try to communicate everyday with parents, but I don’t get any
feedbacks, responses, and the problem continues. Sometimes I feel a
little frustrated when I see that there’s a little support from home in
terms of homework. Parents are not checking their child’s backpack
to see if they have homework and definitely not checking the
homework once they are completed.
Three out of five teachers believed that their students they have and have
had in the past lack motivation. Teachers stated that many of their students come
from a home where education is not valued.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
Table 2
Interview Data Related to Research Question #1: What are the teachers ’ and
administrators’ perceptions o f linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse
students ’ academic potential in urban Title I schools?
Factors T-l T-2 T-3 T-4 T-5
1. Lack of
Support at
home
X X X X X
2. Lack of
Motivation
X X X
3. Lack of
Ability
X X X
Four out of five teachers and the administrator from this school shared in
their interview that there are many behavior issues and problems that cause
distractions in and outside of the classroom. Two of the teachers stated that their
students are inconsistent in turning in their daily homework. (See Table 2) When
the researcher asked the participants how much parent involvement they receive in
their classrooms, all of them said none. They also shared that because many of their
parents work during the day, they hardly get to see them on campus. Many of the
teachers shared that when there’s a problem with their students, it is hard to see a
positive outcome because they feel like they are trying on their own.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
48
Table 3
Interview Data Related to Research Question #2: What specific factors contribute
to perceptions o f these teachers ’ and administrators?
Factors T-l T-2 T-3 T-4 T-5
1.Behavior
Issues &
Distractions
X X X
2.Inconsistency
in turning in
homework
and
assignments.
X X
3. Parent
Involvement
X X X X X
There is a clear relationship between teachers’ and administrator’s
perception and the number of students that they nominate for the gifted program.
As you can see on Table 3, Teachers who believed that their students lack in
motivation, ability to perform at their grade level, and support from home did not
nominate any of his or her students for the Gifted and Talented program this year.
Teacher 1, who believed that her students were lacking the necessary support from
home, referred three of her students, teacher 2 and teacher 3 both believed their
students did not receive any support from home, students lack motivation and
ability did not refer any of their students to the GATE program. Teacher 4 who also
believed that her students lack the support from home and lack motivation, but not
intellectual ability nominated 3 of her students, and teacher 5 who only believed
that her children were lacking parental support referred 10 out of 33 of her students
to the gifted and talented program this year.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
This school in Compton uses its district’s criteria in selecting
students for the GATE program. Because the district does not emphasize in visual
and performing arts, and leadership ability, most of their students are nominated
solely on their test scores. Students must receive 90 percentile or above on their
CST and/or CAT6 exam for two years or 85 percentile and above for at least 1 of
the past two years and a portfolio which includes 90 percentile or above in their
district benchmark tests, reading and math assessments, and writing assessment
score of 4 out of 6 or above. Out of 900 students last year, none of the students
were referred or nominated for the GATE program, but this year, with a new GATE
lead teacher, there are 20 students from grades 3 through 5 who were officially
nominated this school year.
Table 4
Interview Data Related to Research Question #3: What is the relationship between
the perceptions o f these teachers and administrators and the nomination and
selection o f linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students for the
gifted education program?
T-l T-2 T-3 T-4 T-5
l.#of
Students
Referred or
Nominated
This Year
3 0 0 3 10
2. Criteria
Used to
Nominate
Test
Scores
Test
Scores
Test
Scores
Test
Scores
Test
Scores
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
Discussions:
Most of the teachers in this particular school felt that many of their students
lacked the support from home, did not have much motivation, and were lacking
ability. Those teachers who believed that their students lacked in these areas had
low number of referrals to the GATE program or none at all. Teachers'
expectations, unconscious biases, and assumptions about students' potential have a
tangible effect on achievement; learning is improved when teachers provide
challenge for all students (Lumsden, 1997). Even though the teachers claimed in
their interviews that they all have high expectations for their students, it was clear
that some of the teachers felt their students were lacking the basic skills to perform
at their grade level. Therefore, these factors kept the teachers from nominating
their students to the Gifted and Talented program. This particular school only used
state test scores to nominate their students. Teachers who nominated high number
of their students to the gifted program did not believe that their students lack the
ability or motivation. One teacher who has 32 students in her fourth grade
classroom referred 10 of her students this year alone. Many of the teachers did not
actually get nominated for the gifted program because of their test scores, but she is
constantly looking and searching to see if her students are meeting the criteria for
the GATE program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
51
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
This chapter includes the perceptions, ideas, and thoughts of the teachers
participating in the study, along with the themes and patterns that emerged during
the interviews from two urban Titles I schools in greater Los Angeles area. The
focus is on the perceptions of teachers and administrators from two urban Title I
schools, Luther Elementary in Compton Unified School District, and Bermont
Elementary in Montebello Unified School District which influences the
nominations of their students for the Gifted and Talented program. The data are
presented with an analysis as guided by research questions that were outlined in
Chapter 1. Each of the research questions are repeated and addressed separately in
this chapter.
The data that serve to answer each research question were collected during
interviews which were conducted in each school site. Two urban Title I school
from Compton Unified and Montebello Unified were randomly selected. School
teachers who have or has had identified or potentially gifted students in urban Title
I schools participated in this study. All teachers, as well as gifted coordinators, and
principals from both schools were afforded the opportunity to participate in the
study. The researcher visited the two school sites to introduce the study and to seek
possible participants for the study. The researcher explained the study and the
1 School names are pseudonyms chosen by the researcher
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
process during a faculty meeting. First five teacher volunteers, as well as
the principal and gifted coordinator from each school site participated in the
interview. The researcher contacted each potential participant in person or by phone
to determine a time and place for the interview.
The primary data sources were interviews with both close-ended and open-
ended questions (See Appendix A&B). The data collected through the open ended
questions were reported in the participants’ own words through the process of tape
recordings and transcriptions. The text of the interviews and questions served as the
primary source for interpreting and analyzing data.
Each interview was audio taped with a digital and analogue tape recorder
and was sent to be transcribed. Once the transcriptions were ready, they were
carefully read and studied by the researcher to be coded. The transcriptions were
coded by the researcher to find a common theme and categories. The researcher
began with an event in an interview and compared it with an incident or event
from another interview. From these comparisons, emerging categories began to
form, Comparisons of these categories continued until a theory developed
(Creswell 1998; Merriam 1998). The process involved a continuous cycle of data
collection, coding, and analysis.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
Population Sample
Table 5
School Profile
Luther Elementary Bermont Elementary
Number of student
population 591 1216
GATE students 5 120
Percentage of GATE
students .8% 10%
Demographics 85%Hispanics 99 % Hispanics
Luther Elementary
Luther Elementary School is a public elementary school, offering a range of
grade levels from kindergarten through five. Luther Elementary School’s
enrollment was 591, which was 136 fewer students than the county average.
Students enrolled in kindergarten during the 2003-2004 academic year was just 98.
Students at Luther Elementary School found teachers to be about as accessible as
they did at other elementary schools in the county, based on the student-teacher
ratio. There were about 23 students per teacher at Luther Elementary, compared to
20 students per teacher in elementary schools in Los Angeles County.
Academic Performance Index is a way of comparing schools based on
student test scores. The index was created in 1998 to help parents and educators
better understand how schools were doing. The API is also used to identify schools
that need help. Luther Elementary’s API was 678. This was a decline of 16 points
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
compared to last year. This school did not meet its growth target and did
not qualify for the Governor’s Performance Award. Statewide, 47 percent of
elementary schools met all their growth targets, down from 82 percent the prior
year. At Luther Elementary, 50 percent of students were considered to be proficient
in English, compared to 58 percent of elementary school students in Los Angeles
county overall. Of the 50 percent of Luther Elementary students who were still
learning English, 17 percent advanced to English proficiency in the prior year.
Eighty-five percent of the students at Luther Elementary identify
themselves as Latino/Hispanic. In fact, there are about three times as many
Latino/Hispanic students as African American students, the second-largest ethnic
group at Luther Elementary. Overall, the ethnic composition of Luther
Elementary’s student body looks somewhat different from Los Angeles County’s
student body.
The “free or reduced-price lunch” subsidy goes to students whose families
earn less than $34,040 a year, based on a family of four. At Luther Elementary, 100
percent of the students qualified for free or reduced-price lunches, compared to 71
percent of students in Los Angeles County. The parents of 31 percent of the
students at Luther Elementary have attended college, and 15 percent have a college
degree. This information can provide some clues to the level of literacy children
bring to school.
Luther Elementary’s teachers have, on average, about seven years of experience,
compared to about 12 years of experience for elementary school teachers
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
throughout the county. About 92 percent of the faculty at Luther
Elementary holds an elementary credential. This is pretty close to the average for
Los Angeles county elementary school teachers, which is 93 percent. At Luther
Elementary, 31 percent of their faculties hold trainee credentials. In comparison,
nine percent of elementary school teachers throughout the county hold trainee
credentials. Trainees are essentially interns or student teachers. Eight percent of
faculties hold emergency permits. In comparison, seven percent of elementary
school teachers throughout the county hold these emergency permits. For reference,
emergency permits are issued by school districts when no credentialed person is
available for a position. Districts also issue emergency permits when the person
available for a job doesn’t meet the formal employment criteria. The holder of an
emergency permit will hold a Bachelor of Arts degree, and will have passed the
teaching exam called the CBEST test. Most teachers at Luther Elementary identify
themselves as Latino/Hispanic. Overall, the ethnic composition of Luther
Elementary’s staff looks somewhat different from staffs throughout Los Angeles
County.
Luther Elementary in Compton started their GATE program last year and
out of 591 students, only 5 of them are formally identified as gifted.
Bermont Elementary School
Bermont Elementary School offers classes in grades kindergarten to four,
which is different from a normal traditional school calendar which offers classes in
grades kindergarten to five. The school operates on a year round schedule. Bermont
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
Elementary’s enrollment was 1,216, which was 489 more students than
the county average. There are about 18 students per teacher at Bermont Elementary,
compared to 20 students per teacher in elementary schools in Los Angeles County.
Bermont Elementary’s API was 597. This was an improvement of 28 points
compared to last year. This school did meet its growth target and qualified for the
Governor’s Performance Award.
At Bermont Elementary, 29 percent of students are considered to be
proficient in English, compared to 58 percent of elementary school students in Los
Angeles county overall. Of the 71 percent of Bermont Elementary students who
were still learning English, five percent advanced to English proficiency in the
prior year. The language most spoken at home by the student was Spanish and most
of them identify themselves as Latino/Hispanic. In fact, there are about 109 times
as many Latino/Hispanic students as White/European American/Other students, the
second largest ethnic group at Bermont Elementary. At Bermont Elementary, 100
percent of the students qualified for free or reduced price lunches, compared to 71
percent of students in Los Angeles County.
The parents of 16 percent of the students at Bermont Elementary have
attended college, and three percent have a college degree. This information can
provide some clues to the level of literacy children bring to school. Bermont
Elementary’s teachers have, on average about 13 years of experience, compared to
12 years of experience for elementary school teachers throughout the county. About
97 percent of the faculty at Bermont Elementary holds an emergency credential.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
This is pretty close to the average for Los Angeles county elementary
school teachers, which is 93 percent. Approximately 11 percent of the faculty
holds trainee credentials. In comparison, nine percent of elementary school teachers
throughout the county hold trainee credentials. 14 percent of the faculty holds
emergency credentials. In comparison, seven percent of elementary school teachers
throughout the county hold these emergency permits.
Most teachers at Bermont Elementary identify themselves as
Latino/Hispanic. In fact, there are about ten times as many Latino/Hispanic
teachers as White/European American teachers, the second largest ethnic group at
Bermont Elementary. Overall, the ethnic composition of Bermont Elementary’s
staff looks very different from staffs throughout Los Angeles county.
Bermont Elementary has two lead GATE teachers. Similar to Luther
Elementary, Bermont offers variety of programs for their identified and potentially
gifted students. Out of 1216, approximately 120 students are identified as gifted.
Subject Profiles
The Seven Teachers and Administrators from Compton
Francine is a principal who worked in a Title I school for 11 years. She has
a teaching credential, as well as a Professional Tier one credential. This is her first
year as a principal and before becoming a principal, she was a classroom teacher, as
well as a resource teacher. She is an African American in her early 40s. She has
never attended a GATE conference, but has sent two teachers to the CAG
(California Association for the Gifted) conference this year.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
Daisy has been teaching in a Title I school for two and a half
years. She is currently teaching a third grade class and she has a preliminary
credential. She is a Caucasian female teacher who has 65 percent Hispanic students
and 35 percent African American students in her class room. She had gifted
students in her class the past year, but has never formally nominated a student for
the GATE program. She has attended only one in-service professional
development.
Dillon is a fourth grade teacher with a professional clear credential and a
CLAD certificate. He has been working in a Title I school for six years. He is a
Caucasian male teacher in his late 30s. He has about 85 percent Hispanic students
in his class and the rest, 15 percent are African American. He has attended abut two
GATE conferences in his teaching career, but has never nominated a student for the
GATE program.
John is a male Hispanic American teacher who has taught in a Title I school
for two years. He has a preliminary teaching credential. He is teaching a class that
is comprised of 100 percent Hispanic students. He has never attended a GATE
conference or workshop and has never nominated his student for the GATE
program.
Sam is a fifth grade teacher who has taught in a Title I school for three
years. He is a Hispanic American teacher who has 80 percent of Hispanic students
in his classroom and the rest are African Americans. He has a preliminary
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
credential and has nominated three of his students for the GATE program.
He also attended the annual CAG conference this year.
Annie is the GATE lead teacher for Luther Elementary School. She is a
Hispanic female teacher who has taught in a Title I school for 8 years. She became
the GATE lead teacher last year and has never formally nominated a child for the
GATE program because she teaches the first grade. She says that the school
currently has 5 identified gifted students.
Alex is a third grade teacher who has been teaching in a Title I school for 8
years. He has a professional clear credential with CLAD emphasis. He has
nominated three of his students for the GATE program, but is not sure if they were
accepted or not. Most of his students are Hispanics and English language learners
He has only attended one GATE conference and/or workshops in his eight years of
teaching.
The Seven Teachers and Administrators from Bell Gardens
Nancy is an administrator who has worked in Title I school for 7 years. She
has a Masters in Counseling, certificate in Child Maltreatment and Family
Violence, a BCLAD, Pupil Personnel Credential, Masters in Educational
Leadership, and an Administrative Credential.
Lauren is a female Hispanic teacher in her early 40s. She has taught in a
Title I school for 11 years and is currently teaching 4th grade. She has a
professional credential, a Masters in reading and language arts, and a credential as a
reading specialist. Her class is 100 percent Hispanics. She nominated 10 of her
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
60
students to the GATE program and they were formally identified. She has
another 5 students that she referred this year.
Angie is a second grade teacher who has taught in a Title I school for seven
years. Most of her students are Hispanic. She is a female Hispanic teacher who has
her Professional Clear Credential. She has nominated two students for the GATE
program. She was able to do this while teaching second grade because in her
school, second graders are flagged for being potentially gifted.
Cindy is a first grade teacher who has been teaching in a Title I school for
12 years. Cindy is a female Hispanic American teacher. She has taught and
identified potentially gifted students. She has always wanted to receive formal
training in gifted education, but she has never have.
Cathy is a second grade female Hispanic teacher. She is currently teaching a
second grade class. She has taught in a Title I school for 7 years and has
Professional Clear Credential with CLAD and also a Masters in Education.
Majority of her students are Hispanic and shares that she has nominated about 4
students to the GATE program. She has attended various professional
developments, as well as conferences related to the GATE program. She shares that
her school has a strong GATE program with 2 great GATE leaders.
Ally is a second grade teacher with a Professional Clear Credential and a
BCLAD. Most of her students are Latino and she is also a Mexican American.
This year alone, she nominated 7 of her students for the GATE program. She has
received training and attended GATE conferences.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
61
Candis is female Hispanic American teacher teaching third grade.
She has a Professional Clear Credential. Most of her students are Hispanic. She
referred lstudent to the GATE program this year. She has not had formal training
in gifted education.
Table 6
Demographic Data: Luther Elementary School in Compton
Names Francine Daisy Dillon John Sam Annie Alex
Gender Female Female Male Male Male Female Male
Nationality African
American
White White Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic
Certification Tier I Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prelim. Prelim. Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Development
in GATE
No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes
Average Yrs.
Taught
11 2.5 6 2 3 8 8
Number of
Referral for
GATE
N/A 0 0 0 3 0 3
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
Table 7
Demographics Data: Bermont Elementary School in Bell Gardens
Names Nancy Lauren Angie Cindy Cathy Ally Candis
Gender Female Female Female Female Female Female Female
Nationality Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic
Certification Tier I Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Clear
Prof.
Development
in GATE
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Average
Yrs. Taught
7 11 7 12 7 5 8
Number of
Referral for
GATE
N/A 10 2 0 4 7 1
Teachers’ and Administrators’ Perceptions
Data Related to Question #1: What are the teachers ’ and administrators ’
perceptions o f linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students’
academic potential in urban Title I schools?
Out of nine main perceptions which were derived from the interviews, the
researcher narrowed it down to five major perceptions which were generally
common in both Luther Elementary and Bermont Elementary. These five
perceptions of teachers and administrators from both schools were:
• No Support and Stability at home
• Language Barriers
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
• Economic Hardship and Barriers
• Low Achieving and Lack of Motivation
• Poor Behavior and Disciplinary Problems
Table 8
Summary o f Interview Data Related to Research Question # : What are the
teachers ’ and administrators’ perceptions o f linguistically, economically, and
culturally diverse students’ academic potential in urban Title I schools?
Administrators Teachers
Luther in Compton • No support from home
• Economic hardship and
barriers
• Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
• No support from home
• Language barrier
• Economic hardship and
barriers
• Lack of motivation
and low achieving
• Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
Bermont in Bell Gardens • No support from home
• Language barrier
• Economic hardship and
barriers
• Lack of motivation
and low achieving
• Poor behaviorand
disciplinary problems
• No support from home
• Language barrier
• Economic hardship and
barriers
• Lack of motivation and
low achieving
• Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
First Perception: No Support and Stability at home
A partnership must evolve between school personnel and parents in order to
effectively educate a child (Baca & Cervantes, 1984; Bermudez & Padron, 1990;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
64
Correa, 1989; Cummins, 1989; Morsink, Thomas, & Correa, in press). As
the term implies, a partnership involves parents' becoming equal and active in their
association with schools. For most families, the role of a collaborative partner is
foreign and uncomfortable. Therefore, the responsibility for initiating the
partnership may fall on the professional. However, in order for the relationship to
be maintained, the parents must commit to assisting professionals in meeting the
unique needs of their children by providing information, reinforcing school
programs at home, asserting and advocating for quality services, and understanding
the professionals' role.
Luther Elementary
One of the major topics that came up during interviews with the teachers
and administrator at Luther Elementary and Bermont Elementary was that their
students do not have any support at home. Many students have parents who are not
literate and are from homes where education is not valued. Annie, the GATE lead
teacher from Luther said: “We don’t have support at home, so they need to be able
to be responsible with their own homework, with their own books they take home,
and responsible for the decisions that they make.”
Out of the six teachers and 1 administrator that the researcher interviewed
from Luther Elementary, 5 of them all shared that their students do not have
support at home. When the students are given homework or assignments, parents
are not helping or checking to see if the work is being done correctly. When the
question, “What are some of the barriers that prohibit your students from learning?”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
65
was asked, one teacher explained that number one barrier is their home
life. A third grade teacher Alex from Luther Elementary stated: “Because there is a
lot of ELs (English Learners), students do not have the support at home. They can’t
ask their parents because their parents don’t know. They can’t read or write
English. So that’s the biggest barrier.”
Increases in parent involvement are of particular concern since research has
provided evidence that there is a link between parent involvement and academic
achievement (Ascher, 1988; Baker & Soden, 1998; Chavkin, 1993; Chavkin &
Gonzalez, 1995; Epstein, 1996; Floyd, 1998; Petersen, 1989). As state Dinger
(1992), “There is considerable evidence that parent involvement leads to improved
studentachievement, better school attendance, and reduced dropout rates, and that
these improvements occur regardless of the economic, racial, or cultural
background of the family” (p. 1). In a study of sixteen Hispanic parents in New
Orleans who became involved in a leadership program (Aspiazu, Bauer, & Spillett
1998), the researchers found that as parents became more involved in structuring
and monitoring homework, their children’s grades improved and their children
showed greater self-esteem. Lucas, Henze, and Donato (1990) studied six high
schools that were successful in promoting the academic achievement of Latino
students. In determining commonalities between these schools, they found that
parent involvement played a key role. In a study specific to Latino families in a
Midwestern high school, Jones and Velez (1997) foundthat Latino students who
performed well academically reported a higher level of parental involvement with
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
66
their education at home. When children work with their parents on school
work at home it improves their self esteem and tells them that their parents value
education (Cartledge & Musti-Rao, 2004). Parental attachment may support the
achievement and protect inner city students from depressive symptoms that could
otherwise develop in low-income communities. The most successful low-income
students had high family support systems, which included support for high
educational goals with low levels of family conflict (Alvarez-Salvat, Gallagher,
Kenny, & Silsby, 2002).
Teachers from Luther Elementary stated that they feel time to time that they
are working alone for their students. They shared that it is difficult to educate a
child alone without the adequate help from parents at home. Many of the students
at Luther Elementary live in foster homes, single parent homes, or even in
homeless shelter. Annie, the lead GATE teacher commented:
These kids grow in an environment that is not safe, which is very
insecure. Life hasn’t been easy for them, so they think that nothing
is easy. And they believe they cannot do things because people
around them maybe are not doing something good. They don’t have
good role models. They don’t have anyone to look at. They don’t
have a bed or they go to bed late at night because of the noise or the
shootings, and they come to school tired. They do not have a good
breakfast sometimes. I had students falling asleep in class because
they could not sleep the night before.
Students in Luther Elementary face problems and hardships at home
without much parent support from home. During the interviews, teachers stated
that because their students do not get support from home, they fall behind and are
not fully learning to their maximum capacity.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
67
Bermont Elementary
Teachers in Bermont Elementary shared the same concern. The school has
high numbers of parents who are not literate, not only in English, but in Spanish as
well. Nancy, the school administrator stated:
There is a lot of struggle with poverty, with work, a lot of parents
working outside the home, the children being alone. And so many
times the struggles would be, well this child is struggling but doesn’t
have the support at home. And it is not the parents that don’t want to
help, but they themselves don’t have the education, don’t have the
language, and are not literate, so they have difficulty with that.
When the researcher asked the question: Do you get a lot of parent involvement in
our school? If so, what kind of parent involvement do you often get? Nancy stated:
Parent involvement is something we’re always working on. This
year parent involvement has been a big focus for us through our
office. We’ve been trying to really work hard at trying to get more
parents to come to school, to participate in learning, so they know
how to help their parents. We’re trying to get parents involved
maybe just in leadership roles and training form workshops in
everything they may need.
Angie, a second grade teacher who has taught in a Title I school for seven
years shared that there are many social and emotional issues that her students are
constantly facing with. She stated:
A lot of my students come from single parent homes. They
come with tragedies in their lives. They come with lack of sleep,
lack of nutrition and things like that hinder their education. If it
wasn’t for those factors maybe they would be able to move on. But
at the same time a lot of them don’t allow it to be a hindrance. They
push through. But there are some that actually use it as a clutch.
They feel sorry for themselves. “But teacher, nobody at home can
help me. My parents don’t speak English. My parents don’t know
how to read. My parents don’t know how to write.” So I try to push
them past that and see that they can help themselves.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
68
She also added that the children at her school are very willing and eager to learn.
She expressed that children come to school because it’s their way go getting out of
poverty.
Second Perception: Language Barriers
Luther Elementary
Teachers shared that a majority of the student population is Hispanic.
Students are recent immigrants and second generation Hispanic Americans, but
they suffer from language barrier at home and in school because their parents do
not read, write, or speak English. Some of the teachers the researcher interviewed
were also Hispanic Americans who spoke Spanish. The teachers explained that
they can help their students with their work while they are present in school, but
when the students take their homework or projects home, parents cannot help their
children because they have no knowledge of the material. A fourth grade teacher
John commented:
Most of the parents do not speak English. I speak Spanish so it’s
easy for me to communicate with them. And I understand their
situations that they have to go through especially when they are
immigrants. I understand about their fears and limitations they have
because of language barrier. I have kids in foster homes that have
been living in different homes. They don’t know how to speak, how
to talk, communicate. I have kids that have been under, well like
drug kids.
Teachers shared that there is a language barrier because there is a lot of EL
(English Learner) students and because their parents do not speak the language,
they cannot be given any support from their home.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
69
The student population in U.S. schools is now more diverse, both
culturally and linguistically than it has been at any time since the early decades of
this century. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, more than one fifth of school age
children and youth come from language minority families and homes in which
languages other than English are spoken, but in. English is not the first language of
many of these students and they enter school with limited English proficiency
(LEP).
The proportion of language minority students who are not fluent in English
is estimated by various sources to be one-fourth, one-third, or as large as one-half
to three-fourths of the student body, constituting between one out of twenty and
one out of seven of the nation’s five- to 17-year-olds (Numbers and Needs, March
1993; July 1994). No matter which estimate is most accurate, U.S. Census figures
indicate that linguistic diversity among students will persist and increase. Already,
during the 1980s, the number of LEP students grew two-and-a-half times faster
than regular school enrollment (Chavez, 1991).
Nearly all LEP and other language minority students are members of ethnic
and racial minority groups and nearly all are poor. Their neighborhoods are likely
to be segregated and beset with multiple problems-inadequate health, social, and
cultural services; insufficient employment opportunities; crime, drugs, and gang
activity. Their families are likely to suffer the stresses of poverty, to worry about
their children’s safety in a dangerous environment, and to fear for their future,
given their few positive prospects.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
A third grade GATE teacher, Alex stated that one of the
difficulties for his students is first and foremost, language. There is a language
barrier for his English language learners because they are spoken to in Spanish at
home. He believed his students do not communicate well and speak proper
English. When given a Lions test, which is an end of unit assessment that students
need to take for Open Court Reading program, students do not do well. They are
tested in spelling, word knowledge, and reading comprehension. These are
subjects and contents they learn in school, but are not reinforced at home. Students
are not read to at home in English or have parents speaking to them in English.
Bermont Elementary
Demographics of Bermont are very similar to Luther Elementary in
Compton. This school’s both teacher and student population is majority Hispanics.
Therefore, they have many students who are labeled as “English Language
Learners”, just like the students at Luther Elementary. The teachers at Bermont
shared similar opinions and perceptions of their students regarding language
barriers and difficulties that their students face and are going through. Cindy, a first
grade teacher who has been teaching in a Title I school with student population
being comprised mainly of Hispanic stated:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
71
They are languagely challenged, I would say. They come to school
with limited vocabulary, limited experiences and that in return,
affects their learning and they’re learning and they’re reading and
writing about things that are foreign to them. So it’s a lot of
language development and language takes time.
Candis, a third grade teacher who has taught in a Title I school for five years also
believed that her students have language barriers which prohibits them from
learning to their maximum capacity. She stated:
We have many students that need a lot of support at home. And
language is an issue because they’re trying to learn English and they
don’t have the support at home.... It’s hard because the language. A
lot of them starting the bilingual program, so they are not
meeting the level of transition and that become difficult.
Third Perception: Economic Hardship & Barrier
Luther Elementary
Students in Luther come from low income families with many of
them living in poverty. Almost the whole school population receives reduced and
free lunch and many of the families are receiving welfare benefits. Family’s
poverty level is based upon standards set by the U.S. Census Bureau in 1997 and
is determined by the age of the householder and the number of related children
younger than 18 years of age. $16,400 was established as the poverty threshold for
a family of four people in 1997. Ruby Payne (1998) explains that poverty can be
situational or generational. Situational poverty is caused by circumstances like
death, illness or divorce, and is more easily overcome. Generational poverty occurs
when a family has experienced poverty for two generations or more (1998). Most
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
72
of the students in Luther Elementary are going through generational
poverty, but whether the poverty is situational or generational, the characteristics of
poverty are detrimental to children, families, and communities.
The children who are impacted the most by poverty are more likely to be
found in inner-city schools, just like Luther and they are also more likely to be
affected by the cycle of generational poverty. These children find it most difficult
to overcome the habitual patterns of poverty because it is the only lifestyle their
parents have known and it is what these children experience daily. Risk factors that
children face through no fault of their own include: poverty, child abuse and
neglect, low parent education levels, and poor nutrition. These children face crises
in the areas of life like poor psychological and physical health and lowered self
esteem. Due to the negative circumstances in their lives, children of poverty have
learned to deal with basic daily survival skills instead of focusing on long range
educational or life goals. The statistics on urban children are disheartening. A
report entitled Urban Schools: The Challenge of Location and Poverty (Bums,
Lippman, & McArthur, 1996) revealed that urban students have a higher likelihood
of being poor, difficulty speaking English, and are more likely to live in
environments that place their health and well-being in jeopardy. Additionally, these
students are less likely to receive regular health care or to live in two-parent
families.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
As these children enter school, they often exhibit weaknesses in
school readiness skills like language development. Children of poverty may have
experienced a lack of stimulation for responding to or asking questions due to
minimal exposure to high expectations or conversations at home, a lack of
enriching experiences, and a lack of parental understanding of the education
process (Boals, 1990). In general, children from poor communities tend to perform
well below the level of their peers from more economically sound families. To
compound these problems, low-income families are often homeless or move more
often than middle income families which makes it harder to provide continuous
community and school services. Families of poverty of may develop attitudes of
helplessness or defeat. These negative characteristics can result in school failure
which manifests itself in low-income communities through cycles of juvenile
delinquency, high school drop-out rates, teen pregnancy, welfare use, higher rates
of crime, and unemployment (Arriola, 2003; Hodgkinson, 2003; Poole 1997).
These areas of concern can be addressed by the combination of different levels of
support which include the family, community, public policies, and schools.
Quane & Rankin (1998) produced a major body of research that addresses
the role of families, communities, and policy makers in low-income communities.
They found that peer relationships and families have a profound impact on a child’s
ability to do well in school. Children whose mothers are on welfare and single give
less supervision to their children, spend less time monitoring their homework and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
regulating the activities of their children which results in higher
incidences of school failure. Low-income students are less likely to socialize with
youth who do well in school, and if they have lived in a high-poverty neighborhood
for a long period of time, they are more likely to view education as not being
important. These influential environmentally factors can be negated if the child’s
mother has done well in school. Students who have concerned adults who provide
more supervision and positive attitudes towards grades help to stimulate their
child’s interest in schools. They also found that kids who do well in school are
committed to their education and have higher expectations for their future (Quane
& Rankin, 1998). Students in Luther Elementary come to school with variety of
problems to school everyday. Some come to school without having anything to eat
for few days, students who did not sleep well the night before because of the
shootings they heard out of their homes or because his or her sibling had the
television on all night in the same room they shared with six others.
When the researcher asked the question, “Tell me why you think it
is hard or easy for some of your students to succeed? What are some of the barriers
that prohibit them from learning to their maximum capacity?” a fifth grade teacher,
Sam, who has taught in a Title I school for three years said:
I think money. Income has a lot to do with it because they don’t
have all the resources available to them like computers with
internet access. Like a kid from a higher income area might be
exposed to more resources because of his or her parents. Even his
environment, the school that he goes to, he’s in a better school
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
75
district that’s providing more field trips, more enriched programs,
he is going to succeed more.
Teachers believed that many students from their school were not exposed to
the things that are in the outside of their classroom. The only meal they get daily
might only be the breakfast and lunch from school. The only places they visit
besides their home and school might only be the places their teacher takes them
through school field trips.
Bermont Elementary
Bermont Elementary is located in city of Bell Gardens and similar to
Compton, 100 percent of the student qualify and are enrolled in state funded free
and reduced lunch program. Cindy, a first grade teacher described her students’
living situations by stating:
Our students are pretty much Latino community. They come from
different parts of South America. The majority is Mexico and there’s
also Central America. They are also economically challenged. They
have good intentions. Parents try to do the best they can with that
they have. But their priority is to provide food, shelter, and clothing.
And schooling, even though it is important, many times it’s not the
priority because they are still, I mean their priority is to get the
money to pay rent basically.
Bell Garden, being the third poorest community in nations has the highest
transience rate. According to a first grade teacher Cindy, on average, there are
fifteen people living in a small cubical that they call home. She commented: “I
went into a home once where there were three families living in one bedroom
apartment. Each one of them was in the roOm and they shared the kitchen. So this is
the demographics we’re teaching.” She also added that hunger, sleep, violence,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
abuse, and lack of resiliency are some of the barriers that prohibit her
students from learning to their maximum capacity. Candis, a third grade teacher
who has been teaching in a low income Title I school stated: “The community is
not very affluent. I would say it’s lower income. We have a lot of people leaving.
We’re struggling with low enrollment district wide. And that’s because I think rent
is being so high for them.”
This proves that people are not stable and the mobility rate is high because people
are constantly moving in and out of the area.
Fourth Perception: Low Achieving and Lack of Motivation
Teachers at Luther explained that many of their students do not have the
motivation to excel. They think doing given assignments is excelling. Dillon, a
fourth grade teacher from Luther stated:
Many of my students confuse activity with achievement. And they
think if they do something that’s enough. And my emphasis is on
learning and retaining information and critical thinking skills. They
will say “We did this in the third grade.” And I try to make to them
that doing something is not the same as knowing something and
being able to use it, being able to apply it.
At home, students are not forced to do their homework and no one is
reinforcing the skills taught in school. Many of the students come to school, do the
work their teacher asks them to do, and they think that is working hard. Most of
the time, no one is emphasizing the value of education, except their teachers or
administrators at school. They do not perform well on the test because students do
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
not spend the time to study for their test and review the materials they
have learned in school.
Students are not motivated to learn because of their attitudes and beliefs.
Students with low expectations for themselves become frustrated and give poor
effort, a cycle called failure syndrome (Brophy, 1998). According to the interview
data, parents in their students’ homes are not showing great expectations. As long
as their students do not get in trouble in school and as long as they do their
homework, parents seem satisfied. Students' lack of confidence in their own ability
to learn and to be successful as well as their disengagement, or lack of connection
with the learning leads to low achievement (Arroyo, Rhoad and Drew, 1999). Lack
