University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs

(USC Thesis Other)

Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 1

EQUITY AND ACCESS: THE UNDER-IDENTIFICATION OF AFRICAN AMERICAN
STUDENTS IN GIFTED PROGRAMS

by

Dawna Tully

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2018

Copyright 2018 Dawna Tully
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I want to express sincere thanks to my committee led by Professor Dr. Anthony
Maddox who guided me through Dyer and Gregersen’s (2011) discovery skills of associating
questioning, observing, networking, and experimenting to find my voice in the dissertation.
Thank you Professor Dr. Monique Datta for pinpoint and thoughtful revisions that propelled me
to think deeply about what I learned and wanted to convey. My third committee member,
Professor Dr. Darline Robles encouraged me to pursue this topic with a focus on African
American students when others, including some colleagues and myself, questioned the exclusion
of other culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse students as well. Additionally, thanks to
Dr. Linda Fischer for her invaluable insights for alignment of the video presentation for the
defense with the research questions and conceptual framework. Next, thank you to the school
leaders and teachers at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School for permission and the opportunity to
interview and observe you for the findings and recommendations associated with this dissertation
study. Finally, thank you to my family, especially my two daughters who, upon viewing my
master’s degree over 20 years ago, noticed a group of graduates with a different colored gown
and asked why. When explained they were doctoral graduates, they asked if I was going to get a
doctorate next to which I replied with an emphatic, “No!” Without skipping a beat, one daughter
said, “We’ll help you with your homework!” The other daughter nodded enthusiastically. They
were five and six years old and planted the seed there was no excuse not to pursue this
dissertation. Thank you, girls, for the PowerPoint images and some proofing.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Statement of the Problem of Under-identification 9
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Performance Goal 11
Organizational Performance Status 12
The Problem of Under-Identification of African Americans in Gifted Programs 13
Importance of Addressing the Problem 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups 17
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals 19
Purpose of the Project and Questions 20
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 21
Definitions 22
Organization of the Project 23
Chapter Two: Literature Review 24
KMO Influencers for the Improvement Model 24
Organizational Influencers 25
Teacher’s Influence on African American Student Achievement 27
Teacher Recommendation of African American Students 28
Teacher Observation Checklist 30
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Dimensions 38
Knowledge 38
Motivation 43
Organizational Dimension 47
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation
and the Organizational Context 54
Conclusion 56
Chapter Three: Methodology 57
Participating Stakeholders 57
Research Study Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale 58
Recruitment Strategy and Rationale 58
Interview Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale 59
Observation Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale 59
Observation Convenience Sampling Access Strategy and Rationale 60
Research Questions 61
Data Collection and Instrumentation 62
Documents and Artifacts 63
Observation 64
Interviews 65
Data Analysis 67
Credibility and Trustworthiness 69
Validity and Reliability 70
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 4

Ethics 71
Limitations and Delimitations 72
Chapter Four: Findings 74
Data Collection for Phenomenological Study 74
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School and Surrounding Community 75
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s Teacher Composition 76
Summary of Interview Method 78
Summary of Interview and Observation Method 79
Research Questions 79
Teachers’ Perceptions of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Barriers 80
Knowledge Barriers 80
Motivational Barriers 84
Organizational Barriers 86
Teacher Experiences with Mindsets Within the Context of Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Barriers 91
Achievement and Opportunity Gaps Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Barriers 99
Learning Environment and Teacher Observations 103
Teachers Motivational Strategies: Engagement and Expectancy-Value Theory 108
Teachers View of Their Role to Improve African American Students’ Gifted Identification 113
Vitruvian Prep School Knowledge Dimensions and Organizational Structures 115
Parents’ Knowledge Dimensions, Motivation Strategies, and Organizational Structures 115
Teachers’ Knowledge Dimensions, Motivation Strategies, Knowledge Dimensions,
Motivation Strategies, and Organizational Structures 116
Discussion 123
Chapter Five: Recommendations 128
Knowledge Barrier Influences 128
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 130
Knowledge Recommendations 130
Motivation Recommendations 137
Organization Recommendations 143
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 145
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 146
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 147
Level 3: Behavior 150
Level 2: Learning 154
Level 1: Reaction 158
Data Analysis and Reporting 160
Summary 162
Strengths and Weaknesses of Approach 164
Limitations 164
Recommendations for Future Research 164
Conclusion 165
References 166
Appendix A: Action Unified School District 188
Appendix B: Individual L1 and L2 Evaluation Tools 190

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 5

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: 2015-2016 Vitruvian School GATE Population. 13
Table 2: Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals 18
Table 3: 2016–2017 Percent of Vitruvian Prep SBAC Proficient Students and Percent of
Students GATE Identified 76
Table 4: Categories for Gifted Identification with Scores Required 88
Table 5: Teachers’ Perspective for Alternate Categories to Identify Giftedness Aligned with
Vitruvian Prep’s TOGCF Form and Western State’s Identification Categories 89
Table 6: Types of Microaggressions African American Students Faced Based on Teacher
Perspectives 98
Table 7: Teacher Experiences with the Achievement Gap, Enrichment, and Opportunity Gap 101
Table 8: Observational Data of Teacher Lessons for evidence of Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
and Cognitive Load Theory 104
Table 9: African American Students’ Engagement With Lesson 108
Table 10: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 109
Table 11: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 109
Table 12: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 110
Table 13: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 110
Table 14: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 111
Table 15: Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson 111
Table 16: Themes and Key Concepts 113
Table 17: Results of the Spring 2017 and Fall 2017 AUSD CogAT7 Gifted Assessment, 2nd and
5th Grade Students 123
Table 18: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 132
Table 19: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 139
Table 20: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 142
Table 21: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 148
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 6

Table 22: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Leaders and Teachers 151
Table 23: Required Drivers to Support School Leader and Teachers Critical Behaviors 153
Table 24: Components of Learning for the Program 157
Table 25: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 159
Table 26: CogAT7 Student Profile(All student names are pseudonyms) 160

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 7

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Under-identification and improvement conceptual model. 55
Figure 2. The ethnic and racial make-up of the teachers interviewed at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary. Source: Vitruvian Prep Dashboard, 2016-2017. 77
Figure 3. Recommendation for school leader. 162

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 8

ABSTRACT
This study examines the knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) gaps within a school
in an urban school district that affect the persistent under-identification of African American
students in gifted programs. The purpose was to improve gifted identification outcomes for
African American students utilizing Clark and Estes improvement model framework that utilizes
knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps within organizations in order to achieve stated
performance goals. A phenomenological study that included interviews and observations of
seven teachers at a small urban school explored their experiences with African American
students and their under-identification in gifted programs. Findings from the experiences of
teachers gleaned through interviews, observations, and document analysis, discovered three
themes that influenced the under-identification of African American students for gifted programs
at Vitruvian Prep. Additional findings from teachers also included how each of the three themes,
could promote improved gifted identification for African American students. From this research
study, the experiences of teachers in an urban school are utilized to determine the appropriate
KMO strategies teachers need to close the gap between the current, 0% and stated, 5% gifted
identification improvement outcomes for African American students.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 9

CHAPTER ONE: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM OF UNDER-IDENTIFICATION
Former United States Education Secretary Arne Duncan stated that education was the
civil rights issue of our generation (Green, 2010). Even though the 1954 landmark decision by
the Supreme Court in the Brown v. Board of Education case dismantled the doctrine of “separate
but equal,” many African American students have not had access to a high-quality education that
delivers the advanced knowledge and skill sets needed for the jobs of the future (Romanoff,
Algozzine, & Nielson, 2009). In fact, several researchers have written that schools are more
segregated now than before the landmark decision, including the gifted programs in the schools
(Ford, 1995; Michael-Chadwell, 2010; Singleton, Livingston, Hines, & Jones, 2005).
Frye and Vogt (2010) found that African American students were 16% of the United
States school population, yet only 8.4% of these students were identified as gifted, a nearly 50%
under-identification, and unchanged from the previous 10 years: 1995-2005. This under-
representation is troubling because children of color are expected to represent 46% of the
students in the United States public school systems by 2020. If this trend of under-representation,
fostered by under-identification processes continued, academic opportunities for African
American students could be hampered with diminished school and career opportunities (Frye &
Vogt, 2010; Green, 2010).
Ford (2010) analyzed nationwide gifted program enrollment data for African Americans,
Asians, Hispanics and Whites and concluded the percent of identified gifted students for any
ethnic group should be close to the percentage of that ethnic group’s enrollment in the school
system. For example, Asians are 50% over-identified nationally, while White students’ gifted
identification closely equaled their enrolled percentage in schools. Hispanics are 40% under-
identified and African American students are 50% under-identified in comparison to their
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 10