of self-efficacy, one's own belief that he or she has the power to achieve, also
produces poor achievement. (Brown, 1999).
Teachers' expectations of children also play a "significant role in
determining how well and how much students learn" (Bamburg, 1994). Teachers
might have bias towards students based on income, behavior, race, gender,
language, and parent education level. In many schools, poor and minority children
are often given a "dumbed down" curriculum, rather than being exposed to more
challenging course content. Low-income and minority students tend to be
overrepresented in special-education, vocational-education, and general-education
programs and underrepresented in college-prep tracks.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
78
Although poor and minority students can excel when expectations
for them are high and content is challenging, "Most schools don't teach all students
at the same high level. In fact, we have constructed an educational system so full of
inequities that it actually exacerbates the challenges of race and poverty, rather than
ameliorates them. Simply put, we take students who have less to begin with and
give them less in school, too." (Bamburg, 1994) This might cause students not to
have motivation and high expectations for themselves which will lead to low
achievement.
Bermont Elementary:
Bell Garden’s 2004 Academic Performance Index (API) was 594. Even
though there was an improvement of 28 points from the previous year, they are still
ranking in number one, number one being the worst and 10 being the best.
According to www.schoolwidepress.com. schools with similar background are
performing at ranking #3. This clearly showed that Bermont Elementary is a low
performing school with low achieving students for variety of reasons.
Similar to the teachers in Compton, teachers in Bermont agreed that many
of their students fall behind because they lack motivation. Many students are low
achieving because they have difficulty understanding the materials they are taught
in English. Teachers at Bermont believed that students are low achieving and they
lack the motivation, but they do not blame the students. Teachers believe that the
children at their school have backgrounds and living conditions that prohibit them
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
79
from being high achievers and having great motivation to succeed.
Lauren, a fourth grade teacher who has taught for more than ten years explained
that teachers often can misjudge their students because they assume things. She
stated:
You know it is human nature to assume. But the more you know, it’s
like I kind of call it, my metaphor is an onion. The more you peel,
the more you want to cry. So the more you learn from my students,
my community, I think the more you want to cry. So it kind of puts
you in your place. It makes you grateful, because Bell Gardens
Elementary is hard working, blue collar, immigrant neighborhood
with a pocket of disfranchised second and third generation. So I
think that’s what it is. Once I understood that, and it kind of put
everything in its place after awhile.
Nancy, an administrator from Bermont, believed that her students are low
achieving because they are not familiar with the English language yet. She thought
that all the state tests, Open Court reading assessments are geared toward non-
English learners. Students know the material in their own native language, but
when they are tested, they do poorly because students cannot comprehend and
understand English as well as the State wants them to. She explained
A lot of issues affect our children. I don’t think it’s always an
excuse because we still try to encourage students, provide a lot of
support interventions for them. And then I think sometimes too,
what plays a big role in all this I think, is so much are expected of
them. Say for example in English, all the state tests, he way students
are classified and so on, everything’s done in English. So for the
majority of our population who are taking exams in English for
example, reclassified as far below basic.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
80
Fifth Perception: Poor Behavior and Disciplinary Problems
Luther Elementary
When teachers were asked: “What are some of the barriers that prohibit
your students from learning?” many teachers said behavior. Teachers commented
that many students have difficult time sitting down. They are constantly touching
things, making noises, and simply not being able to concentrate. The administrator
from Luther Elementary School shared:
Behavior and discipline is a priority for us because you really cannot
get much done if you have discipline problems. Discipline is really
important because if students are not disciplined, they are not likely
to learn. We have high number of African American male students
who have difficulties sitting still and they are out of the
classroom a lot.
Many students are not disciplined at home, so they show the same behavior
in school. They are not giving consequences for their children’s actions, so when
these same students come to school, they have hard time adjusting to school rules
and classroom rules. The principal from Luther shared that many of her parents are
not well educated, so they do not and cannot help their children in an effective way.
We are a hundred percent free and reduced lunch school. It’s a low
SES school. Our parents are not well educated. So one of the areas
that we are looking at is empowering our parents to help their
children at home. We are working on bringing in consultants from
outside to help our parents to help their children at home.
Teachers shared in their interviews that they cannot simply do the work
alone. It should be a group effort, but they send notices home, they do not get any
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
81
response back. All teachers at Luther use positive reinforcement. All the
Hispanic teachers shared that they understand how difficult it is to be an immigrant
because they too went through similar obstacles when they were growing up. They
say they know what is going on at home and why their students act the way they
do. The lead GATE teacher stated:
Even though we say that education is something that you do in
collaboration with the home and the school, I know that they, some
of them, don’t have that home. So I believe that I am the only
one. And that is what I have in mind. If I don’t do something for
them, maybe nobody would do it. And I believe that every child can
learn, it depends on how you do it, how you teach that child.
Bermont Elementary
Teachers in Bermont Elementary all agreed that many of their students have
distractions that are caused by issues related to home environment. Cathy, a second
grade teacher remembered a student she had in her class:
Although she didn’t come from a home that was involved in her
education, she was very resilient. And she had the capabilities of
taking the talent that she was given or that she developed to go on to
bigger and better things. But she had a behavior problem. But the
behavior problem stemmed from the family and the lack of
motivation. This is just her life; it was her culture at that point.
Even though teachers expressed that their students have behavioral and discipline
issues, the researcher was made to believe that the teachers understood where the
problem was coming from and were trying to come up with methods and strategies
that will help their students. Angie, a second grade teacher with seven years of
experience of teaching in low income, Title I school said:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
82
If they’re willing to try, I am willing to try. If they’re willing to put
in the extra work, I’ll be willing to put in extra work. If I have
parents that are willing to help me at home with students, then I’ll be
more willing to send more things home like packages for them to
work on at home that are extra work that don’t need to be
returned sending books home that the kids can check out, be willing
to show the parents how to help children. If parents are motivated to
help their children, I will be motivated to help the parents. If the
children are motivatedto learn in the classroom, I become more
motivated to teach them and help them.
Cindy, a first grade teacher said many times, teachers look at the negative things
and concentrate on the things which have the negative influence in his or her
classroom. She also stated that the teachers should look past that realize where
these students are coming from. She quoted:
Many times you see a child who is irresponsible with their
homework because, for whatever reason, at home they don’t take
care of him. So he comes to school uncared for.. ..I tend to overlook
students just because of their behavior problems. You will give
attention to the negative instead of all the positive you can get from
them if maybe you would tweak a few things, or change their
environment because of, for whatever reason, they may not be
working for them. I would say many times teachers do over look
that.
Teachers feel that their students have discipline problems, but they know the root
of the problem and most of them believe that it is their job to work around those
obstacles to implement a good strategy that will benefit their under privileged
students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
83
Factors Which Influences Teachers’ and Administrators’ Perceptions
Data Related to Question #2: What factors contribute to perceptions o f these
teachers and administrators?
For each of the five perceptions derived from the data, three factors were
found which tied in with the perceptions of the administrators and teachers from
both Luther Elementary and Belmont Elementary. These factors are the reasons
why teachers and administrators had such perceptions of their students at their
schools.
Table 9
Summary o f Interview Data Related to Research Question #2
Perceptions Factors
No Support and Stability at Home L No Parent Volunteer &
Involvement
2. Poor Attendance & Tardiness
3. Broken Homes, Students Living in
Foster Homes
Language Barriers 1. Illiterate Parents
2. English Language Learners
3. Lack of Academic Language
Economic Hardship and Barriers 1. Students without Proper Care
( Food and Clothing)
2. 100% Free and Reduced Lunch
3. Low SES & Title I School
Low Achieving and Lack of Motivation 1. Low Test Score
2. Poor Attitudes and Beliefs
L Poor Work Habits and
Inconsistency
Poor Behavior and Disciplinary Issues 1. Easily Distracted
2. No Parental Support
3. Physically and Emotionally
Unstable
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
84
The following five figures consist of teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of
their
students followed by three factors which influence their perceptions.
Attendance and
Tardiness
No Support and
Stability at Home.
Perception:
No Parent Volunteer
(Involvement)
Broken Homes,
Students Living in
Foster Homes
Figure 1. Teachers’ and Administrators’ First Perception and Its Factors: No
Support and Stability at Home
First factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students do not have the adequate support and stability at home is that
teachers do not get parent volunteers in and outside the classroom. When the
researcher asked the question: “Do you get a lot of parent involvement in your
classroom?”, 1 teacher out of 6 from Luther and 2 teachers out of 6 teachers said
they do see some kind of parent involvement in or outside the classroom. One fifth
grade teacher, Sam from Luther said:
I receive a lot of help outside the classroom. Maybe bringing in
materials that the school can’t provide us, they bring it for us. Or
maybe parent volunteers, say we have an activity and when I ask
for parent volunteers, I have a lot of their support. But for resources
that are expensive, there’s no support there.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
85
In Sam’s case, he has parents who are willing to help him outside the
classroom. The other five teachers stated that they do not have any parent
volunteers or involvements in or out side of the classroom. One third grade teacher
from Luther shared that out of the eight years he has taught in a Title I school, he
has never had a parent volunteering to help, with this year being an exception.
Alex, a third grade teacher from Luther stated:
I’ve had one parent who has been very persistent and diligent about
it. She’s been assisting me whether it’s just with correcting
assessments, working with small groups or just helping me with
paperwork. So this is my first year and that’s the only exception in
my entire career.
Out of the six teachers and one administrator, only two teachers told the
researcher that they get parent volunteers in their classroom. Ally, and Angie,
second grade teachers from Bermont Elementary both told the researcher that
parents come to school and help them file papers, put packets together, and help
them check students’ homework. Angie said:
Sometimes the parents will just come in and say, “You know, is
there anything that you would like me to take home and bring it
back?” And sometimes the parents will just volunteer to help me
check homework in the morning so that I can go on with my lessons
instead of checking the homework. So usually in that way the
parents come and help me. Or in the mornings they’ll make sure
that-, like I have one parent who won’t leave until I pick up the kids,
and he keeps them in line. So that’s a big help.
On the other hand, six others said they have no volunteers or get any kind of
parental involvement in and outside their classroom. Cathy, a second grade
classroom teacher stated:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
86
Oh, no, I’ve never had a parent volunteer in my classroom, Never!
I teach a different-, because I teach English Only class, it’s different.
The parents of the second language learners in this community are
single parents and they have to work. So I don’t necessarily believe
that it’s the parent not wanting to participate, they don’t have the
ability to do so. Because they have to work, they don’t have the time
to dedicate to the classroom.
Teacher at Bermont believed that because of the circumstances of the parents, they
are not able to volunteer even if they wanted. Work, financial burdens and just
having to survive does not allow parents to come to school to participate or help in
activities.
Second factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students do not have the adequate support and stability at home is attendance
and tardiness. The principal at Luther Elementary School site shared that
attendance is one of the major issue that her school is trying to work on.
We look at attendance and we have honest conversations with our
parents. We try to get their input because one of the things that we
realize is that they have to be here in order to be learning. So
attendance is the priority for us.
Many teachers stated that because they do not have stability at hone, their students
are frequently tardy and absent. Daisy, a third grade teacher from Luther who has
taught in a Title I school shared that many of her students are absent frequently
because some of them move around from one foster home to another. She stated:
They do not have a permanent home or sometimes they don’t have a
parent to walk them to school, so a lot of them miss many days of
school. When they miss school, they are going to miss out on things
that were taught and when that happens over and over again, that
student will fall behind. I see that a lot at our school. These kids do
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
87
not have stability at home and that directly reflects on children’s
behavior, and work habits.
Annie, the Lead GATE teacher from Luther also stated:
Our students live in a neighborhood where there are a lot of racial
issues and gang problems and dysfunctional families. We get kids
with a lot of disadvantages from home. So we have to work with
them. Because many students come from these kinds of
environments, as mentioned previously, they are often tardy and the
students miss many days of school. To them, number one priority is
survival. They are worried about food and shelter first and then their
academia comes after all the other factors that they need for daily
survival.
Teachers in Bermont Elementary explained how the mobility rate of the
students in Bermont is high. Many students come and go and like the students in
Luther, they are frequently absent and tardy. Ally, a second grade teacher from
Bermont explained:
We have many students moving from one place to another. They
stay in one place and then stay here for like a month and then they
move to another school, and then they move back. And we have a
lot of that going on. And usually, sadly enough, kids that are in that
situation aren’t testing properly or you know there are gaps in their
education because of those situations.
Just like the teachers in Luther explained, students in these neighborhoods
face many struggles daily. They might have a single parent who leaves to go to
work at 5 and no one else is there to wake up a first grade child to dress and feed
him or her to go to school. There might be a child who is living in an area where
gun shots and noises of ambulances would sound every night, which keep them
from sleeping at a decent hour. These are some of the issues the teachers in both
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
88
schools described. Because of these instabilities in their homes, students
are not fully ready to learn when they see them in the morning.
Third factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students do not have the adequate support and stability at home is that many
of their students live in broken homes and in foster homes. Teachers at Luther
Elementary all stated that many of their students live with a single parent or in
foster homes. When the researcher ask the question: Why you think it’s hard or
easy for some of your students to succeed, one third grade teachers stated that there
are too many barriers at homes. He stated that there are too many distractions at
home and that many of his students are living in trailer parks and are homeless or
even living with multiple families. Because some of the students live in this kind
of environment, they are easily to miss days of school and many of them are tardy
to school because there is no one at home to dress them, feed them, and walk them
to school.
Again, living situations of the students in Bermont Elementary is very
similar, if not identical to the students at Bermont. Many of them live in single
parent homes or others live in foster homes. Many of them live in one small one
single bedroom apartment with ten to fifteen other people. The lead GATE teacher,
Lauren stated:
When they are going against many basic factors like food and
support, they are already coming to school listless and unfocused.
The school is their home in terms of having their own desk, having
their own place. This is their home.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
89
The teachers felt that because their students do not have stability at home
due to broken families and difficult living situations, they cannot just assume why
the students are not performing at their maximum capacity. Ally, a second grade
teacher described that teachers need to see themselves as the students that they
teach. She also shared that it is easy for her to understand her students and
understand why they lack in certain areas. She stated:
Well, I see my students as myself. Because I was one of those
children once long ago. And I am Mexican American. My parents
are immigrants to this country. I was an English Learner
obviously. So I understand their struggles too. I can relate with them
in other words. Every one of my students is so different, but at some
level, I can relate to them, with their family or just their experience.
English Language
Learners
Parents are Illiterate
Most of Them are
Immigrants
Language Barrier
Perception:
Students Do Not
Know the Academic
Language
Figure 2. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Second Perception: Language Barriers
and Its Factors
First factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students suffer from language barrier is that most of their students’ parents are
illiterate because they are immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
With the school being comprised of mostly Hispanics, teachers often find students
not getting academic support from home because their parents cannot read, write,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
or read English. The researcher realized that teachers like Daisy, a
Caucasian third grade teacher from Luther, who has mostly Hispanic students in
her class, or Sam, who is also a Caucasian male teacher would be faced with
difficult situations in communicating with parents. Students also suffer because
when they are given homework or assignments to complete at home, their parents
cannot help them because they do not speak the language and cannot afford a
private tutor or outside help. The only person and place a student can rely on are his
or her teacher and the school. She stated: “Because there are a lot of English
learners, students don’t have that support at home. They can’t ask their parents,
“Hey, what do you think of this?” because the parents don’t know, they can’t read
English.”
Teachers in Bermont also felt that there is a language barrier because the
students’ parents are illiterate in English and often Spanish as well. The students
are not given the extra help at home with homework un less they have older sibling
who can help them. All six teachers from Bermont stressed the point that there is
no communication barrier between them and their students’ parents because they
too speak Spanish.
The second factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel
that their students suffer from language barrier is that most of their students are
English language learners. Luther elementary population is mostly Hispanics.
Their students’ first and home language is Spanish. Even though many of them
were born in the States, they are labeled as English language learners because their
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
91
home language is Spanish. Students take annual California English
Language Development Test, which is comprised of listening, speaking, and
writing. Many of the students take up four years to be redesignated as RFEPS
(Reclassified English Language Learners). All English learners must receive ELD
(English Language Development), which is state and district mandated daily for
approximately 50 minutes.
John, a fourth grade teacher from Luther shared that it is easier for him to
relate to his students because he also speaks the language. He explained that when
his students do not know what the meaning of a word from his Open Court
Anthology book, he can translate it in Spanish for them. He said:
It is easier for me to work with my students because we share the
same background. I myself am an immigrant from Mexico and my
first language was Spanish, so therefore, I know their struggles and
it is easier for me to help them.
Students in Bermont are also mostly English language learners as well.
Many students are in a bilingual class, which helps the students’ transition from
their home language to English. The administrator Nancy said:
We have majority of our students in an EL (English Learning)
program. So we have bilingual students. We have big percentage of
our students that are bilingual and in a bilingual program. So they
are dominant in Spanish, of course with the goal of learning English
and going into mainstream English and reclassifying into English.
We have different services offered to students in the area of
math and language arts for students who have maybe some type
of identified learning problems.
Teachers explained that many of their students do poorly on the tests
because it is written in a language they are not familiar with. Ally, a second grade
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
teacher explained that time to time she feels like she is rushing though the
unit because she is trying to cover all the state mandated content standards and that
she is not giving the students enough time to slowly acquire the new language. She
explained:
We are not giving adequate time for children to learn. We want to
bombard them with so much information. And especially for
children that are English learners, I’m not saying to dummy down
the curriculum, I’m saying for things to go at a pace that is more
normal for language acquisition.
The third factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students suffer from language barrier is that students do not know academic
language. Many students do not know the academic language. Students in both
schools suffer from language barrier in schools and do poorly on tests because they
are not familiar with academic language. When the researcher asked the question:
What are some of the barriers that prohibit students from learning to their
maximum capacity, Lauren, the lead GATE teacher explained:
I think it’s academic, in terms if academic language. They’re
moving in terms of GATE, they are moving at a social registry. I
think that really affects all learners in our school, but in terms of
gifted that are underachieving, they’re reading the story and
understanding the story, yet at the same time, like the other day this
week one said, “Teacher, what is ‘vast’? I read in the
context, but I still don’t know what ‘vast’ is.” SO we had to look at
the picture of Grand Canyon. “Vast, see the horizon? There is a
vast.” “Oh, vas, it means all around? Oh, I see now.” They don’t
have that experience. They don’t have the books usually. Even the
gifted have maybe two books in their homes, or maybe three.
Teachers believed that because students do not have the adequate resources and
help available to them, they are struggling with language. Students in low income
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
93
families, who need the most resources do not have enough books and help
as they need.
Barriers Caused by
Economic Hardship
Perception:
100 Percent Free and
Reduced Lunch
Students Coming to
School without Proper
Care (Food & Clothing)
Low SES. Title I
School
Figure 3. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Third Perception: Economic Hardship &
Its Factors
The first factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students suffer from economic barrier and hardship is that some of their
students are coming to school without proper care. Many of these students in both
Luther and Bermont only have one uniform to wear at home. So most of the days,
their uniform is dirty and unwashed. Their parents do not have washer and dryer at
home, so they wait weeks to go to the laundry mat. Some of their students also
come to school hungry and tired. The lead GATE teacher from Luther stated:
Our school population is mainly Latino. I would say 85 percent of
our students are Title I students. So all of them qualify for free
lunch. Many of our kids come to school very tired. They don’t
have good breakfast sometimes. I have students falling asleep in
class because they couldn’t sleep the night before. Kids come to
school in the morning being very hungry because they didn’t have
breakfast or they didn’t eat the night before. Some of these kids have
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
94
the lunch we given them here and that’s it. That’s all they eat. So
when you come to school being hungry and not sleeping, I mean not
rested, then you can’t Work and function well.
The second factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel
that their students suffer from economic barrier and hardship is that 100 percent of
their students in both Luther and Bermont Elementary receive free and reduced
lunch. More than three million California children are eligible for free and
reduced-price meals at school. In both of the schools, 100 percent of the students
qualified for free or reduced price lunches, compared to 71 percent of students in
Los Angeles County Researcher can conclude that the entire school population is
living with economic hardship because the total population is qualified to free
lunch program.
Cindy from Bermont Elementary stated:
All of our student receive free lunch from school. This can actually
tell you what kind of situations students are in. To some of these
kids, the meals at school might only be the meal they have all they.
I have many students who get in trouble for trying to hide the food
to take home. According to the cafeteria workers, students are not
allowed to take anything home, so a lot of children get in trouble for
that. They might have brothers and sisters at home that they want to
share the food with. It’s a shame. Sometimes, kids fall asleep for
often complains about headaches because they are hungry. I try to
leave some fruit or healthy snack for the kids to eat in class. I know
what they are going through.
The third factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students suffer from economic barrier and hardship is that both of the schools
are low SES, and Title I schools.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
The purpose of the Title I is to ensure that all children have a fair,
equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a
minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and
state academic assessments. According to U.S. Department of Education, The
purpose of the Title I can be met by: (1) ensuring that high-quality academic
assessments, accountability systems, teacher preparation and training, curriculum,
and instructional materials are aligned with challenging State academic standards
so that students, teachers, parents, and administrators can measure progress against
common expectations for student academic achievement;(2) meeting the
educational needs of low-achieving children in our Nation's highest-poverty
schools, limited English proficient children, migratory children, children with
disabilities, Indian children, neglected or delinquent children, and young children in
need of reading assistance;(3) closing the achievement gap between high- and low-
performing children, especially the achievement gaps between minority and no
minority students, and between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged
peers;(4) holding schools, local educational agencies, and States accountable for
improving the academic achievement of all students, and identifying and turning
around low-performing schools that have failed to provide a high-quality education
to their students, while providing alternatives to students in such schools to enable
the students to receive a high-quality education;(5) distributing and targeting
resources sufficiently to make a difference to local educational agencies and
schools where needs are greatest;(6) improving and strengthening accountability,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
96
teaching, and learning by using State assessment systems designed to
ensure that students are meeting challenging State academic achievement and
content standards and increasing achievement overall, but especially for the
disadvantaged;(7) providing greater decision-making authority and flexibility to
schools and teachers in exchange for greater responsibility for student
performance;(8) providing children an enriched and accelerated educational
program, including the use of school wide programs or additional services that
increase the amount and quality of instructional time;(9) promoting school wide
reform and ensuring the access of children to effective, scientifically based
instructional strategies and challenging academic content;(10) significantly
elevating the quality of instruction by providing staff in participating schools with
substantial opportunities for professional developmental 1) coordinating services
under all parts of this title with each other, with other educational services, and, to
the extent feasible, with other agencies providing services to youth, children, and
families; and (12) affording parents substantial and meaningful opportunities to
participate in the education of their children.
Teachers from both school sites explained that despite the fact that the
school receives extra funds to support their students, they have not seen the money
being used directly for the students. They do not have extra aides in the classroom
to work with the students individually or are given extra books for the kids to take
home. These are the areas they need in order to help their children succeed in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
school Students are continuously disadvantaged because they come from
a low income family and the school does not offer to help them in an effective way.
Attitudes and Beliefs Low Test Score
Low Achieving and
Lack of Motivation
Perception:
Poor Work Habits and
Inconsistency
Figure 4. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Fourth Perception: Low Achieving and
Lack of Motivation and Its Factors
The first factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students lack motivation and are low achieving is that their students have low
state test scores. In Luther Elementary, students are given weekly tests, as well as
quarter benchmark tests given by the district to all the schools in districts. One
teacher from Luther said:
Many students do not do well on state tests or even weekly tests
because they are lacking motivation. No one at home tells them they
need to succeed. Parents often require their children to do minimal
work and since they are not exposed to people talking about college
or higher education, they think coming t o school daily is good
enough.
Majority of the teachers from Luther and Bermont who participated in the
interview stated that students are not really concerned about their grades. Of course
there are few who go beyond expectation and get good grades throughout the
school year, but most of them are behind in their studies for several of reasons.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
The second factor which influences the teachers and administrators
to feel that their students lack motivation and are low achieving is that their
students’ attitudes and beliefs about school. Many of their students come from an
environment where education is not valued. Many students believe that making
money and being rich is more important than learning how to solve a math problem
or being able to read and write. No one at home is telling them to turn off the TV
or to study for a weekly spelling test. Rather, when they have older siblings at
home, they are easily influenced and become involved in negative aspects of life. A
fourth grade teacher John from Luther said:
Many of their brothers and sisters are in gangs. When our students
see that their brother and sisters are hanging out with their friends,
watching TV, or just playing round, they are going to think that it is
ok for them to do the same. If they have siblings that are not focused
in their studies, they are going to think that is ok for them to so
the same. Already they are thinking that is the norm.
Because majority of parents from both Luther and Bermont work, there is no one is
at home to supervise or to tell them to do their homework, to read, and to review
for the test, students think that it is okay for them to play or not study. No one is
giving and providing them the positive influence that they need to succeed.
Students might have older siblings who are engaged in gang activities or other
things related to that sort, therefore when the students go home, that is what they
see and hear, not someone encouraging them to study or to read and that can greatly
impact students’ motivation to succeed.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
The third factor which influences the teachers and administrators
to feel that their students lack motivation and are low achieving is that their poor
work habits and inconsistency in turning in homework. Out of the twelve teachers
interviewed for this study, ten of them expressed their concern about students’
work habits. Many of the teachers have students who have hard time concentrating
and working independently. There are many behavior issues that the teachers are
faced with. One teacher explained that there are many disabilities as well. A third
grade teacher Alex from Luther Elementary commented: “Also what keeps them
from learning; it could be disability. A disability that sometimes has not been
either diagnosed or identified as disability. So that keeps them from learning.”
This teacher’s comment reflects on how teachers think of their students’ work
habits. Since they are not getting help and support from their home, students come
to school without homework and assignments because no one at home is checking
the work. When they have disabilities that block them from learning to their
maximum capacity, the only person who can help is the teacher. Many of the
parents in this low SES, Title I school does not have the resources available to help
their children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
100
Poor Behavior with
Disciplinary Issues
Perception:
Physically and
Emotionally Unstable
No Parental Support Easily Distracted in
Class
Figure 5. Teachers’ and Administrators’ Fifth Perception: Poor Behavior and
Disciplinary Problems and Its Factors
The first factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel that
their students have behavioral and discipline issues is that they are easily distracted
in class. Teachers explained that their students have hard time staying on task for a
long time. Student’s attention span is very short, even in the upper grades. John,
an upper grade teacher from Luther Explained:
Many of these children are not used to sitting down and staying in
one position for long time. I know we talk about cooperative
learning and we have to allow students to walk around, but when I
try to teach my lesson that way, I often see disorderly classroom. I
like to have structured teaching setting, where students interact with
one another, but in an organized way.
Other teachers, Angie and Candis stated that they have many students in
their class who are constantly standing up or touching things with their hands.
These kinds of behavior allow the teachers to think and believe that students have
serious disciplinary and behavior issues that cannot be corrected over night and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
students are constantly being reprimanded by their teachers daily for these
types of behaviors.
The second factor which influences the teachers and administrators to feel
that their students have behavioral and discipline issues is that students have no
parental support. When the teachers notice that their students are having a hard time
adjusting to rules and requirements of the class, they try to contact the parents.
When the teachers contact or attempt to contact them to speak about their child’s
behavior, many parents ignore or does not come to school to address the problem.
One of the main reasons why this is true is because most of the parents work from
morning to night. Many of them have two jobs which does not allow for them to
leave. Even though the parents are wanting to help their children, they are not home
to positively reinforce good behavior and work habits. Therefore, much of the
problems are left alone, just for the teacher. Annie, the lead GATE teacher from
Luther said:
I set the expectation very high for my students. I have non
negotiable things, like being responsible is one of the things that
I always encourage from the beginning of the year. We don’t have
the support at home, so they need to be able to be responsible with
their homework, with their books they take home and be responsible
for the decisions they make.
As previously mentioned, many teachers feel that they are trying to educate their
students alone. The feel that when a note is sent home or a phone call is made to
the students’ homes, they do not get the help and response that they want to get.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
The third factor which influences the teachers and administrators
to feel that their students have behavioral and discipline issues is students’
instability. Teachers felt that their students in their class are unstable physically and
emotionally. Many of them come to school thinking how they are going to sleep
that night or who is going to pick them up after school because they live in a group
home or under a foster care. Annie stated:
These kids grow in an environment that is not safe, that is very
insecure. So that goes on in their life. Life hasn’t been easy for
them, so they think nothing is easy and they believe they cannot do
things because people around them maybe not doing something
good. They don’t have good role models. So they don’t have
anybody to look at. And I try to be the role model and I try to tell
them, “You can do whatever you want. You just need to try and
never give up.”
Many teachers a Luther Elementary said they can relate to the students
because they too grew up in a similar environment. Teachers: John, Sam, Annie,
and Alex were all English Learners and immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador, and
Guatemala. They also had parents who worked double shifts and who could not
help them with homework because they did not speak English. They also know the
living situations of their students because they too had the same issues growing up
as a kid. A fifth grade teacher from Luther expressed his feelings by saying: “I see
myself in their position, ‘cause I grew up in that type of environment, you know a
low income- environment, almost the same background as the students I’m
teaching, so I feel like I can relate to them.”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
Teachers from Bermont felt the same way about their students
being emotionally unstable. Students from these two schools come from
disadvantaged background that lack parent support. These things causes students
to misbehave and uncooperative. Some students believe that that is the only way
they can get attention and get some kind of recognition from teachers and parents.
Relationship Between the Perceptions and the Nominations and Selection for
GATE
Data Related to Research Question #3: What is the relationship between the
perception of these teachers and administrators and the factors influencing the
nomination and selection of linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse
students for the gifted education program from urban Title I schools?
After all the interviews and analysis of the findings, the researcher found
that there is no direct correlation between teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions
of these students and the actual nomination of their students for the GATE
program. Teachers in Luther Elementary, as well as the teachers in Bermont
Elementary all had similar perceptions of their students and the factors that led
them to those particular perception, but Luther Elementary had low referral rate and
Bermont had high referral and nomination rate.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
Table 10
Factors Which Influenced the Referral and Nomination ofthe Students for the
Gifted Program in Two Urban Title I Schools
Factors Luther Elementary Bermont Elementary
Identification Criteria • Test Scores Only • Test Scores
• Teacher
Recommendation
• Portfolio
• Interview
Paperwork Process • Paperwork was
Considered
Overwhelming
• Paperwork was
Considered
Overwhelming
Teacher’s Knowledge
Regarding the Referral
Process & Nomination
Criteria
• Many were not
knowledgeable of the
referral/nomination
process
• Teachers were highly
knowledgeable of the
referral/nomination
process
The researcher found that there were other factors which contributed to the
low or high number of students being nominated for the GATE program at die two
schools that participated in die research (See Table 10). The first factor is the
GATE identification criteria, second, time needed to be spent in paper work, and
third, teachers’ knowledge of the identification process at the each school site.
First the identification criteria for GATE program are very different in these
two schools. In Luther Elementary in Compton, a student must get 90 percent or
higher in Math or English in CST or CAT6 test for two consecutive years. Students
are primarily referred by test scores only and unlike Bermont Elementary in Bell
Gardens, teachers do not compile portfolios. In Bermont Elementary, teachers
usually fill out a form, and then there is an interview that a child, teacher, and the
parent need to attend with a committee comprised of representative from the district
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
105
and the student’s teacher from the school site. Nancy, an administrator
from Bermont explained:
Ok, so they do go through a referral process through teachers, and
then there is a process that they go through as far as interviewing
with a committee, which includes a representative from the district
and the school site. Portfolios are presented on the students. And at
that point, based on the information that’s presented, students will
wither be recommended for testing or they will be clustered into-,
clustered basically as a GATE cluster for the following school year.
And then those students are monitored to see if they maybe
considered gain.
When the researcher asked Annie, the GATE lead teacher at Luther how the
students are identified for the gifted program, she said:
We do it through testing, standardized testing; first we go through
their scores. They need to qualify. We have the same criteria for
that. And it’s not easy. They need to be able to score high in like
ninety percent in the CAT6 and also in the CST. Ninety percent in
one area or both, which is not easy for, now a days, especially with
the testing we have. Then we have another criteria. That’s when you
have a high score for one year, eight five percent or above, but then
you need to support that with the writing assessment and the
program assessments like language assessments, report cards. You
need to submit the benchmark assessment scoring ninety and above.
And so it’s not easy.
The second factor that results in low or high number of students for the
GATE program is the overwhelming paper work that is involved with nominating a
child for the gifted program. John, a fifth grade teacher who has been working in a
Title I school for three years stated: “I know that they identify some students ‘cause
it’s also like a lot of paperwork involved. You cannot just say somebody is gifted.
You have to support that with performances and paperwork.”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
Teachers from Bermont had similar opinions about the reasons
why some teachers do not refer their qualified students to the GATE program.
When the researcher asked the question - What are some of the reasons that keep
the teachers from nominating a student for the gifted program? Here are some of