percentage enrolled in schools nationwide. Thus, African American students are the most
consistently under-identified group, and a cause for concern.
As of the 2016-2017 Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) participation data, the
percent of African American students enrolled in the Action Unified School District (AUSD), a
pseudonym for a school district in the western United States, was 13.0% with 7.3% identified as
gifted. Contrast this with White student enrollment at 15.9% with 31.4% identified as gifted
(EdData, 2016). The percentage of African American students at Vitruvian Prep Elementary
School, a pseudonym for a school in the AUSD, was 24%, but the percentage of African
American students identified as gifted was 0% percent. And it is noted that the Office of Civil
Rights from the Department of Education reviewed data on giftedness by racial/ethnic groups
and periodically monitored school districts such as Action Unified for any discriminatory
practices (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014).
Organizational Context and Mission
The mission of the AUSD is to provide an excellent, innovative, and diverse education
for all students as they get prepared for college and career choices. AUSD has established its
goals to prepare critical thinkers for success in future endeavors. The school district provided
Early Transitional Kindergarten (ETK) through Twelfth grade public school education for
students in the community. Stakeholders include teachers, students, staff, parents, and
community partners. Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s mission stated support that met the
social and academic needs of all students in a safe and caring environment. The focus of this
research study was certificated classroom teachers as the stakeholder group of influencers to
improve gifted identification for African American students in gifted programs. Students at
Vitruvian Elementary are in ETK through 5
th
grades and are between 4-12 years old.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 11

Organizational Performance Goal
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s Fall 2015 goal to assess all second, third, fourth, and
fifth grade African American students for the GATE program was achieved through teacher
referrals and GATE assessment make-ups for students absent on the day of the assessment.
Though none of the African American students were identified as gifted, it brought attention to
both the school and district GATE leadership that under-representation was a problem from the
disaggregated GATE identification data viewed at district GATE meetings. As of 2015-2016
AUSD’s guidelines required that all students are assessed only in the second and fifth grades
unless referred for testing by a teacher or parent. In 2015-2016 Fall, and the 2016-2017 Spring
GATE assessments, parents and teachers could recommend a student for gifted identification for
any grade except second and fifth, yet both have been either unaware or uninformed on the
process to do so. Teachers are asked to refer students of any race who are new to the district for
GATE testing. Independent teacher referrals outside of the stated parameters have not been
recorded at Vitruvian Prep and district-wide information on teacher referrals by race was not
available for this study. From the Fall, 2017 assessment only second graders were assessed
district-wide. District requests and teacher referrals included only students new to the district for
grades three, four, and five.
A second goal was to provide teachers with an examination of the school district’s
Teacher Observation Checklist for Gifted Characteristics (TOGCF) form before the gifted
assessment. Research has revealed that teachers recommend fewer African American students
for gifted programs than other races and provide lower scores on teacher observation checklist
forms often based on their perceptions of African American students (Elhoweris, Mutua,
Alsheikh, & Holloway, 2005). A third goal was that by May 2016 all parents with an emphasis
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 12

on African American parents would be informed about the GATE program, gifted identification
process, and invited to GATE parent meetings provided by the school district and open to all
parents.
These goals were initiated by the school site GATE leadership team. Emphasis on a
measurable goal such as improved identification from 0% to 5% that would engage teachers,
parents, and students was discussed. For example, when the principal learned that teachers alone
could recommend students for gifted identification, it was immediately added to the goal since
teachers had been unaware they could do this. The school GATE leadership team supported the
idea to provide knowledge, skill, and motivational strategies to teachers about the gifted
program. Through the organizational goals, the knowledge and motivational process needed to
improve the identification of African American students from the current 0% to 5% is
anticipated.
Organizational Performance Status
Since 2013, the Hispanic student population had nine students identified for the gifted
program while the African American student population had zero students identified for gifted
identification in the same 3-year period (Vitruvian Prep, 2016). Rotatori, Bakken, and Obiakor
(2014) reported on research which indicated that, if quotas were used to match African American
students with White student gifted identification at any other school in the district, 24%, or 12 of
the 52 African American students, would potentially be identified as gifted at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary School.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 13

Table 1
2015-2016 Vitruvian School GATE Population.
Vitruvian School GATE
Population
African
American
Hispanic Other Total
# of school population 52 163 2 217
% school enrollment 24% 75% 1% 100%
# GATE population 0% 9 0 9
% of GATE students 0% 6% 0 6%
Total 0 6% 0 6%
Note. Vitruvian Prep GATE Data from 2015-2016. Source: "General Information / School
Accountability Plan", 2016.

The Problem of Under-Identification of African Americans in Gifted Programs
When the 1954 landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision was rendered
unanimously, a top reason given by the plaintiffs to combat the separate-but-equal doctrine was
that separate schools made blacks feel inferior to Whites and therefore not equal. Cornell and
Hartmann (2007) stated that racial identities separated races, often indicated inferiority, and
included that some races were less intelligent than others. Other research described critical race
theory, which was developed to address how the narrative about African Americans post Brown
v. Board would be portrayed and used to the advantage of the dominant White culture (Milner,
200). Although integration of schools was initiated by federal and state mandates, White parents
separated their children from culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse students by moving
from urban to suburban schools. Within urban and some diverse suburban schools, parents also
separated their children from culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse students through
gifted programs at these schools. Some researchers have proposed that gifted programs are the
new segregation within our educational system (Ford, 2010; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Green,
2010).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 14

Ford (2010) described teachers, 82% of whom are White nationwide, as practitioners of
color-blindness, a perspective that everyone is equal and should be treated equally regardless of
inequities. According to a discussion on diversity by Stevens, Plaut, and Burk (2008) White-
dominated corporate culture embraced color-blindness as well. The intent was to include others
but had the effect that minorities felt excluded because their unique cultural attributes were not
recognized apart from the dominant White culture. Castania (2003) discussed how the melting
pot perspective did not work for African American and other minorities because the social,
political, and economic inequities were not resolved first. Additionally, White privilege and
oppression are interrelated in that White privilege, the unearned advantages a dominant race has
over a minority race caused discrimination that impeded African American improved
identification in gifted programs (McIntosh, 2012; Sleeter, 2017).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
Ross, Callahan, and the United States Office of Educational Research and Improvement
Programs for the Improvement of Practice (1994) provided the most commonly used definition
developed by the department of education (1993) for GATE with the following:
Children and youth with outstanding talent in intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership
capacity, or in special fields who perform or show the potential for performing at
remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age,
experience, or environment. Outstanding talents are present in all children and youth
from all cultural groups. (p. 33)
Singleton et al. (2005) discussed that for most of the past two decades the emphasis,
manpower, funding and energy the federal government has focused on the achievement gap
between White and African American students while the excellence gap for academically high
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 15

performing and potentially gifted African American students were neglected. Focus on the
achievement gap at the expense of the excellence gap was not always the case according to gifted
education history provided by the National Association of Gifted Children (NAGC, n.a.)
Though the concept of gifted education began in the early 1900’s, it received federal
government funding and support in the 1950s and 60s during the United States and Russian Cold
War era when technological advances were considered important to the security of the country
(Plucker & Callahan, 2014; Singleton et al., 2005; NAGC, 2015). The government looked to
identify those students with the highest intellectual abilities, especially in science and math, and
developed criteria for identifying those abilities. Shetterly (2016) relayed that during the Cold
War and later Space Race, the federal government’s aeronautics industry was in serious need of
mathematicians and actively searched and hired hundreds of African American female
mathematicians known as human computers. The qualifications for the job included either four
years of math from high school or a college degree in a math or science-related field. Both
African American female mathematicians and African American male engineers during this
period of legal discrimination, racism, and segregation proved their exceptional intellectual
ability. The excellence gap between the female White and African American human computers
group was non-existent.
According to Kim and Sunderman (2004) and Wong (2016), African American students
were two and a half times more likely to be placed in remedial classes over Whites while only
half as likely to be placed in honors, Advanced Placement or gifted classes. Both the
achievement and excellence gaps, the gap between high ability African American and White
students needed to shrink to particularly allow African American and Hispanic students to thrive
with challenging coursework to reach their full academic potential (Ford, 2014; Plucker,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 16

Burroughs, & Song, 2010). From an economic perspective, quality education is an investment in
the acquisition of skills students needed for jobs that produced financial and emotional prosperity
for themselves and value for society (Wheelan, 2010).
Data from Review 360, a Web-based behavioral management system used to track
discipline, reported all school discipline referrals were for African American boys in the 2015-
2016 school year (Pearson Education, 2017). At Vitruvian, 24% of the student body is African
American, yet this racial group comprised all suspensions given that year. Frequent discipline
referrals are referred to the school’s Student Study Team, often a first step toward potential
special education identification for a multitude of designations including emotional behavioral
disability. African American students, particularly boys, have been over-identified for special
education nationally, in the AUSD, and at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School (Harry & Klingner,
2014). Documentation provided by Vitruvian Prep’s special education office revealed that 5% of
African American students are identified for several categories of special education services,
while 0% are identified for the two categories of giftedness (Vitruvian Prep, 2018).
On the other hand, the Hispanic student population at Vitruvian Elementary School, at
73% (1% identifies as “other”) has begun to thrive, with Hispanic students scoring higher than
African American students on state assessments while maintaining the 5% percentage of
identified gifted students since 2013. Meanwhile, no African American students are identified as
gifted per data by the AUSD GATE Office (2015).
The identity and well-being of African American students, already perceived as inferior
to the dominant culture, may continue to be adversely affected as they move through the
educational system (Ghavami, Fingerhut, Peplau, Grant, & Wittig, 2011). Ford (2014) and Green
(2010) found that African American students continued to have limited access to classes with an
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 17

enriched, engaging curriculum and better-trained teachers. This trend, if continued further, can
lead these children to lower-than-expected socioeconomic and educational opportunity outcomes
as adults (Green, 2010). An improved gifted identification initiative for African American
students that tapped into their potential giftedness could help to reverse this negative trend (Ford,
2014).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
At Vitruvian Prep Elementary School, the stakeholder groups include: African American
students, their parents, and teachers. African American students benefit from the performance
goal to increase their gifted identification from 0% to 5% with an enriched, challenging, and
motivating curriculum. Parents of African American students benefit from the achievement of
this goal as it supported the aspiration parents have for the academic success of their children
(Huff, Houskamp, Watkins, Stanton, & Tavegia, 2005). Teachers, as the stakeholder group for
the study are critical influencers to provide the knowledge, motivational strategies, and the
organizational structure needed for increased gifted identification for African American students.
Teachers provided the instruction that when enriched strengthened the academic
development of African American students. Hargrove and Seay (2011) reported for example, the
instructional skills of teachers are needed to motivate African American children, especially boys
who begin at an early age to disengage from interest in education.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 18

Table 2
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s mission is to prepare students who will be academically and
socially supported to be successful in future academic endeavors, including college and career success
in a safe environment.
Organizational Performance Goal
By Fall 2017, Vitruvian Prep teachers will identify knowledge, motivational, and organizational
strategies to increase the gifted identification of African American students from 0% to 5%.
Stakeholder Performance Goals
GATE Assessment
Schedule
GATE Site
Leadership
Teachers Parents of African
American Students
African
American
Students
Fall, 2015 Assess all African
American students
in grades 2 through
5. (GATE
Leadership)
Prepare lessons with
rigor, challenge, and
interest to engage
African American
students.
Parents are
informed about the
assessment and
invited to GATE
parent education
meetings.
Students are
encouraged
to take the
assessment
and
participate in
GATE
sponsored
activities.
Fall, 2016 No assessments
given district or
school-wide.
(GATE
Leadership)
Prepare lessons with
rigor, challenge, and
interest to engage
African American
students.
Parents are invited
to district and
school GATE
parent education
meetings.
No
assessments
given district
or school-
wide.
Spring, 2017 Assess all African
American students
in grades 2 and 5.
(GATE
Leadership)
Prepare lessons with
rigor, challenge, and
interest to engage
African American
students.
Parents are
informed about the
assessment and
invited to GATE
parent education
meetings.
Students are
encouraged
to take the
assessment.
Fall, 2017 Assess all African
American students
in grades 2 and 5.
(GATE
Leadership)
Prepare lessons with
rigor, challenge, and
interest to engage
African American
students.
Parents will be
informed about the
assessment and
invited to GATE
parent education
meetings.
Students are
encouraged
to take the
assessment
and
participate in
GATE
sponsored
activities.
Note. Fall, 2017 Stakeholder Performance Goals. Source: AUSD GATE plan.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 19

Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Post Brown v. Board of Education, African American students in gifted programs have
been declining for decades nationwide (Ford, 2014; Hertzog, 2005; Moore III; Ford; & Milner,
2005; Romanoff et al., 2009). Interest convergence, a principle of critical race theory, defined as
promotion of integration and equity policies in education for African Americans as long as those
polices, and interests met the needs of Whites (Milner, 2008). These interests initially included
integrated schools with segregated gifted programs of mostly White students that used
identification processes that accommodated their learning style (Hertzog, 2005; Romanoff et al.,
2009). Over the past 30 years, researchers found Supreme Court decisions limited desegregation
which resulted in White students moving to more affluent communities leaving mostly African
American and Hispanic students in urban schools with less resources and continued social
inequality (Ford, 2014; Holme, 2002; Orfield, Frankenberg, & Siegel-Hawley, 2016). With a
review of previous and updated research literature the purpose of this project was to conduct a
gap analysis that examined the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that
interfered with the under-representation of African American students in gifted programs (Clark
& Estes, 2008). This analysis, for practical purposes, focused on the teachers at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary School in the AUSD as the stakeholder group to conduct a qualitative
phenomenological research design method. In phenomenological studies, the investigator
described what stakeholders experienced about the phenomenon of giftedness. Moreover, the
investigator asked questions about the knowledge, skills, motivational and organizational
strategies that the literature indicated increased gifted identification of African American
students from 0% to 5% by the Fall, 2017 gifted assessment.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 20

Stakeholder group for the study: Teachers. Certificated classroom teachers at
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School were the focus of this study to increase gifted identification
for African American students. A deductive strategy employed was the process of gathering data,
developing patterns from the data, discovering themes from the data, and providing
recommendations based on the findings. Deductive thinking was then employed to make sense of
the theme or themes discovered in the data and determined whether more questions need to be
answered. Based on the conceptual framework of the barriers that impeded increased
identification for African American students in gifted programs, teachers as the key stakeholder
group began dialogue about the following questions: What do you think are the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational barriers to improved identification for African American gifted
students? How can gifted identification for African Americans students be improved from the
current 0% to 5% at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School?
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to conduct a gap analysis that examined the knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences that contributed to the under-representation of African
American students in gifted programs. The analysis began with generating a list of possible or
assumed interfering influences. Systematic examination of these influences was narrowed down
to actual or validated interfering influences. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder focused on in this analysis were the
certificated teachers at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School in the AUSD.
An increase in the percentage of African American students in the gifted program at
Vitruvian Prep from 0% to 5% was the gap to be identified by December 2017. The data
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 21

collection included interviews, observations, document and artifacts of up to seven certificated
classroom teachers (Creswell, 2014).
1. What are the knowledge, skills, motivational, and organizational barriers to improved
identification for African American gifted students for the gifted program at Vitruvian
Prep Elementary School?
2. How can gifted identification for African Americans students be improved from the
current 0% to 5% at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
A systematic analysis of the causes of the performance gap between the current lack of
African American students identified as gifted and the organization’s stated goal was conducted
as a qualitative phenomenological study that utilized school and district data. The gap analysis
method designed by Clark and Estes (2008) supported the collection of data through
observations, interviews, and document analysis which examined knowledge, motivation, and
organizational obstacles that prevented achievement of the goal. Review of the literature with
analysis and evaluation of research-based recommendations was provided to support
achievement of the stated goals.
Though the literature review assisted with information related to the research questions,
the qualitative research design was dependent on what the stakeholders believed were the
barriers to under-identification of African Americans in gifted programs. As information was
gathered from the participants, research was reviewed to find any available answers or solutions
to the answers provided. Creswell (2014) emphasized that an on-site investigator must be aware
of potential pitfalls when collecting data with the remedy to keep focused on the research
questions. As an investigator-employee of the school district, data collection adhered to ethical
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 22