the responses that were shared by the participants:
Lauren, Lead GATE teacher. Asking people to turn in paperwork is the biggest
challenge.
Nancy, school administrator. Well I think one reason could possibly be, or at least
I’ve seen in the past is the paperwork. It’s a lot of paper and the time.
Angie, a second grade teacher. Honestly, the paperwork. It requires a lot of
paperwork, a lot of preparing portfolios that the student is gifted, preparing the
paperwork to be submitted to the district, to the school, sending it home to the
parents. And a lot of times the teachers just see it as, “Ok they’re good students,
eventually somebody will recognize them for it.”
The third factor that result in low or high number of students for the GATE
program teacher’s knowledge of the nomination process. The researcher found that
teachers in Luther Elementary were not aware of the nomination and referral
process of the GATE program. Francine, a principal at Luther stated that many ,
teachers are not aware about the gifted program. She said: “I think most
importantly, teachers do not know about the gifted education program. They’re not
aware of the criteria for qualifying children.” Also when the researcher asked the
question: What kind of criteria do you use to nominate your students for the gifted
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
education program? Dillon, a fourth grade teacher who has been teaching
six years in Title I school said:
“Personally I haven’t nominated anyone because the school’s done I think a fairly
good job with that.’’When the researcher asked another teacher John if there was a
gifted education program at his school, he simply said he was not familiar with the
program.
The teachers in Bermont on the other hand were very knowledgeable about
the referral process. When the researcher asked the same type of questions to
teachers at Bermont Elementary, they responded with great knowledge and
understanding of the GATE nomination and referral process. Cindy, a second
grade teachers stated:
Students are recommended from grade two. However, early as
Kindergarten, they are flagged, if you would say, and I guess kept
an eye on through into second. And either second or third, we’ll do
recommendation for GATE. They’ll do the testing and then they
end up being nominated or are involved in after school enrichment.
When the researcher asked the question: What kind of criteria do you use to
nominate your students to the gifted program, all six teachers knew the specific
criteria that the school uses to refer and nominate its students to the GATE
program. Teachers in Bermont not only use test scores, but they use portfolios
which includes students work samples, results from the IQ tests, teacher’s notes,
visual and performing arts portfolio, leadership skills, and many other relevant
factors.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In conclusion, the researcher found no significant relationship
between teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of their culturally, linguistically,
and ethnically diverse students with the referral and nomination process. Teacher’s
knowledge of the referral process, the criteria of the selection process, and teachers’
view on time and paperwork that the teachers need to devote in order to nominate
their students to the GATE program were the key factors which influenced the
referral and nomination process of the students for the GATE program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Students who are not from the dominant culture are generally under
represented in the range of programs and provisions for gifted and talented
students. In the United States of America, research shows students who are from
minority cultural groups have been over-represented in special education programs;
however, they have been under-represented in programs for the gifted and talented
(Frasier, M 1987; Sisk, D 1994).
This study was conducted to answer the following questions regarding the
low number of referrals of students of diversity for the gifted program in urban
Title I schools:
1. What are the teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of linguistically,
economically, and culturally diverse students’ academic potential in urban
Title I schools?
2. What factors contribute to perceptions of these teachers and administrators?
3. What is the relationship between the perceptions of these teachers and
administrators and the factors influencing the nomination and selection of
linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students for the gifted
education program from urban Title I schools?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
Population Sample
Interviews were onducted in two urban Title I schools located in Southern
California: (1) Luther Elementary School, which is in the Compton Unified School
District, and (2) Bermont Elementary School, which is in the Montebello Unified
School District. Five teachers, one GATE lead teacher/coordinator, and one
administrator from each school were interviewed for the study.
Luther Elementary School is a public elementary school, offering grade
levels kindergarten through fifth grade. Luther Elementary has an enrollment of
591 students, which was 136 fewer students than the county average. There were
approximately 23 students per teacher at Luther Elementary, compared to an
average of 20 students per teacher in the elementary schools in Los Angeles
County. Most students at Luther Elementary identified themselves as
Latino/Hispanic. In fact, there were approximately three times as many
Latino/Hispanic students as African American students, which was the second-
largest ethnic group attending Luther Elementary. Out of the 591 students, 5 were
formally identified as gifted, which was approximately 0.08 percent of the total
student body. According to statistics, it is estimated that about 2 percent of school
population is usually identified as gifted.
Bermont Elementary School offers grade levels from kindergarten through
fourth grade. The school operates on a year round schedule, which is different
from the normal traditional school calendar year. Bermont Elementary’s has an
enrollment of 1,216 students, which was 489 more students than the Los Angeles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Ill
County average. There were approximately 18 students per classroom and
teacher at Bermont Elementaiy, as compared to the average of 20 students per
classroom and teacher in the elementary schools in Los Angeles County.
Additionally, Belmont Elementary’s Academic Performance Index for the
2004-2005 school year was 597. Bermont Elementary had two lead GATE
teachers. Out of the 1216 total students, approximately 120 students were identified
as gifted, which was approximately 10 percent of the student body.
Table 11
Overview o f Participants
Schools Luther Elementary Bermont Elementary
Gender 3=Female
4=Male
7=Female
Ethnicity 1= African American
2=Caucasian
4=Hispanic
7=Hispanic
Professional Development 4=Yes 5 -Yes
3=No 2=No
Average Years Taught 6 years 8 years
The participants in this study included both teachers and administrators from
Luther Elementary and Bermont Elementary, who have or (in the past) had gifted
or potentially gifted students in their classroom and school for at least one year.
The average years taught for teachers and administrators in Luther Elementary was
six years, while the average for Bermont Elementary was eight years. Four out of
seven participants from Luther Elementary attended professional development
related to gifted and talented education and five out of seven participants from
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
Bermont Elementary previously attended professional development
related to gifted and talented education.
The primary data sources for the study came from interviews that included
both close-ended and open-ended questions (See Appendices A & B). These
questions were formulated by the researcher and were used in a pilot study to test
the validity and reliability. The data collected through the open-ended questions
were reported in the participants’ own words through interview process which was
taped and transcribed. The text of the interviews related to the research questions
served as the primary source for interpreting and analyzing data.
Question One: What are the teachers ’ and administrators ’perceptions o f
linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students ’ academic potential in
urban Title I schools?
Luther Elementary identified five students for the GATE program, which
was approximately 0.08 percent of the total student population and Bermont
Elementary had 120 identified GATE students, which was approximately ten
percent of the student population. Initially, it was believed that the low number of
referral rates for students of diversity in the gifted program in Title I schools was
the result of teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of their students of diversity.
An analysis of the interviews with the teachers and administrators from the two
urban Title I schools indicated that there was no direct relationship between the
teachers’ perception of their culturally, linguistically, and socially diverse students
and the numbers of referrals and nominations of these students for the gifted
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
113
program. Teachers and administrators from both schools: Luther and
Bermont had similar perceptions regarding their students of diversity. These
perceptions have been identified as follows:
1. Students do not have support and stability at home
2. Students suffer from language barriers
3. Students have economic hardships and barriers
4. Students are low achievers and they lack motivation
5. Students have poor behavior and disciplinary problems
Students do not have support and stability at home: Participants from both schools
believed that the majority of their students do not have adequate support and
stability at home. Research has provided evidence that there is a link between
parent involvement and academic achievement (Ascher, 1988; Baker & Soden,
1998; Chavkin, 1993; Chavkin & Gonzalez, 1995; Epstein, 1996; Floyd, 1998;
Petersen, 1989). As stated by Dinger (1992), “There is considerable evidence that
parent involvement leads to improved student achievement, better school
attendance, and reduced dropout rates, and that these improvements occur
regardless of the economic, racial, or cultural background of the family” (p. 1).
Students suffer from lansuaee barrier. The student population in schools in the
U.S. is now more diverse, both culturally and linguistically than it has ever been.
According to the 1990 U.S. Census, more 20 percent of school age children and
youth come from homes in which languages other than English are spoken. For
students from both Luther and Bermont Elementary, English is not their first
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
114
language and many entered school with Limited English Proficiency
(LEP). U.S. Census figures indicated that linguistic diversity among students will
persist and increase. During the 1980s, the number of LEP students grew more
than two-and-a-half times faster than regular school enrollment (Chavez, 1991).
Students with LEP suffer from language barriers due primarily to lessons and
assessments that are taught in an unfamiliar language. In addition, these students
do not have parents at home who can assist in their school work because of their
own language barrier.
Students have economic hardships and barrier. Low socioeconomic families have
often failed to provide “real life” exposure to their children that may stimulate the
development for higher level thinking skills. Enriching experiences such as travel,
educational activities, and shared problem solving are neglected due to the financial
burdens on a family. Such students may be from isolated rural settings,
economically disadvantaged urban areas, or specific ethnic or cultural minorities
that do not encourage intellectual development. Students from both Luther and
Bermont have economic hardships and barriers which affected their learning.
Students from Luther and Bermont generally had parents who worked two or three
jobs and come from families that cannot provide much financial support
Students are low achievers and they lack motivation: Students of diversity, such as
African American, Hispanic American, and Native American students are often
underachievers and low achievers in American school settings (Davis & Rimm,
1997; Diaz, 1999; Ford, 1995; Grantham & Ford, 2003; Moore, 2003; Ogbu, 2003;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
115
Pewewardy, 1993). In comparison to their White student counterparts,
students of diversity are likely to perform poorly on high-stakes tests, earn lower
grades, drop out of school at unreasonable rates, and otherwise fail to achieve at
levels commensurate with their academic ability (Denbo, 2002; Shaffer, Ortman, &
Denbo, 2002). Teachers in Luther and Bermont found their students to be low
achievers because most of them have low family support system. Parental
attachment has been noted to support the achievement and protect inner city
students from depressive symptoms that could otherwise develop in low-income
communities, however, the unfortunate reality is that many parents from low SES
homes work many hours which does not allow such attachment.
Students have poor behavior and disciplinary problem: Behavioral and affective
disengagement from class and school is a particular problem among minority
students from low-income homes (Steele, 1992). It has been difficult or impossible
for some students to see any advantage to school participation when the immediate
rewards are few and relationships with school staff might be adversarial. In
addition, there is a substantial amount of evidence that poor engagement behaviors
are more common among students that are at risk. For example, minority students
have been noted to participate less fully in learning-related activities (Finn, Folger,
& Cox, 1991; Lambom, et al., 1992; Treuba, 1983) and exhibit more behavior
problems in school (Farkas,ef al. 1990; McFadden,ef al. 1992; Velez, 1989) in
comparison to their non-minority peers.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
116
Question Two: What factors contribute to perceptions o f these teachers
and administrators?
• No support and stability at home: No parent involvement, poor attendance
and excessive tardiness, and students living in foster homes, and in broken
homes.
The majority of teachers from both Luther and Bermont stated that because
students do not have stability at home, their students were frequently tardy and
absent. For example, Daisy, a third grade teacher from Luther shared that many of
her students are absent frequently because some move around from one foster home
to another. She stated:
They do not have a permanent home or sometimes they don’t have a
parent to walk them to school, so a lot of them miss many days of
school. When they miss school, they are going to miss out on things
that were taught and when that happens over and over again, that
student will fall behind. I see that a lot at our school. These kids do
not have stability at home and that directly reflects on children’s
behavior, and work habits.
• Language barrier: Parents are illiterate, students are English language
learners, and students not knowing the academic language
This study has found that many of the students from both Luther and Bermont had
an academic language barrier because these students come primarily from Spanish
speaking countries or have parents who can only speak Spanish. With the school
being comprised of mostly Hispanics, teachers often found students were not
getting academic support from the home because their parents were not able to read
or write English. When students were given assignments to complete at home,
their parents could not help them because they did not speak the language and
could not afford a private tutor or any outside help. The only person and place a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
117
student was able to rely on was his or her teacher and the school. Cindy, a
teacher from Luther, stated: “Because there are a lot of English learners, students
don’t have that support at home. They can’t ask their parents, “Hey, what do you
think of this?” because their parents don’t know, they can’t read English.”
• Economic hardship and barrier: Students coming to school without adequate
care, students participate in reduced and free lunch program, and students
have low social economic status (SES) and are attending Title I school.
Luther and Bermont are both Title I schools, which means that the majority of the
students attending these two schools were from low SES families. The vast
majority of the students from both schools came to school without proper care. The
lead GATE teacher from Luther stated:
Our school population is mainly Latino. I would say 85 percent of
our students are Title I students. So all of them qualify for free
lunch. Many of our kids come to school very tired. They don’t have
good breakfast sometimes. I have students falling asleep in class
because they couldn’t sleep the night before. Kids come to school in
the morning being very hungry because they didn’t have breakfast
or they didn’t eat the night before.
• Low achieving and lack o f motivation: Low test score, attitudes and beliefs,
and poor work habits and inconsistency.
Teachers and administrators believed that their students lacked motivation and were
low achieving because of their attitudes and beliefs about school. Many of their
students came from an environment where education was not valued. John, a
fourth grade teacher from Luther, stated:
Many of their brothers and sisters are in gangs. When our students
see that their brothers and sisters are hanging out with their friends,
watching TV, or just playing round, they are going to think that it is
ok for them to do the same. If they have siblings that are not focused
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
118
in their studies, they are going to think that is ok for them to so the
same. Already they are thinking that is the norm.
Alex, a third grade teacher from Luther Elementary stated:
These kids grow in an environment that is not safe, that is very
insecure. So that goes in their life. Life hasn’t been easy for them,
so they think that nothing is easy. And they believe that they cannot
do things because people around them maybe are not doing
something good. They don’t have good role models. So they don’t
have anybody to look at.
• Poor behavior and disciplinary issues: Easily distracted in class, no parental
support, and physically and emotionally instable.
Luther and Bermont teachers believed that their students had a hard time staying on
task for a long time period and their students were easily distracted. Teachers from
Bermont, Angie and Candis, stated that they have many students in their class who
are constantly standing up or touching things with their hands. As a result, these
teachers believed that these students have serious disciplinary and behavior issues
that cannot be corrected over night and students are constantly being reprimanded
by their teachers daily for these types of behaviors.
Questions Three: What is the relationship between the perceptions o f these
teachers and administrators and the factors influencing the nomination and
selection o f linguistically, economically, and culturally diverse students for the
gifted education program from urban Title I schools?
The last research question which guided the study was to investigate the
direct relationship between teachers’ and administrators’ perception and the referral
and nomination rates of the students of diversity in the two urban Title I schools.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
119
Table 12
Relationship between Teachers ’ and Administrators Perceptions and Number of
Nomination for the GATE program
School Perceptions Factors Nominations
Per School
Luther
in
Compton
* No support from home
* Economic hardship and
barriers
* Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
* No support from home
* Language barrier
* Economic hardship and
barriers
* Lack of motivation and
low achieving
* Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
0.8 %
(5 students)
Bermont
in
Bell
Gardens
* No support from home
Language barrier
* Economic hardship and
barriers
* Lack of motivation and
low achieving
* Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
* No support from home
* Language barrier
* Economic hardship and
barriers
♦Lack of motivation and
low achieving
♦Poor behavior and
disciplinary problems
10.0 %
(120
students)
An analysis of the interviews with the teachers and administrators from the
two urban Title I schools indicated that there was no direct relationship between the
teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions and the actual referral of their students for
the gifted program. Teachers and administrators from both schools shared similar
perceptions about their students, but the number of the gifted students at Luther
Elementary was relatively low, whereas, the number o f gifted students at Bermont
Elementary was relatively high (See Table 11). A teacher’s gender, ethnicity,
number o f years of teaching, or participation in the GATE professional
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
120
development did not have a significant relationship with the referral rates
for the GATE program (See Table 6 and 7). For example, Lauren, who has taught
for 11 years from Bermont Elementary, had referred 10 students for GATE,
whereas Cindy, who taught for 12 years from Bermont Elementary, had not
referred any of her students for GATE.
The most predominant responses from teachers and administrators
regarding the reasons why they do not refer students for the gifted program
included the following:
• Many teachers do not refer their students to the GATE program because o f
the fact that they do not know the criteria and the process to refer and
nominate:
The perceptions of the teachers and administrators did not have an affect on the
referral and nomination of the students for the GATE program; however, the fact
that certain teachers were not aware of the referral process and the basic criteria for
the gifted program at their school hindered the referral and nomination process.
Some of the teachers at Luther did not know the referral and nomination process.
For example, Dillon, a fourth grade teacher from Luther, explained that he does not
refer his students to the GATE program because “the school does a good job in
that”. The data revealed that teachers from Luther did not know the referral
process for the GATE program, whereas all teachers from Bermont knew exactly
what they needed to do in order to nominate and refer their students to the GATE
program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
121
• Teachers do not want to be involved in all the paper work during the
referral process:
Teachers generally believed the referral process takes too much of their time and
too much paper work is involved in the referral process for the gifted program.
Angie, a second grade teacher from Bermont, shared that referring a child for a
gifted program requires a lot of paperwork and a lot of time to prepare portfolios.
She stated that in many instances, the teachers will simply say, “Ok they’re good
students; eventually somebody will recognize them for it”. Teachers were not
completing the required paperwork to have their students nominated for the GATE
program because it was time consuming and overwhelming.
Conclusions
In previous literature, there was a concern that students of diversity were
underrepresented in gifted education and that students from low income families
have the most difficulty in being selected for gifted programs (Clark, 1997). Good
(1970) and Frazier (1997) found that the teachers’ perceptions of students’ abilities
as well as their interactional manner with the students in the classroom showed a
favoritism of high ability over that of low ability students, but this study has shown
that teachers’ perception did not have strong relationship on referral rates. Though
studies show that African American students and Hispanic students have been
underrepresented in the gifted program for over 50 percent, teachers in both Luther
and Bermont Elementary indicated that students’ behavior, social and economic
status, and ethnicity were not taken into consideration in the process of referral.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
122
Rather, this study has proven that expectation for paper work, differences
in district identification criteria, and lack of teachers’ knowledge of the referral
process at each school sites were the factors why students were not being referred
and nominated to the gifted program. The current study determined that students of
diversity in urban Title I schools were not referred to the gifted program because of
these reasons listed above.
Limitations
Several limitations were present in this study. Generalization of these
findings is limited, given the design of this study and the sample size. The first
limitation is the sample size. The study was conducted from only two urban Title I
schools. The study could have produced different results if data would have been
collected from at least two other urban Title I schools that have a high number of
gifted students and another with low number of gifted students.
A second limitation that existed was that the two schools participated in the
study both had majority of Hispanic students whose English is not their primary
language. The data collected did not address the concerns regarding the low
number of other ethically, socially, and culturally diverse students.
The last limitation that existed was that most of the teachers who
volunteered for the interview were also Hispanic Americans. Because they are the
same ethnicity as their students, their perception of their students might be different
from those teachers who do not share the same ethnicity as their students. Teachers
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
123
might be sympathetic and more understanding toward students’ living
situations and behaviors because they might share similar backgrounds and home
life. The study might have provided different results if the interviews were
conducted only with teachers who are not of the same race as their students.
Significance of the Study
There is significantly low number of referral of diverse students for the
gifted education program (Daniels, 1998). Research indicated that the reasons for
this under-representation are: 1. teacher perceptions of student expectations, 2.
stereotypes of giftedness, 3. test bias, 4. lack of a universal definition of giftedness,
5. parent’s awareness and 6. administrative issues (Masten & Plata, 2000). This
study was developed to address the questions related to why there is low number of
students of diversity being recommended and screened for the gifted program from
urban Title I population. By examining these issues, the researcher was able to
clearly define the factors that influenced the nomination and selection of students of
diversity for the gifted education program.
It is important for teachers and administrators to be aware of the reasons
why there are low numbers of referrals of diverse students for the gifted program.
For administrators, it is important for them to know why their teachers do not refer
students for the GATE program. Once they are familiar with the reasons behind
low number of referral, administrators can effectively design and implement
various workshops and conferences with their teachers to familiarize them with the
referral process. For teachers, it is crucial to know the reasons why other educators
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
124
do and do not refer their students for the gifted program so that they can
exclude themselves from those who on no account refer their students to the gifted
program.
Implications for Practice and Recommendations
Given the results of this dissertation study, there are a number of areas in
which further research is warranted: (a) the unit analysis in the under representation
of gifted students of diversity; (b) the role of the principals in providing adequate
training for teachers for the gifted program; and (c) development of effective
referral process models.
The unit analysis in the under representation o f gifted students o f diversity
As a descriptive and exploratory study, this dissertation represents an
attempt to document the under representation of the gifted culturally, linguistically,
and ethnically diverse students. This finding alone should serve to spur continued
research in a sorely needed areas of education that concerns students of diversity.
Valencia and Suzuki (2001 ) examined the Office for Civil Rights national survey
data for 1994 of gifted incidence rates by race/ethnicity (U.S Department of
Education, Office for Civil Rights, 1997; see Valencia & Suzuki, p. 230, for fuller
discussions). The authors noted that the white gifted incidence rate nationally was
7.20% while the Hispanics and Black incidence rates were 2.95% and 2.97%,
respectively. By calculating odd ratios for these two groups, Valencia and Suzuki
reported that Hispanics and Blacks were 2.4 times less likely to be identified as
gifted than Whites. The authors also noted that if Hispanics and Black gifted
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
incidence rates were identical to the White rate, there would be an
increase of over 500,000 Hispanic and Black students identified as gifted.
The role o f the principals in providing adequate training for teachers for the gifted
program
The training, commitment, and experience in giftedness and gifted
education that the principal brings to the gifted program has a significant impact on
the schools to identify gifted students of diversity in urban schools. Given the
support of this finding in the literature (Ford et al., 1997), it is paramount that
researchers investigate the importance of the role of the principal, particularly in
terms of professional development of teachers and development of strong
relationships with parents. Administrators may plan an annual workshop for the
teachers which explains and outlines the referral process of the gifted program at
their own school site. Also, administrators may want to find a way to decrease
paper work load for the teachers in the initial process of referral for the gifted
program. Results from the study showed that many teachers felt there was too
much paper work involved in the initial referral period, which prohibits teachers
from spending their time to refer their students for the gifted program. Future
research that explores these aspects will provide greater understanding of the role
of the principal in referral process of the students of diversity in urban schools.
The development o f effective referral process models
Teachers in other urban Title I schools can reexamine their knowledge on
the referral process for the gifted program. They may rethink and reevaluate their
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
126
district criteria for the nomination of the gifted and determine if any of
their students qualify to receive benefits of the program. This study indicated that
some teachers were not familiar with the nomination process and criteria that they
students must meet for the gifted program. Future research that touches upon
referral process which works effectively in districts will provide greater
understanding of the reasons and factors that relate to high and low referral rates of
gifted students in urban Title I schools.
Parent Education in urban Title I schools
One of the reasons why many students of diversity are underrepresented in
gifted and talented education program is that parents in urban Title I schools are not
aware of the program and its benefits. Schools have often been unsuccessful in
achieving high levels of participation from low-income and bilingual parents.
These parents may have had negative experiences in school and may be reluctant to
meet with educators, or they may have little formal education and feel unqualified
to contribute. If they are asked to make contributions for which they don't feel
qualified, their negative feelings may be exacerbated. Administrators and teachers
must provide options for involvement that are matched to families' motivations,
interests and abilities and make sure that families are aware of the many ways they
can support the education of their children
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
127
REFERENCES
Agbenyega, Stephen, Joseph Jiggetts. "The Continuing Disproportionate Minority
Enrollment in Special Education." Gender, Race & Class. Maclean (Ed.).
1997,237-242
Allen, P. G. (Ed.). (1983). Studies in American Indian literature: Critical essays
and course designs. New York: The Modem Language Association of
America.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology o f Creativity. New York: Springer-
Verlag.
Assessment Model (Grant from the U. S. Education Department, Indian Education
Programs No. G008420046). Norman, OK: American Indian Research and
Development.
Baldwin, A. Y. (1985). Programs for the gifted and talented: Issues concerning
minority populations. In F. D. Horowitz & M. O’Brien (Eds.), The gifted
and talented: Developmental perspectives (pp. 223-249). Hyattsville, MD:
American Psychological Association.
Baldwin, A. Y., Gear, G. H., & Lucito, L. J. (Eds.). (1978). Education Planning for
the Gifted: Overcoming Cultural, Geographic, and Socioeconomic
Barriers. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
Banda, C. (1989). Promoting pluralism and power. In C. J. Maker & S. W.
Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education: Defensible programs for
cultural and ethnic minorities (pp. 27-33). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Beam, G. C. (1980). "A kindergarten/primary program for culturally different
potentially gifted students in an inner city school in Albuquerque, New
Mexico" (Final Report). Grant Number G007901801. Project Number
562AH90290. Albuquerque: Albuquerque Special Preschool.
Beck, P. V. & Walters, A. L. (1977). The sacred: Ways o f knowledge, sources o f
life. Tsaile, AZ: Navajo Community College Press.
Bemal, E. M. (1980). Methods of identifying gifted minority students. (ERIC
Report 72 ed.).
Blanning, J. M. (1980). "A multi-dimensional inservice handbook for professional
personnel in gifted and talented." Hartford: Connecticut State Department
of Education, Connecticut Clearinghouse for the Gifted and Talented.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
128
Boseker, B. J. & Gordan, S. L. (1983). What Native Americans have
taught us as teacher educators. Journal o f American Indian Education,
22(3), 96-106.
Bradley, C. L. (1989). Give me the bow, I’ve got the arrow. In C. J. Maker & S. W.
Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education: De ensible programs for
cultural and ethnic minorities (pp. 133-137). Austin, TX Pro-Ed.
Brescia, W. & Fortune, J. C. (1988). Standardized testing o f American Indian
students-ERIC digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 296
813)
Brown, A. D. (1986). Cherokee culture and school achievement, American Indian
Culture and Research Journal, 4(3), 55-74.
Brown, R. T. (1989). Creativity: What are we to measure? In J. A. Glover, R. R.
Ronning & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook o f creativity (pp. 3-32). New
York: Plenum.
Bruch, C. (1975). Assessment of creativity in culturally different children. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 19,164-174.
Bruch, C. B. (1971). Modification of procedures for identification of the
disadvantaged gifted. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 15(2), 267-272.
Bureau of Indian Affairs (1986). American Indians today: Answers to your
questions (Stock No. 0-153-689). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Callahan, C.M., Tomlinson, C.A., Hunsaker, S.L., Bland, L.C., and Moon, T.
(1995). Instruments and evaluation designs used in gifted programs. Storrs,
CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Castellano, J.A. (2003). Special populations in gifted education: Working with
diverse gifted learners. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Cattey, M. (1980). Cultural differences in processing information. Journal o f
American Indian Education, 2(19), 23-28.
Chan, K. S., & Kitano, M. K. (1986). Demographic Characteristics of Exceptional
Asian Students." In M. K. Kitano & P. C. Chinn (Eds.), Exceptional Asian
Children and (pp. 1-11). Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional
Children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
129
Cheska, A. T. (1988). Ethnicity, identity and sport: The persistence of
power. International Review for the Sociology o f Sport, 23(2), 85-95.
Chinn, P. C. & Hughes, S. (1987). Representation of minority students in special
education classes. Remedial and Special Education, 5(4), 41-46.
Clark, B. (1983). Growing up gifted. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (No. E 520). Reston: VA.
Cochran, E. P., & Cotayo, A. (1983). "Louis D. Brandeis high school,
demonstration bilingual enrichment college preparatory program." New
York: New York City Public Schools.
Colangelo, N. (1985). Counseling needs of culturally diverse gifted students.
Roeper Review, 5(1), 33-35.
Coleman, M.R. & Gallagher, J. (1995). State identification policies: Gifted students
from special populations. Roeper Review, 17(4), 268-275.
Coleman, M.R. (2000). Back to the future. Gifted Child Today, 22(6), 16-18.
Coleman, M.R. (2001), Surviving or thriving? Gifted Child Today, 24(3), 56-63.
Corwin, M. (2001). And Still We Rise : The trials and triumphs of twelve gifted
inner-city students. Harperperennial Library.
Cotton, Kathleen (2005) Expectations and Students Outcomes Regional
Educational Library School Improvement Research Series (SIRS) Online
available at http:www.nwrel.Org/scpd/sirs/4/cu7.html.Brattesani, K.A. et al.
(1984) Students Perceptions of Differential Teacher Treatment as
Moderators of Teacher Expectation Effects. Journal of Educational
Psychology 76 (19840 236-247.
Council for Exceptional Children. The Association for the Gifted. (2001, April).
Diversity and developing gifts and talents: A national action plan. Reston,
VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
Cuch, F. S. (1987). Cultural perspectives on Indian education: A comparative
analysis of the Ute and Anglo cultures. Equity & Excellence, 23(2-3), 65-
76.
Dannenberg, A. C. (1984). "Meeting the needs of gifted & talented bilingual
students: An introduction to issues and practices." Quincy: Massachusetts
Department of Education, Office for Gifted and Talented.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
130
Davidson, K. (1987). The plight of the Crow. GCT, 10(1), 15-17.
De Leon, J. (1982). Cognitive style difference and the underrepresentation of
Mexican Americans in programs for the gifted. Journal for the Education o f
the Gifted, 6(3), 167-177).
Dowdall, C. B., andN. Colangelo. "Underachieving Gifted Students: Review and
Implications." GIFTED CHILD QUARTERLY 26 (1982): 179-184.
Draper, W. (1980). The Creative Minority Student: Some General Considerations.
Interviews with Ambrocio Lopez and Charles Payne, part 1. The Creative
Child and Adult Quarterly, 5(2), 103-108.
Faas, L. (1982, June). Cultural and educational variables involved in identifying
and educating gifted and talented American Indian children. Paper
presented at the Gifted Minorities Conference. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 231589)
Fishman, J. A., Deutsch, M., Kogan, L. North, R. & Whiteman, M. (1967).
Guidelines for testing minority group children. In A. H. Passow, M.
Goldberg, & A. J Tannenbaum (Eds.), Education o f the disadvantaged: A
book o f readings (pp. 155-169). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Fitzgerald, E. J. (Ed.) (1975). Presentations at the first national conference on the
disadvantaged gifted. Ventura, CA: Ventura County Superintendent of
Schools.
Florey, J. & Tafoya, N. (1988). Identifying gifted and talented American Indian
students: An overview. ERIC digest. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Rural Education and Small Schools (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 269 810)
Frasier, M. (1989). Identification of gifted Black students: Developing new
perspectives. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in
gifted education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities
(pp. 213-225). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Frasier, M. (1997). Gifted minority students: Reframing approaches to their
identification and education. In N. Colangelo & G. Davis (Eds.). Handbook
of Gifted Education (2nd ed.), Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Frasier, M. M. (1997). Gifted Minority Students: Reframing Approaches to Their
Frasier, M. M., & Passow, A. H. (1994). Toward a New Paradigm for Identifying
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
131
Frasier, M. M., et al. (1995). Core Attributes o f Giftedness: A Foundation
for
Fuchs, E. & Havignhurst, R. J. (1972). To live on this earth-American Indian
education. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Gallager, J.J. (1995). Education of gifted students, a civil rights issue? Phi Delta
Kappan, (pp. 408-410).
Gallagher, J. J. (1979). "Issues in education for the gifted." In A. H. Passow (Ed.),
THE GIFTED AND THE TALENTED: THEIR EDUCATION AND
DEVELOPMENT. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gallagher, J., Bernal, E., Bosworth, S., Geer, W., Radford, R. & Sato, 1. (1974).
Talent delayed-talent denied: The culturally different gifted child, a
conference report. Reston, VA: The Foundation for Exceptional Children.
Garbarino, M- S. (1971). Life in the city: Chicago. In J. O. Waddell & O. M.
Watson (Eds.), The American Indian in urban society (pp. 168-205).
Boston: Little, Brown & Company.
George, K. R. (1987). Identifying gifted and talented Indian students: A guide to
understanding gifted American Indian students. Las Cruces, NM:
Educational Resources Information Center Clearinghouse on Rural
Education and Small Schools.
Gerken, K. C. (1979). An .unseen minority: Handicapped individuals who are gifted
and talented. In N. Colangelo & R. T. Zaffrann (Eds.), New voices in
counseling the gifted (pp. 321-325). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R. & Reynolds, C. R. (1989). Handbook o f creativity:
Perspectives on creativity differences. New York: Plenum Press.
Gregory, D. A., Starnes, W. T. & Blaylock, A. W. (1988). Finding and nurturing
potential giftedness among Black and Hispanic students. In A. A. Ortiz &
B. A. Ramirez (Eds.), Schools and the culturally diverse exceptional
student: Promising practices and future directions (pp. 76-85). Reston, VA:
Council for Exceptional Children.
Hanson, W. D. & Eisenbise, M. D. (1983), Human behavior and American Indians.
Rockville, MD: National Institute of Mental Health, (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 231589)
Highwater, J. (1980). The sweet grass lives on: Fifty contemporary North American
Indian artists. New York: Lippincott & Crowell.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
132
Hogkinson, H. L. (1985). All one system: Demographics o f
education-Kindergarten through graduate school. Washington, DC:
Institute for Educational Leadership.
Identification and Education. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.),
Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd ed., pp. 498-515). Boston, MA: Allyn
and Bacon.
Identifying and Serving Recent Immigrant Children Who Are Gifted. ERIC
Kellogg, J. B. (1988). Forces of change. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(3), 199-204.
Kenealy, P. et al. (1991) Teacher Expectations as Predictors o f Academic Success
Journal of Social Psychology 131(2), 305-306.
Kirschenbaum, R. J. (1989). Identification of the gifted and talented American
Indian student. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in
gifted education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities
(pp. 91-101). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Kirschenbaurm, R. J. (1988). Methods for identifying the gifted and talented
American Indian student. Journal for the Education o f the Gifted, 11(3), 53-
63.
Kitano, M. K. (1986). "Gifted and talented Asian children." RURAL SPECIAL
EDUCATION QUARTERLY, 8(1), 9-13.
LeBrasseur, M. M. & Freark, E. S. (1982). Touch a child-they are my people:
Ways to teach American Indian children. Journal o f American Indian
Education, 21(3), 6-12.
Leung, E. K. (1981). The Identification and Social Problems o f the Gifted
Lewis, et al. Closing the Achievement Gaps in Urban Schools: A Survey o f
Academic Progress and Promising Practices in the Great City Schools,
Preliminary Report 1999 October .
Little Soldier, L. (1985). The whys and wherefores of Native American Bilingual
Education. The Urban Review, 17(4), 225-232.
Llanes, J. R. (1980, February-March). "Bilingualism and the gifted intellect."
ROEPER REVIEW, 2(3), 11-12.
Lockart, B. L. (1978). Cultural conflict: The Indian child in the Non-Indian
classroom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 195 397)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
133
Locust, C. (1988). Wounding the spirit: Discrimination and traditional
American belief systems. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 315-330.
Lucas, T. (1993b) “ What Have We Learned From Research On Successful
Secondary Programs for LEP Students!" In Proceedings of the Third
National Research Symposium on Limited English Proficient Student
Issues: Vol.l Focus on Middle and High School Issues. Washington DC:
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Bilingual Education and Minority
Languages Affairs.
Luftig,R. L. (1983). Effects of schooling on the self-concept of Native American
students. The School Counselor, 251-260.
Machado, M. (1987, February). "Gifted Hispanics under-identified in classrooms."
HISPANIC LINK WEEKLY REPORT, p.l.
Maker, C. J. & Schiever, S. W. (1989). Critical issues in gifted education:
Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities. Austin, TX: Pro-
Ed.
Maker, C. J. (1987). "Project Discover; Discovering intellectual skills and
capabilities while providing opportunities for varied ethnic responses."
Tucson: University of Arizona, Division of Special Education and
Rehabilitation.
Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (Eds.). (1989). Critical Issues in Gifted
Maker, J. (1983). Quality education for gifted minority students, Journal for the
Education o f the Gifted, 6(3), 140-153.
Marashio, P. (1982). Enlighten my mind: Examining the learning process through
Native Americans’ ways. Journal o f American Indian Education, 2(2), 2-9.
Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching. London: Sage Publications,Ltd