considerations as described by institutional review board (IRB) policy. Otherwise, there is the
threat to the validity of the findings that included what Maxwell (2013, p. 7) indicated were
“alternative explanations” such as an investigator’s desire to support what others believed or the
investigator’s personal bias.
Definitions
Access: Equal and equitable opportunity to obtain an education, regardless of
socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, gender, or disabilities (Glossary of Education Reform,
2018).
Differentiation: A type of instruction that focuses on the needs of students by content,
process, product, and environment (NAGC, 2015; Tomlinson, 2014).
Discrimination: Behaviors toward a group of persons based on prejudicial attitudes
(Stangor, 2014).
Equity: Fair outcomes, treatment, and opportunities for all students (California
Department of Education, 2017)
Equity index: A method to calculate a minimally acceptable under-representation goal
due to factors such as income disparity, lack of resources, and less education (Ford, 2014).
Equity-mindedness: A way of thinking by educators that calls attention to inequities of
student learning outcomes by race and ethnicity (Bensimon, Rueda, Dowd, & Harris, 2007).
Gifted and Talented Education Program (GATE): Provides students who excel in a
specific academic area, have high intellectual ability, high creativity, or exceptional performing
arts skills differentiated instruction to develop high capacity for learning (NAGC, 2015).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 23

Giftedness: Students with talent in academics, performing arts, creativity and leadership
that perform and have potential to accomplish at an exceedingly high level and found within all
cultures, ethnicities, and socioeconomic levels. (Ross et al., 1994, page 33).
Prejudice: A strong opinion, usually negative about another person, or groups of persons
without adequate facts (Prejudice, 2018)
Racism: Prejudice toward a specific racial group with the belief that one’s own race is
better (Racism, 2018)
Relative Difference in Composition Index (RDCI): A method to calculate the difference
between a race or cultural group’s gifted education composition and general education
composition as a percentage of the general education composition (Ford, 2014).
Organization of the Project
Chapter One introduced the problem statement and the research questions based on Clark
and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivational, and organizational (KMO) framework and gap
analysis improvement model. Chapter Two reviews the literature of KMO influences related to
African American student gifted underidentification (Clark & Estes, 2008). In Chapter Three,
the proposed method for the study, a qualitative phenomenological study of the experiences of
teachers related to the two research questions and based on interviews, observations, and data
collection will be examined (Creswell, 2014). Based on the themes developed from coding
teacher responses, Chapter Four will present and analyze the findings of the methods chosen
utilizing acceptable research guidelines. Chapter Five concludes the research study with
recommendations to improve African American gifted identification based on both Clark and
Estes’ (2008) Improvement Model and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) Evaluation Model.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 24

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter Two contains a review of the literature about the KMO influencers that affected
equity and access for African American students in gifted programs from the national level to the
local school for the study. These KMO influencers comprise the core of the gap analysis
framework utilized within each of four models proposed by Clark and Estes (2008) that work to
close KMO gaps between an organization’s current and proposed performance goal. For this
study, the improvement model was chosen to address the current gap of 0% African American
students identified for gifted programs with the proposed goal of 5% improved identification for
gifted programs.
KMO Influencers for the Improvement Model
An overview of KMO influencers will begin with organizational influencers that impede
improved gifted identification for African American students, the importance to address the
problem for current and future generations of African American students, and how research
helped to determine the performance goal of 5%. Motivational influencers reported by the
research literature indicated the classroom teacher had the greatest influence with what they
expected and how they engaged African American students in learning. Knowledge influencers
included how teachers developed lessons with increasing cognitive skills while aware of how
African American students can retain information in long-term memory. With these KMO
influencers discussed in the literature review, a conceptual framework that incorporates the gap
between what teachers at Vitruvian Prep currently know and implement with what they need to
know and implement in order to achieve the performance goal of 5% improved gifted
identification for African American students will be further explored in Chapter Three,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 25

Methodology, Chapter Four, Findings, and Chapter Five Recommendation sections of the
dissertation.
Organizational Influencers
Brown (1997) in an article published online in 2010, stated that a discrepancy existed
between the updated 1993 federal government definition that included giftedness can be found in
all cultures with how states with gifted programs remained unchanged, ignoring minority
cultures. Ford (2014) and Green (2010) and Singleton et al. (2005) reported the trend of under-
identification for African Americans in gifted programs has continued post Brown v Board of
Education due to policies and instructional practices that benefited the dominant White culture.
Ford (2014) and Hines (2008) and Michael-Chadwell (2010) and Romanoff et al. (2009)
indicated that African American students’ access to accelerated instruction, including gifted
programs will be critical for the future workforce since schools are projected to be minority
dominated by 2020.
Siegle et al. (2016) discovered that based on socioeconomic status, White students who
did not receive free and reduced lunch at a school district were 3.5 times more likely to be
identified for gifted programs than African American students who also did not receive free and
reduced lunch. Furthermore, Siegle et al. (2016) found that these same reference White students
used in the study were close to 12 times more likely to be identified for gifted programs than
African American students who did receive free and reduced lunch. When researchers controlled
for achievement scores, schools, socioeconomic status, and district reading and math scores they
discovered that White students were 2.5 times more likely identified gifted than African
American students with comparable academic achievement (Siegle et al., 2016).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 26

Ford (2014) and Siegle et al. (2016) indicated additional barriers that prevented gifted
identification of African Americans such as the lack of access to gifted programs, lack of teacher
referrals, students’ below standard performance on intelligence and achievement tests, policies
and procedures for gifted identification that have not been updated, and lack of awareness and
interest by students and parents for gifted education. If these disparities continued, African
American students may be limited in the development of their human capital, often a prerequisite
to economic prosperity and personal happiness (Wheelan, 2010).
Organizational influencer for Vitruvian Prep’s improvement goal. Ford (2014)
reported under-representation is a discrepancy if it is beyond an established threshold utilized,
the relative difference in composition index (RDCI). The RDCI calculation determined the
difference between gifted and general education composition as a percentage of the general
education composition. Ford contended that the RDCI as a calculation to address this gap was a
viable solution for school leaders and teachers to establish a reasonable goal. Also, this
calculation demonstrated an awareness to solve the underlying causes of under-identification
which a quota-based calculation that is illegal would not. Ford calculated the RDCI using
national data which revealed that up to 250,000 potentially gifted African American students
have not been identified for gifted programs. An equity index was added to the RDCI to provide
decision makers with further data that supports the contention by DeCuir-Gunby and Schutz,
(2016), Eckert and Robins (2016) and Ford that factors other than chance cause the under-
identification such as discrimination.
During the 2016-2017 school year at Vitruvian Prep, the African American student
population was 23%, yet none were identified as gifted. The two-step equity index calculation
proposed by Ford (2014) determined the minimum percentage of African American students that
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 27

could be identified gifted beyond equitable circumstances such as low socioeconomic status is
the following:
1. C (23%) x Threshold - T (20%) = African American student - A (5%). (Composition (%)
of African Americans in the school population) X Threshold = African American student
(A). (5% African American students underrepresented in gifted programs at Vitruvian
Prep) Ford (2014).
2. C (23%) – African American student - A (5%) = Equity Index (18%). (Composition (%)
of African Americans in the school population) – A (5% African American students
underrepresented in gifted programs at Vitruvian Prep) = 18%. (A minimum of 18% of
the 23% = 4% or two African American students at Vitruvian Prep should be the
minimum target goal for the school and teachers to work toward for improved
identification outcomes) (Ford, 2014; Rotatori et al., 2014).
Consultation between the investigator as a participant-observer and the school leader resulted in
the improvement goal of 5% with the rationale that parity with the 5% of Hispanic students
identified gifted could be a springboard for both groups to continue to improve (School leader,
personal communication, October 8, 2015).
Teacher’s Influence on African American Student Achievement
Multiple scholars have analyzed a variety of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to
determine the role of teachers in increased academic achievement for African American students.
Multiple researchers reported that racial attitudes and behaviors of teachers about the ability of
African American students affected the rigor and quality of academic instruction teachers
provided. For example, researchers found African American students, especially males, were less
likely referred, recommended, or provided academic supports leading to honors, Advanced
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 28

Placement, or gifted education classes. (Bensimon, 2005; Bonner, Lewis, Bowman-Perrott, Hill-
Jackson, & James, 2009; Borland, 2004; Ford, 2014; Ford, Moore, & Scott, 2011; Hargrove &
Seay, 2011; Hertzog, 2005; Siegle et al., 2016). Motivational influencers that included deficit
thinking, racial attitudes, discriminatory behaviors, and color-blind instruction impeded teachers’
ability to recognize high ability African American students. Critical race theory stated racism is
embedded within all aspects of the society with the dominant White culture and its values
promoted as the standard for culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse people including
students to follow (Ford et al., 2011; Hertzog, 2005; Hargrove & Seay, 2011; Sleeter, 2017).
Teacher Recommendation of African American Students
Several researchers determined that educators’ beliefs informed practices that contributed
to teachers’ discrimination about African American students resulting in less referrals and
recommendations for gifted programs (Ford, 2014; Frye & Vogt, 2010; Green, 2010; Singleton
et al. 2005). Discrimination in education according to Ford’s (2014) description of Allport’s,
Clark & Pettigrew, 1954) five scales of prejudice meant stopping minorities from participating in
specialized educational programs such as gifted programs (Allport, Clark & Pettigrew, 1954).
Delgado and Stefancic (2017) and Sue, Lin, Torino, Capodilupo, and Rivera (2009) defined acts
of intentional and unintentional discrimination as macroaggressions by the dominant White race
over minorities that included African Americans. Examples such as the tone teachers used to
speak to or about African American students indicated the teachers’ lack of expectations for the
students (Ford, 2014; Ford, Scott, Moore, & Amos, 2013; Sue, 2010; Sue et al., 2009).
Hargrove and Seay (2011) found perceptions of teachers analyzed from questionnaires of
370 teachers about the abilities of African American students resulted in lower referrals than
White and Hispanic students for gifted programs. Hopkins and Garrett (2010) reported teacher
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 29

bias and perception existed because African American students do not fit the traditional view of
giftedness as determined by standard gifted assessments for intellectual and high academic
ability. For example, leadership, creativity, and the arts are utilized infrequently by school
districts nation-wide (McClain & Pfeiffer, 2012). Instead, teacher referrals have over-identified
African American students for special education services which further diminished teacher
perceptions of African American students’ academic capability and opportunities for gifted
identification referral (Harry & Klingner, 2014; Hopkins & Garrett, 2010).
Reasons proposed included teachers' perception of students from low social economic
status and minority backgrounds as academically inferior to other students. Another reason
determined that teachers did not recognize gifted characteristics in African American students’
due to intentional and unintentional racial bias. In a quantitative survey that used descriptive
statistics of 370 teachers across four school districts, racial bias was indicated when 35% of
teachers did not agree that academic giftedness was present in all socioeconomic groups in the
society (Hargrove & Seay, 2011; Moon & Brighton, 2008).
Ford (2014) and Plucker and Callahan (2014) discussed other measures to identify
students of color to increase teacher recommendation of African American students for gifted
identification. Measures included gifted identification observation tools such as the Teacher
Observation of Potential in Students (TOPS), which allowed teachers to observe African
American students over three six-week periods recording academic, creative, and social
strengths. Harradine, Coleman, and Winn (2014) found in an evaluative study of the TOPS
observation tool that teachers reported a 46% increase in recognizing strengths in the 496
students of color they had not recognized before using the TOPS form.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 30

Teacher Observation Checklist
Identification of students for gifted programs varies by state with either the 1978 or
revised 1993 federal definitions used as a guideline. McClain and Pfeiffer (2012) discussed their
findings that 96% of states have a definition of giftedness with variation for categories of
giftedness such as intellectual, specific domain, creativity, and leadership. For example, 90% of
states include intelligence, 78% include high achievement, while just 18% include leadership as
a category of gifted identification (McClain & Pfeiffer, 2012). Sternberg and Subotnik (2000)
proposed five decision-making models for gifted identification one of which was the multiple
cutoff model, used by 54% of states. Multiple cutoff model measures more than one
identification category such as teacher rating scales, behavior checklists, and creativity rubrics as
additional tools to measure for giftedness.
School districts within states have discretion to use any part of their state’s gifted
definition and identification decision-making models including teacher rating scales and
observation check-lists. If rated highly on the checklist score there may be an opportunity by
teacher or parent advocacy for the student to re-take the assessment at the next opportunity.
Harradine et al. (2014) and Hargrove and Seay (2011) stated that a discussion among teachers
about race and racial attitudes is critical before the use of any observational tools to accurately
evaluate African American students.
Researchers found that teachers underestimated the potential talents and strengths of
African American students, especially African American boys leading to fewer referrals to gifted
programs. Several researchers related some reasons were checklists and rating scales were based
on White middle and upper-class values such as compliant behavior, docile attitude, and high
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 31

achievement on test scores (Allen, Robbins, Payne, & Brown, 2016; Ford, 2014; Ford, 2010;
Harradine et al. (2014).
Teacher review of the definitions of giftedness. According to Mazzoli and Campbell
(2016) teachers’ exposure to various definitions of giftedness may confirm or deny teachers
personal definition of giftedness. In a review of the literature on teacher perceptions of
giftedness, Smith and Campbell (2016) and Sternberg and Davidson (2005) found that teachers
viewed giftedness as inherent in children from an early age with the ability to learn information
quickly and reflected in high scores on intelligence tests. Hargrove and Seay (2011) reported
about a survey done of over one thousand teachers that 35% did not agree with the 1993 federal
definition that giftedness can be found in all cultures which indicated racial bias. Implications of
these perceptions are reflected in how teachers view African American students whose gifted and
talented abilities may extend beyond intelligence tests.
In a review of the first federal definition of giftedness in 1972, then revised in 1978,
1993, and 2004 researchers found that most states used the 1978 and 1993 definitions as a guide
for school districts’ gifted education programs (Hopkins & Garrett, 2010; Ross et al. 1994;
McClain & Pffeifer; 2012; NAGC, 2017). Since 2015, Western State, a pseudonym, eliminated
the 1993 federal definition of giftedness leaving school districts to use any of the federal
definitions or theory-based definitions such as those proposed by Renzulli (2011) and Gardner
(2011). Western State does give guidance on categories of giftedness from the 1993 federal
definition that school districts may choose from.
Another definition source for teachers was from the NAGC, which summarized that
giftedness was the aptitude for accelerated learning in a variety of domains, not fixed in time,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 32

and subject to recognition of barriers such as discrimination, socioeconomic status, and
motivational challenges (NAGC, 2010).
Teacher as the stakeholder group to identify the gifted assessment construct.
Analyses by some researchers summarized the inequity of gifted identification assessments
stating that gifted education was created for the dominant White race which excluded students of
color, promoting bias and racism. (Borland, 2004; Briggs, Reis, & Sullivan, 2008; Ford et al.,
2011) School district leadership provided schools with the type of gifted assessment to use for
identification of students for gifted program. Investigation of the literature did not find the extent
that teachers know what type of gifted assessment was used and what the test measured.
Teachers need to know what the assessment test measures use that information to prepare
African American students for these assessments (Lohman, 2005; Warne, 2009).
For example, tests widely used for gifted assessments such as the Cognitive Abilities Test
(CogAT), measured learned reasoning abilities for verbal, quantitative, and spatial reasoning
(Lohman, 2005; Lohman, 2012). Raven Progressive Matrices Test measured non-verbal abstract
reasoning (Raven, 2000). Naglieri Non-Verbal Ability (NNAT) Test measured non-verbal
reasoning and general problem-solving (Naglieri, 2003). Intelligence tests such as the Weschsler
Intelligence Scale for children (WICS IV) and Stanford Binet (SB V) measured general
intellectual ability (Wechsler, 1949; Terman & Merrill, 1937). Teachers afforded the opportunity
to view gifted assessments examples plan instruction to increase gifted identification for African
American students if they learn and are trained in the type of assessment construct used for the
test.
Teachers as the stakeholder group: Providing an enriched curriculum to support
the academic development of African American students. Teachers are the gateway for gifted
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 33

education by recommendation, referral, instruction, motivational strategies, and cultural
competency knowledge for the African American students they teach (Ford, 2014). Improved
teacher knowledge and instruction in gifted education strategies can benefit advanced learning
for African American students. Siegle et al. (2016) proposed a model of talent development that
included teacher selection of talent-rich African American students for accelerated instruction by
teachers to maximize talents in preparation for formal gifted assessments. reviewed the literature
that reported the attitude, behavior, attention, and instructional challenge teachers incorporated
specifically toward African American students influenced their successful engagement with
learning (Briggs, et al.,, 2008; Ford, 2014; Michael-Chadwell, 2010; Siegle et al., 2016)
Singleton et al. (2005) and Michael-Chadwell (2010) further reported literature that
related the importance of parent education for the process of gifted identification and the support
from family and community to advocate for the student’s academic development. Chadwell-
Michael (2010) designed the Chadwell Transformative Model for Gifted Program Reform
(CTMGPR) as the result of a phenomenological study of teachers and parents about under-
representation of African Americans in gifted programs. Based on the findings, CTMGPR
included suggestions for pre-service teacher preparation and professional development in gifted
education strategies to support both identified and unidentified talent development for African
American students.
Allen et al. (2016) reported a case study about a school’s implementation of the school-
wide enrichment model (SEM), initiated as an alternative to traditional gifted programs to
provide gifted education for the culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse student
population. SEM is based on Renzulli’s (2011) theory of gifted education related to
encouragement of students’ creative problem-solving and collaborative learning skills. Over a 5-
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 34

year period of the qualitative case study, the gifted identification of culturally, linguistically, and
ethnically diverse students increased from 3% to 7% with 60% of African American student
population enrolled in enrichment clusters. Teacher commitment to family engagement,
instructional rigor, and cultural interests of students were among the findings of the study (Allen
et al., 2016).
Teacher high expectations to challenge African American student learning. Due to
the cognitive demands of teaching, teachers are often unaware of how they communicated to
African American students what they believed are their academic capabilities through daily
instruction (Ford et al., 2011; Michael-Chadwell, 2010; Siegle et al., 2016). Gibbons, Pelchar,
and Cochran (2012) discussed a case study about an at-risk African American elementary student
encouraged by the teacher to talk about college and career information was a way to express high
expectations as the student moved through the K-12 learning environment. Rich, (2014) reported
Office of Civil Rights data that African Americans were half as likely as White students to have
access to rigorous math and science classes to pursue careers in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics, (STEM). Additional data reported by Rich (2014) also included
African American students were three times more likely to have an inexperienced teacher than
White students. To reduce the achievement and excellence gaps, improved instructional practices
such as differentiation, front-loading, and Advanced Academic Curricular Units by trained and
experienced teachers in gifted education was required (Beasley, Briggs, & Pennington, 2017;
Lohman, 2005; Plucker et al., 2010).
Charleston, Charleston, and Jackson (2014) addressed the low participation of African
American students in computer science courses due to inexperienced teachers, lack of
technology resources, and students’ own self-efficacy to be successful in computing classes.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 35

Bensimon and Malcolm (2012) and Charleston et al. (2014) reported how teacher development
of color-consciousness as opposed to color-blindness supported teachers to recognize African
American students’ need for culturally relevant instruction within any discipline’s domain.
Bensimon and Malcolm (2012) stated when teachers use the lens of color-blindness, African
American students are viewed equally with equal needs but not equitably with specific
instructional needs to reach their potential. Briggs et al. (2008) and Siegle et al. (2016) expressed
the need for teachers to learn the cultural style of African American students to recognize gifted
characteristics apart from standardized tests, a common method used to identify students for
gifted programs. Ford et al., (2011) discussed the need for teachers to recognize intentional and
unintentional racism which affected whether teachers expected African American students to
learn the content contained in standardized and gifted assessments.
Teachers as the stakeholder group: Developing cultural competency to engage
African American students in learning. Teachers learned and provided culturally responsive
instruction that intentionally supported both the potential giftedness and the multicultural needs
of African American students (Elhoweris et al., 2005; Ford et al., 2011; Ford, 2014). Ford et al.,
(2011) defined cultural competency as overcoming deficit thinking by learning about and valuing
the cultural differences of African American students with students of other races and ethnicities.
Deficit thinking can influence teacher referral even for high ability African American students
(Ford et al., 2011; Ford, 2014). Elhoweris et al. (2005) in a stratified cluster sampling of 207
elementary teachers given the same academic data about students eligible for gifted
identification, except for their ethnicity consistently did not refer African American and Hispanic
students. Educators needed to train in cultural awareness to promote positive expectancy, a
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 36

theory that states what a teacher expects of students is what students learn to expect of
themselves (Eccles, 2009; Elhoweris et al., 2005).
Teacher perception of African American students affect gifted identification.
Multiple studies demonstrated that teachers have lowered expectations for African Americans,
students of color, and low-income students. Borland (2004) and Shaughnessy, Moore, and
Borland (2014) explained that teachers want an exact definition and application of giftedness
though it is a construct that is pliable and can reveal itself in multiple ways such as academics,
leadership, and the performing arts.
Several researchers stressed that teacher perceptions of African American students as
deficient in mental capacity due to poverty and historical injustices played a role in how often
teachers referred or considered African American students for gifted programs (Borland, 2004;
Elhoweris et al., 2005; Ford, 2014; Hertzog, 2005; Shaughnessy et al. 2014; Siegle et al., 2016).
References to the American origins of gifted programs in the early 1900’s and the subsequent
focus on intelligence quotient (IQ) scores as the primary means of identifying gifted students has
endured in the minds of teachers who often viewed giftedness as a fixed rather than flexible
construct (Borland 2004; Ford, 2014; Pfeiffer, 2002; Renzulli, 2011).
Deficit thinking theory. This theory blames the victim for their low academic
achievement without considering historical and cultural disadvantages for that individual (Ford,
2014; Gorski, 2008; Walker, 2011). Deficit thinking is rooted in racial discrimination as it is
applied to African American students. Deficit thinking theory is embedded within critical race
theory, which influenced expectancy-value theory in that what teachers believe about students is
believed by students about themselves. This is particularly important for African American
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 37

students who are taught by a teacher workforce that was 82% White the 2011-2012 nationwide
data collection (DOE, 2016).
The significance of the racial make-up of a district or school was what Gershenson, Hart,
Lindsay and Papageorge (2017) found in their 10-year longitudinal study that Black students
who had just one Black teacher in grades 3 through 5 were 29% more likely to graduate high
school and for Black boys it was 39% more likely to graduate high school. High expectations
and teacher investment in high-quality instruction appeared to be the major reasons.
Influence of culture on cognition and learning. African American students are
influenced by the deficit thinking of teachers about their academic ability and teaching styles that
often do not address their cultural need for expressiveness, spirituality, and personal history
(Elhoweris et al., 2005; Ford et al., 2011; Ford; 2014). Papageorge, Gershenson, and Kang,
(2016) found from their 2002-2012 Longitudinal Study that teacher expectations played a
significant role in the predictions by African American and White teachers for the high school
and college completion success rates for the same African American students. African American
female teachers were 20% more likely than White teachers to predict that their Black student
would graduate high school.
Further influenced by the race of the teacher on learning was if a Black student,
especially a male had a White teacher in a 10
th
grade math or science subject, they were less
likely to pursue similar courses in that subject (Gershenson, et al., 2017). This could have serious
implications for future math and science career success in schools without the racial diversity of
staff. For example, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor stated that the need
for software developers is expected to increase by 17%, faster than the average job between 2014
and 2024 (Department of Labor, 2017).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 38

Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Dimensions
Research-based information about the type of knowledge and skills needed by the teacher
stakeholder group was analyzed to support achievement of the organizational goal. Bloom’s
Revised taxonomy and cognitive load theory (CLT) supported teacher’s instructional delivery
and student learning to provide African American students with an enriched and long-lasting
education so more may be potentially identified (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). An overview
of the original Bloom’s Taxonomy, updated by Krathwohl (2002) explained how teachers
provided improved instruction with the four Knowledge Dimensions of Factual, Conceptual,
Procedural, and Metacognitive and six processes: Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze,
Evaluate, and Create.
Knowledge
Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Teachers benefited to know the updated version of Bloom’s
Taxonomy to improve instruction for African American children who often are not provided a
challenging, rigorous curriculum (Ford et al., 2011). The purpose was to provide teachers with a
familiar, yet updated framework to design learning objectives that related to the California and
the National Common Core Standards. These English language arts and math standards
promoted depth of knowledge that aligned to the four knowledge dimensions of Bloom’s revised
taxonomy (California, 2016; “Common Core State Standards Initiative,” 2016). A complement
to Bloom’s revised taxonomy are the depth and complexity prompts (Kaplan, 2012) that included
visual icons named language of the discipline, details, patterns, points of view, ethics, and big
ideas of language. These prompts scaffold and enriched instruction to allow students to move
incrementally toward a deep and greater understanding of a lesson objective, unit, or theme.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 39

Teachers as the stakeholder group. Teachers’ integration of conceptual knowledge with
some or all six cognitive processes in lesson-planning is for any subject (Krathwohl, 2002;
Rueda, 2011). Increased practice and reflection by teachers of Bloom’s revised taxonomy and
Kaplan’s depth and complexity prompts provided the challenging and enriched curriculum
needed by African American students to better prepare for achievement and gifted assessments
(Kaplan, 2012; Krathwohl, 2002,) In a research study by Noble (2004) on differentiation of
instruction for the diverse classroom, teacher-designed lessons that combined Bloom’s revised
taxonomy with other theories improved academic outcomes for students.
Noble (2004) stated that Bloom’s revised taxonomy and multiple intelligence theory are
familiar to teachers and this in turn motivated their use for improved student learning outcomes.
Gardner’s (2011) theory of multiple intelligences originally presented in 1983 and updated in
2011 included seven types of intelligences with the linguistic and logical mathematical types the
most conducive to identification in gifted programs (Noble, 2004). Though the teachers in
Noble’s (2004) mixed methods study sought to fill in Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy Matrix
completely, it was not deemed necessary for every lesson. However, the use of the matrix
assisted teachers to use multiple cognitive processes within the knowledge dimensions when
applicable. Teacher beliefs and attitudes about their students changed when their instructional
practice changed, and they saw positive results from those changes (Allen et al., 2016; Harradine
et al., 2014; Noble, 2004) Moreover, in the case of African American students who traditionally
have not done as well on standardized and gifted assessments, teacher knowledge of how
students processed and retained information enhanced student learning (Ford et al., 2011;
Kirschner, 2002 Rueda, 2011).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 40

Cognitive load theory. Cognitive load theory and part of information processing theory
explained how meaningful learning was stored and transferred from short-term memory, to
working memory, and finally long-term memory with a capacity to retain large amounts of
information (Kirschner et al., 2006; Mayer, 2011). Mayer (2011) described CLT as a “human
information processing system” (p 34) with a special emphasis on the importance of prior
knowledge in learning. The process of storage in the short-term or sensory memory began with
the selection of words and images about a topic that is engaging to pay attention to. Teachers
need to infuse instruction with connections that include cultural relevancy for African American
students to stimulate interest and allow students to organize the information in the working
memory for integration with the long-term memory. This process of “selecting, organizing, and
integrating” (Mayer, 2011, p. 37) was student cognitive engagement that encouraged retention of
information and improved academic outcomes. Culturally responsive instruction was instruction
the teacher utilized to honor and engage students in learning using the students’ own cultural and
personal experiences (Chadwell-Michael, 2010; De Gaetano & España, 2010; Ford, 2014; Frye
& Vogt, 2010; Grissom & Redding, 2015 Hopkins & Garrett, 2010).
Mayer (2011) stated short-term sensory memory stored information for brief moments
then either dissipated or worked its way to the working memory. The working memory worked
hardest to construct meaning from the multiple information input received. When the working
memory re-structured the information into single compartments there can be room for more
working memory, though in general it is limited in how much information can be retained. The
value of prior knowledge was that it is in the next phase of the system called long-term memory,
but first engaged with the working memory to organize the information received to make
meaning. Next, there is a transfer of meaningful information back to long-term memory which
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 41

lasts for years. The working memory is then liberated to get more information from the sensory
memory and prior knowledge division of long-term memory continuing the process (Kirschner et
al., 2006; Mayer, 2011; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Metacognitive knowledge: teachers as the stakeholder group. Teachers need to reflect
on their own perceptions about African American students and examine the reasons of the
continuous achievement and excellence gap between African American and White students on
standardized and gifted tests (Elhoweris et al., 2005; Ford, 2014; Walker, 2011).
Deficit thinking impeded the learning of African American students because it removed
the accountability for high-quality instruction from the schools and the teachers (Ford &
Grantham, 2003). Instead, the culture, family dynamics, and even lifestyle of the students are
blamed for the consistently low achievement (Frye & Vogt, 2010; Payne, 2002). Ford and
Grantham (2003) stated that the optimal time for teachers to confront their deficit thinking is
during pre-teacher preparation courses in college. However, few teacher preparation programs
offer extended opportunities for teachers to reflect beyond the typical multicultural class.
De Gaetano and España, (2010) discussed multicultural, culturally responsive, and cultural
competency education as necessary for educators to learn and integrate within lessons to promote
high expectations for African American students.
Multicultural is understood as culturally responsive education specific to the history and
culture of a racial or ethnic group. Culturally responsive instruction means how teachers
presented lessons that included positive connections to African American history, culture, and
life-style. Culturally Competence Training was needed by teachers before and after placement in
schools to strengthen teachers’ knowledge and confidence to teach students from cultures other
than their own (De Gaetano & España, 2010; Milner, 2008).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 42

Hertzog (2005) and Milner (2008) discussed critical race theory, which detailed the
historical racism endured by African American students resulting in less opportunities for
academic and economic advancement. In Western State for example, White students are eight
times more likely to attend a high performing school with advanced coursework than African
American students (Education Trust-West, n.a.a.). District and school professional development
was an avenue for teachers to examine the impact of race and culture on student’s learning (Ford
& Grantham, 2003; Frye & Vogt, 2010; Hertzog, 2005; Milner, 2008).
Bloom’s taxonomy, Kaplan’s prompts, and CLT, with culturally responsive instructional
strategies assisted teachers to plan and improve lessons with learning objectives that connected
with State Common Core and Gifted Education Standards (California Department of Education
(CDE), 2010; NAGC, 2015) In this way, teachers think about and assessed the quality of
instruction they provided by the results of that instruction (Krathwohl, 2002). As teachers
learned about deficit thinking, microaggressions and culturally relevant instruction, they must
also consider how to deliver the lessons.
Ford and Grantham, (2003) and Schraw and McCrudden, (2006) discussed how teachers
can build students’ interest by modeling either situational or personal interest in a topic in order
to provide empowerment to students of color to engage more fully in learning. Situational
interest creates the initial spark of external learning that is often connected to students’ prior
knowledge about a topic while personal interest is internally created and lasts longer (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). In contrast, lowered expectations by teachers about African American
students affected students’ interest in learning, which lessened their opportunity for gifted
identification (Ford & Grantham, 2003; Rueda, 2011; Siegle et al., 2016).

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 43

Teachers are encouraged to self-reflect about their own bias in educating African
American students, design lessons that included educational objectives reflective of Bloom’s
revised taxonomy, depth and complexity prompts, CLT, multiple intelligences, and cultural
competency knowledge that utilized students’ prior knowledge to strengthen cognitive retention.
Results of improved student learning outcomes promoted teacher referrals for African American
students in gifted programs (Elhoweris et al., 2005; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Hertzog, 2005;
Kaplan, 2012; Kirschner et al., 2006; Krathwohl, 2002; Noble, 2004; Rueda, 2011).
Motivation
Motivation expectancy-value theory. Expectancy-value theory. Eccles (2009) and
Wigfield and Cambria (2010) provided a theoretical model to improve teachers’ knowledge and
classroom application. Eccles (2009) determined that there are fundamentally two questions that
can engage students in the classroom and increase their ability to persist in their learning. The
questions are, “Can I do the task?” and “Do I want to do the task?” (Eccles, 2009, p. 1)
Expectancy-value theory purported that a discussion about the importance and value of the
learning can encourage interest in the learning (Eccles, 2009; Elhoweris et al., 2005).
Eccles (2009) and Pintrich (2003) determined that motivation was a major component to
answer the question of why some students are successful in school when others are not as
successful. Eccles, (2006) used motivational and social criteria that related to long and short-
term educational goals such as grades, graduation, and behaviors about reaching those goals to
formulate a model. The model indicated that fulfillment of the goals was narrowed to two basic
views. One view was the student’s beliefs about the probability of their success and the other
was how important that success was for them. Student’s belief in their academic ability was not
an isolated belief as it was influenced by the beliefs of others in their ability to be successful as
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 44

well. Others included parents, teachers, friends, and any other significant person in the student’s
life. Equally important was the value the student and others supporting the student’s goal put on
the achievement of the goal. Eccles (2009) and Pintrich (2003) both developed a series of
questions that helped to predict the selection of more challenging tasks to accomplish. For
example, a student’s confidence in both their ability to perform well and the importance they
placed on performing well. Eccles (2009) research narrowed the questions that asked, “Can I do
the task?” If the student answered yes, then it indicated the student would do well on the task.
The other question was, “Do I want to do the task?” Likewise, if the student answered yes, then
the student would not only do well but persist if the task became too challenging (Eccles, 2009;
Rueda, 2011).
Clark and Estes (2008) and Eccles (2009) and Rueda (2011) found implications for
African American students and the reasons for their lowered identification for gifted programs
was critical to an understanding of how expectancy-value theory affected their view of both their
ability to succeed and the value they placed on their success. Though the importance of parents,
friends, and other important persons in the student’s life affected their confidence in their ability,
it is the daily interaction with the classroom teacher that immediately encouraged or discouraged
the student’s view of their ability and stamina to succeed. Teachers and the school culture
provided the environment for students to say, “Yes” to both questions (Eccles, 2009; Pintrich,
2003; Wigfield & Cambria, 2010).
Teachers as the stakeholder group. Teachers can survey African American students
using the two basic motivational questions: “Can I do the task?” and “Do I want to do the task?”
The implications for teachers as the stakeholder group to close the gap between 0% identified
African American students in gifted programs to 5% by Fall, 2017 and involve the skill of
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 45

implementing motivational strategies including the appropriate use of expectancy-value theory.
Both questions must be answered, “Yes” by a student for successful learning to occur (Eccles,
2009). The action of doing answered the first question while persistence in completing the task
answered the second question. As the confidence builds, more action, higher persistence, and
greater mental effort will be used to complete tasks.
When the teacher plans lessons that met the conceptual rigor of Bloom’s revised
taxonomy and intentional practice of CLT, the use of motivational strategies to build the
confidence of African American students in their academic ability was also utilized (Eccles,
2009; Liaison, 2015). Teachers began with less challenging tasks and build toward more
challenging tasks as students’ experience success (Eccles, 2009; Kaplan, 2012; Rueda, 2011).
Teachers also observed if students needed support as they may be discouraged by poor self-
image to ask for help (Eccles, 2009).
During lesson-planning, teachers metacognitively reviewed the two questions formulated
by Eccles (2009) and the socio-cognitive principles developed by Pintrich (2003 such as
achievement goals and self-regulated learning that support lesson objectives. Rueda (2011)
emphasized that teachers should adapt motivational strategies that encouraged students to act,
persist, and make effort. Reflective questions asked by teachers to ascertain the perceptions of
African American students about their motivation to learn, assisted teachers to plan motivational
and instructional lessons. Setting short-term specific goals assisted students to complete them
and gain a sense of accomplishment (Eccles, 2009; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Rueda (2011)
reported when African American students experienced success, confidence developed, creating
more opportunities for success.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 46

Engagement. Rueda (2011) defined engagement as a motivated person, as observed by
the attention they give their work. Positive engagement was a construct in which the greater the
engagement, the greater the chance a student will reach their learning goal. Engagement included
the motivational indicators of choosing, persisting, and diligently working toward a task (Rueda,
2011). According to Rueda (2011) further research was needed to explore better ways to define
the Engagement Construct. However, Rueda (2011) discussed the work of other researchers that
developed three aspects of the Engagement Construct, Behavioral, Cognitive, and Affective.
Behavioral Engagement related to the action of involvement in learning. Cognitive Engagement
supported the use of learning strategies to promote knowledge acquisition. Affective
Engagement related to the joy of learning (Rueda, 2011). Additional researchers according to
Rueda (2011) supported focus on the Behavioral and Cognitive aspects. These included the
attributes of metacognitive strategies such as preparing and reviewing and cognitive strategies
such as effort to begin a task and persistence required to complete the task.
The implication for African American students was that positive engagement led to more
positive engagement which resulted in a higher chance that students’ reach their learning goals
(Rueda, 2011). The emphasis by Rueda (2011) on positive engagement was because there was
clearly negative engagement such as when students refused to begin a task, persist at it, or devote
effort to its completion. For African American students’ a form of negative engagement was the
Paradox of Underachievement (Ford et al., 2011) in which students believed if others worked
hard, those students achieved their goals but they will not because of their race. Therefore, it is
critical that teachers are aware of the negative as well as positive dynamic of the Engagement
Construct.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 47

Teachers as the stakeholder group. First, teachers determined whether there was a
learning or performance problem. Then diagnose using one or more of the underlying
motivational indicators such as self-efficacy, value, interest, attributions, goal orientation, and
emotions to fix motivational problems. Rueda (2011) suggested that teachers first look at
whether the motivation problem was with choice, persistence, or mental effort. Next, connect
that information to the learning or performance of students. After that, look at a variety of
motivational strategies to use for that specific issue.
For example, with attributions theory, Anderman and Anderman (2009) found that
students wanted to know why an event in their life happened and what might happen in the
future. With this knowledge, teachers teach students the reasons for their success and failures
focused on improvement related to effort rather than ability. African American students often
viewed their failures as indicative of their own lack of ability and therefore minimized future
efforts to learn (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). Motivational indicators are context-specific,
cultural in nature, and could require different indicators to fix motivational issues for students
(Rueda, 2011). As teachers learned and incorporated these strategies in their daily lessons, the
benefit was improved learning and motivation for all students with a special emphasis in this
study on African American students and their increased identification in gifted programs.
Organizational Dimension
Clark and Estes gap analysis improvement model framework. Clark and Estes (2008)
designed a framework to achieve performance goals that utilized the right combination of
knowledge, skills, motivational strategies and organizational structures. These organizational
structures involved effective processes and resources needed to reach the performance goal.
Along the way, continual assessment of both the processes and resources guide changes needed
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 48

to close stated goals. Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) cautioned that due to the complexity
of organizational change initiatives, an improvement in one area may become a problem in
another. To combat this problem, Clark and Estes (2008) discussed six types of support research
indicated produced positive improvement changes in most types of organizations. They include,
1) explicit goals with a way to measure the goals, 2) alignment between the goals and resources,
3) frequent communication, 4) involvement of leadership, 5) the knowledge, skills, and
motivational strategies needed, and 6) understanding that models of change work differently for
different organizations (Clark & Estes, 2008). An integration of knowledge, skills, motivational
strategies, and organizational processes to achieve performance goals are recommended (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Organizational mission. The mission of the AUSD (2016) prepares students for
educational and career success. AUSD seeks to build school communities of excellence to meet
the needs of all students. The district’s GATE department’s mission provided services for
identified students in grades 3 through 12. The GATE program is designed to meet and
maximize the academic and social development of gifted students with grade level core
curriculum differentiated to promote positive motivation and the intellectual growth of gifted
students (AUSD website notes, 2016-2017). AUSD’s long time policy and procedure to assess
all second and fifth grades students was changed in 2017-2018 to include only second grade
students with teacher or parent referrals for other grades. Though research has found that
giftedness was not a fixed construct but fluid, flexible, and developmental the likelihood of
African American students ever assessed again after the second grade at Vitruvian Prep was
minimal to none without teacher or parent advocacy (Kaufman & Sternberg, 2007; Reis et al.,
1998; Reis & Renzulli, 2009).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 49

At the research site for the study, Vitruvian Prep Elementary School, the school-specific
mission expressed the importance of students’ developing the 4 C’s of communication,
creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking. Based on Ford’s (2014) Equity Index, the
performance goal was established by the leadership team to improve gifted identification for
African American students from 0% to 5% by December 2017.
Organizational global goal. The focus of AUSD for 2017-2018 was to strengthen the
gifted programs at schools that have strong, weak, or non-existent programs. Schein (2010)
stated that due to culture as the personality of the teachers at individual school sites, what
worked at one school would not necessarily work at another. Therefore, teachers at each site
needed to discuss the problem of under-identification of their African American students and the
gap between the problem and solution.
The goal at the research site