Masten W. G. (1981). Approaches to identification o f gifted minority students.
Jackson, MS: Mississippi State University (ERIC Reproduction Document
Service No. ED 234 578)
McGrew, Kevin S. and Evans, Jeffrey (2004) Expectations for Students with
Cognitive Disabilities: Is the Cup H alf Empty or H alf Full? Can the Cup
Flow Over? NCEO Synthesis Report 55. Published by the National Center
on Educational Outcomes, 2004 December.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
134
Mitchell, B. (1982). Identification of the gifted and talented: A screening
process with special emphasis on the culturally different. In L. S. Sato (Ed.),
Selected proceedings from the Fifth National Conference on Disadvantaged
Gifted/Talented (pp. 109-116). Ventura, CA: Ventura County
Superintendent of Schools Office.
Montgomery, D. (1989). Identification of giftedness among American Indian
people. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted
education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities (pp. 79-
90). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Mooney, R. L. (1963). A conceptual model for integrating four approaches to the
identification of creative talent. In C. W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.),
Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 331-340). New
York: Wiley
Mucha, J. (1984). American Indian success in the urban setting, Urban
Anthropology, 13(4), 329-354.
National Education Association (1983). American Indian/Alaska Native education:
Quality in the classroom. Washington, DC: Human and Civil Rights
Division (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED 250 137)
National Indian Child Abuse and Neglect Resource Center (1980). The social
worker and the Indian client. Washington, DC: National Center on Child
Abuse and Neglect (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229
192)
National Research Council (2002). Minority students in special and gifted
education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
O’Malley, E. (Ed.) (1982). American Indian Education Handbook. Sacramento:
American Indian Education Unit, California State Department of Education
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 230 327)
Olsen, L. (1988). Crossing the schoolhouse border: Immigrant children in
California. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(3), 211-218.
Ortiz, A. (1975). The Tewa world view. In D. Tedlock & B. Tedlock (Eds.),
Teachings from the American earth: Indian religion and philosophy (pp.
179- 189). Toronto: George J. McLeod Limited.
Ortiz, A. (1984). Ritual drama and Pueblo world view. In A. Ortiz (Ed.), New
perspectives on the Pueblos (pp. 135-161). Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico Press.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
135
Padilla, E. R. & Wyatt, G. E. (1983). The effects of intelligence and
achievement testing on minority group children. In G. J. Powell (Ed.), The
psychosocial development o f minority group children (pp. 417-437). New
York: Brunner/Mazel.
Passow, A. H. (1972). The gifted disadvantaged: Some reflections. In I. S. Sato
(Ed.), Selected proceedings from the Fifth National Conference on
Disadvantaged Gifted/Talented (pp. 19-27). Ventura, CA: Ventura County
Superintendent of Schools Office.
Passow, A. H. (1981). Introduction: There is "gold in them tharhill." In Balancing
the scale for the disadvantaged gifted: Presentations from the Fourth
Biennial National Conference on Disadvantaged Gifted/Talented (pp. 1-26).
Ventura, CA: Office of Ventura County Superintendent of Schools.
Passow, A. H. (1986). Educational programs for minority disadvantaged gifted
students. San Diego: San Diego Unified School District. (ERIC
Reproduction Service No. ED 268 190).
Pepper, F. C. (1976). Teaching the American Indian child in mainstreaming
settings. In R. L. Jones, (Ed.), Mainstreaming and the minority child (pp.
133-158). Minneapolis: Council for Exceptional Children.
Perkins, D. (1995). Outsmarting IQ: The emerging science of learnable
intelligence. New York: The Free
Perrine, J. (1989) Situational identification of gifted Hispanic students. In C. J.
Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education:
Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities (pp. 5-18). Austin,
TX: Pro-Ed.
Perrone, P. A. & Aleman, N. (1983). Educating the talented child in a pluralistic
society. In D. R. Omark & J. G. Erickson (Eds.). The bilingual exceptional
child (pp. 269-283). San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press.
Pfeiffer, A. B. (1989). Purpose of programs for gifted and talented and highly
motivated American Indian students. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever
(Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education: Defensible programs for cultural
and ethnic minorities (pp. 102-112). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Ramirez, B. A. & Johnson, M. J. (1988). American Indian exceptional children:
Improving practices and policy. In A. Ortiz & B. A. Ramirez (Eds.),
Schools and the culturally diverse exceptional student: Promising practices
andfuture directions (pp. 76-85). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional
Children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
136
Raupp, M. (1988). "Talent search: The gifted Hispanic student." Quincy:
Massachusetts Department of Education, Office for Gifted and Talented.
Recognizing the Gifted Potential o f Minority and Economically
Disadvantaged Students (Number RM95210). Athens: University of
Georgia, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Renzulli, J. S. (1973). Talent potential in minority group students. Exceptional
Children, 39(6), 437-444.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). "What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition." PHI
DELTA KAPPAN, 60(3), 180-184,186.
Renzulli, J. S., Reis, S., & Smith, L. H. (1981). The Revolving Door Identification
Model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J., & Smith, L. (1977). Two approaches to identification o f gifted
students. Exceptional Childern43, 512-518.
Rodriquez, A. (1983). Educational policy and cultural plurality. In G. J. Powell
(Ed.), The psychosocial development o f minority group children (pp. 499-
512). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Ross, A. C. & Brave Eagle, D. (1975). Value orientation-A strategy for removing
barriers. Denver: Coalition of Indian Controlled School Boards, Inc. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 125 811)
Ross, A. C. (1982). Brain hemisphere functions and the Native American. Journal
o f American Indian Education, 21(3), 2-5.
Salend, S., Garrick D., Laurel M.(2002) A Comprehensive Approach to Identifying
and Addressing Issues of Disproportionate Representation, Remedial &
Special Education, 23(5), 289-300
Sanders, D. (1987). Cultural conflicts: An important factor in the academic failures
of American Indian students. Journal o f Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 15(2), 81-90.
Sando, J. S. (1976). The Pueblo Indians. San Francisco: The Indian Historian Press.
Section on Gifted Underachievers. 1983. Roeper Review 5(4).
Shoff, H. G. The Gifted Underachiever: Definition and Identification Strategies.
1984. ED 252 029.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
137
Sisk, D. A. (1989). Identifying and nurturing talent among the American
Indians. In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted
education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities (pp. 128-
132). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Skupaka, B. M. (1972). The "holdingpower" workshop. Santa Fe: New Mexico
State Department of Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED 194 284)
Stolworthy, D. L. (1987). The Navajo reader and writer: Academic, social, and
emotional factors (Doctoral dissertation, New Mexico State University,
1986). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 11 A.
Szasz, M. C. (1977). Education and the American Indian: The road to self-
determination since 1928 (2nd ed). Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico Press.
Tafoya, T. (1982b). Directions of Indian and Native Education: Culture, Content,
and Container. Bilingual Resources, 4(2-3), 45-47.
Tafoya, T. (I 982a). Coyote’s eyes: Native cognition styles. Journal o f American
Indian Education, 21(2), 21-33.
Talent Potential (Research Monograph 94111). Athens: University of
Georgia, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Tippeconnic, J. W., Ill (1990). American Indians: Education, demographics, and
the 1990’s. In G. E. Thomas (Ed.), U.S. race relations in the 1980s and
1990s: Challenges and alternatives (pp. 249-257). New York: Hemisphere.
Title la n d Gifted Education (2005) ESOL Resource Guide: Georgia Department of
Education Projects and Programs Retrieved from the Internet May 1, 2005
Online at: http://www.glc.kl2.ga.us/pandp/esol/lep04.htm
Tonemah, S. & Britton, M. (1985). American Indian Gifted and Talented
Education Assessment Model. Norman, OK: American Indian Research and
Development.
Tonemah, S. (1987). Assessing American Indian gifted and talented students’
abilities. Journal for the Education o f the Gifted, 10(3), 181-194.
Tonemah, S. A., & Brittan, M. A. (1985). American Indian Gifted and Talented
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
138
Torrance, E. P. & Ball, 0. E. (1984). Torrance tests o f creative thinking,
streamlined manual including norms and direchons for administering and
scoring figural A and B (rev. ed.). Bensenville, EL: Scholastic Testing
Service.
Torrance, E. P. (1964). Identifying the creatively gifted among economically and
culturally disadvantaged children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 5(4), 171-176.
Torrance, E. P. (1968). Finding hidden talents among disadvantaged children,
Gifted Child Quarterly, 8, 147-155.
Torrance, E. P. (1969). Creative positives of disadvantaged children and youth,
Gifted Child Quarterly, 5(2), 71-81.
Torrance, E. P. (1970). Broadening concepts of giftedness in the 70’s. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 14, 199-208.
Torrance, E. P. (1971). Identity: The gifted child’s major problem. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 15(3), 147-155.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Differences Are Not Deficits. Teachers College Record.
Torrance, E. P. (1977). Discovery and nurturance o f giftedness in the culturally
different. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
Torrance, E. P. (1979). Creative positives of disadvantaged children and youth. In
J. C. Gowan, J. Khatena, & E. P. Torrance (Eds.), Educating the ablest-A
book o f readings on the education o f gifted children (pp. 341-35 1). Itasca,
IL: F. E. Peacock.
Wade, E. L. & Strickland, R. (1981). Contemporary Indian art: Evolving images of
the Native American. In E. L. Wade & R. Strickland, (Eds.), Magic images:
Contemporary Native American art (pp. 3-17). Norman, OK: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Wade, E. L., Haralson, C., & Strickland, R. (1983). As in a vision: Masterworks o f
American Indian art. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. (1987). From minority to
majority: Education and the future o f the Southwest (Publication 2A170).
Boulder, CO: Author.
Whitmore, J. R. "Recognizing and Developing Hidden Giftedness." THE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL, 82 (3), 274-283.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
139
Wise, F. & Miller, N. B. (1983). The Mental Health of the American
Indian Child. In G. J. Powell (Ed.), The psychosocial development o f
minority group children (pp. 344-361). New York: Bnumer/Mazel.
Worth, J. A. & Adair, J. (1972). Through Navajo eyes: An exploration in film
communication and anthropology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
Zah, P. (1983). A Blueprint for Navajo Education, Integrateducation, 27(1-6), 227-
228.
Zappia (1989). Identification of gifted Hispanic students: A multidimensional view.
In C. J. Maker & S. W. Schiever (Eds.), Defensible Programs for Gifted
Students from Underserved Populations: Cultural and Ethnic Minorities (pp.
10P26). Austin: Pro-Ed.
Zintz, M. V. (1969). Education across cultures. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
140
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol: Teachers
Thank you for participating in this study and agreeing to be interviewed. Your
response will be incorporated into a dissertation research study that aims to better
understand the factors that influence and affect the nominate,on of minority
students for the gifted education program in low income - Title I schools.
1. Please tell me your name, the school and district you teach and the grade
you currently teach.
2. What kind of certification do you currently hold? (For example:
Emergency, University Intern, Preliminary, Professional)
3. How long have you taught in a Title I school?
4. Please tell me about your school, your students and its environment.
5. What factors influence your feelings about your students?
6. How do you set the expectation for all your students?
7. Tell me why it is hard or easy for some of your student to succeed. What
are some of the barriers that prohibit them from learning to their maximum
capacity?
8. Describe your student’s background.
9. What types of parent involvement is given to the classroom?
FOLLOW UP: What type of parent involvement do you often receive? For
example: In-class volunteer (such as grading papers, working with small
groups).
10. Have you ever taught identified gifted students or have potentially gifted or
gifted students in your classroom now?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
141
FOLLOW UP: How many do you have?
11. Do you have gifted education program in your school? How would you
describe the elements and quality of the program?
12. What kind of training for the gifted have you received? ( For example:
Professional development, Gifted education conferences, Self-taught by
reading)
13. What do you consider to be the characteristics of the gifted? How do you
know if one of your students is gifted?
14. What kind of criteria do you use to nominate your students to the gifted
education program?
15. How many students do you refer or nominate your students to the gifted
education per year?
16. What are some of other reasons that keep teachers, including yourself from
nominating a student to the gifted program? (For example: Rude behavior,
uncleanliness, punctuality and etc.)
17. Thank you very much for answering these questions. Do you have any other
thoughts you want to share regarding this interview or any other issues
related to the questions that I have just asked you?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
142
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol: Administrators
Thank you for participating in this study and agreeing to be interviewed. Your
response will be incorporated into a dissertation research study that aims to better
understand the factors that influence and affect the nomination of minority students
for the gifted education program in low income - Title I schools.
1. Please tell me your name, the school and district you work for.
2. What kind of certification do you currently hold? ( For example: Profession
Tier I or Profession Tier II, Gifted Coordinator-certified)
3. How long have worked in a Title I school?
4. Please tell me about your school, your students and its environment.
5. What factors influence your feelings about your students?
6. How do you set the expectation for all your students?
7. Tell me why it is hard or easy for some of your student to succeed. What
are some of the barriers that prohibit them from learning to their maximum
capacity?
Follow Up: Do you think your teachers’ high expectation for his or her
student result in students’ high success rate?
8. Describe your students’ background.
18. What types of parent involvement is given to the classroom?
FOLLOW UP: What type of parent involvement do you often receive? For
example: In-class volunteer (such as grading papers, working with small
groups).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
143
9. Do you have gifted education program in your school? Please tell
me briefly about the program.
10. Approximately how many identified gifted students or potentially gifted
students in your school?
Follow Up: How are they identified? Can you explain the
identification/referral process?
11. What kind of training for the gifted have you received?
Follow Up: For example: Professional development, Gifted education
conferences, Self-taught by reading)
12. What do you consider to be the characteristics of the gifted? How do you
know if one of your students is gifted?
13. What kind of gifted education/program training and workshop do you offer
for your teachers?
14. How many students do your teachers refer or nominate their students to the
gifted education program per year?
15. What do you believe that are some of the reasons that keep teachers from
nominating a student to the gifted program? (For example: Rude behavior,
uncleanliness, punctuality and etc.)
16. Thank you very much for answering these questions. Do you have any other
thoughts you want to share regarding this interview or any other issues
related to the questions that I have just asked you?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
144
APPENDIX C
Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
WPH 800
Los Angeles, California 90089
INFORMATION SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
CONSENT TO PARTICPATE IN RESEARCH
A Study of Teachers’ and Administrators’ Perceptions and Factors
Influencing the Identification of Students of Diversity for the Gifted Program
in Two Urban Title I Schools.
Information Sheet for Adults
You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Sandra N.
Kaplan, Ed. D and Jennifer Kang Moon M.S Ed., from the Rossier School of
Education at the University of Southern California. You were selected as a possible
participant in this study because you are a teacher or an administrator from an
urban Title I school. A total of 14 subjects will be selected from teachers and
administrators to participate. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the
information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before
deciding whether or not to participate.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The number of students served in gifted and talented programs has grown
substantially in the past decades. However, it is also clear that students from
economically disadvantaged families and students with exceptional talents are not
being identified in fair proportions compared to the numbers in the general
population. This comparative study seeks to find more information on the reasons
why many of the gifted minority students in some Title I schools are not referred to
the gifted education program
Completion and return of your questionnaire or response to the interview
questions will constitute consent to participate in this research project.
PROCEDURES
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
145
You will be asked to participate in an audio-taped interview lasting
approximately 20 minutes. You will be asked questions such as:
What kind of criteria do you use to nominate your students to the gifted
education program? How many students do you refer or nominate your students to
the gifted education per year?
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks associated with this research study. You may
feel some discomfort at being audio-taped; you do not have to answer any
questions which may make you feel uncomfortable. If you decline to be audio
taped, you will not participate in the study.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
You may not directly benefit from your participation in this research study;
however it is hope that the findings from this research will encourage many
teachers and administrators to provide better learning opportunities for the highly
potential and gifted minority students.
PAYMENT COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will have an opportunity to win $100 cash prize for participating in this
study. You do not have to enter or complete the study in order to be eligible for the
cash prize.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can
be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law.
You are entitled to review any audio-tapes made of your interview. You can
review and revise the transcripts. If you decline to be audio-taped, you will not be
able to participate in the study.
All of the audio-tapes of the interviews will be transcribed into text by the
investigator. Segments may be quoted directly in the study. Most of the
information will be “coded” which means that particular things that you say in the
interview may be used to answer one or more of the research questions or to prove
a point made by the researcher. Your identity will not be used, but instead
pseudonym will be used
All audio-tapes and transcripts will be kept in the investigator’s locked
office and only the researcher team will have access to the tapes and transcripts.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
146
The school will not have access to the data. Audio-tapes will be kept for
one year and then erased; the transcription will be kept for three years and then
destroyed.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences,
no information will be included that would reveal your identity. In addition, audio
tapes will only be used for transcription purposes.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in
this study, you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You
may also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain
in the study. The investigator may withdraw you from this research if
circumstances arise which warrant doing so.
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to
contact Jennifer Kang Moon by email at kangienni@alumni.usc.edu or by phone at
213-595-3500 or by mail at 12975 Agustin Place Unit A-101 Playa Vista,
California 90094 or Dr. Sandra Kaplan by email at skaplan@usc.edu or by phone at
818-740-3291 or by mail at University of Southern California, Rossier School of
Education, WPA 1002, Los Angeles, CA 90089.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation
without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because
of your participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your
rights as a research subject, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice
Provost for Research, Grace Ford Salvatori Hall, Room 306, Los Angeles, Ca,
90089-1695. Telephone: (213) 821-5271 or email: upirb@usc.edu.
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT
I understand the procedures described above, and I understand fully the
rights of a potential subject in a research study involving people as subjects. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this
study. I have been given a copy of this form.
Name of Subject
Signature of Subject Date
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
147
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the subject to the subject and answered all
of his/her questions. I believe that he/she understands the information described in
this document and freely consents to participate.
Jennifer Kang Moon
Signature of Investigator Date
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A history of the development of the California Science Content Standards: 1990--2005

PDF

Factors contributing to the academic achievements of Hispanic gifted children

PDF

Examining the factors that predict the academic success of minority students in the remedial mathematics pipeline in an urban community college

PDF

An analysis of program planning in schools with emerging excellence in science instructional design

PDF

An exploration of project -based learning in two California charter schools

PDF

A study of the relationship between student achievement and mathematics program congruence in select secondary schools of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles

PDF

Early career teachers' views of their elementary science teaching methods courses: The relationship between preservice preparation and the realities of the first years of teaching

PDF

Correlation of factors related to writing behaviors and student -developed rubrics on writing performance and pedagogy in ninth-grade students

PDF

Elementary administrators and teachers' perceptions of the teacher evaluation process in California's public schools

PDF

The relationship between attending science and math academies and students' college course taking patterns

PDF

How has the requirement to implement content standards affected the instructional program in schools and classrooms?

PDF

Factors influencing minority parents to place their children in private schools

PDF

An evaluation study of gifted programs in two Jewish day schools

PDF

A literacy space for children: Creating curriculum in a domestic violence shelter

PDF

Implementation of literature circles in a rural high school English class: One teacher's journey of changing student attitudes toward reading

PDF

Factors shaping the career choices of Korean American teachers and teacher candidates

PDF

Analysis of Saudi Arabian middle and high school science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science

PDF

An analysis of the implementation of content standards in selected unified school districts of California

PDF

A comparative study of American, Australian, British, and Canadian museum visitors' understanding of the nature of evolutionary theory

PDF

An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement

Asset Metadata

Creator Kang-Moon, Jennifer (author)

Core Title Factors influencing teachers' and administrators' identification of diverse students for gifted programs in Title I schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, administration,education, curriculum and instruction,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Kaplan, Sandra (committee chair), Colbert, Joel (committee member), McComas, William (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-583274

Unique identifier UC11336045

Identifier 3236516.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-583274 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3236516.pdf

Dmrecord 583274

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Kang-Moon, Jennifer

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA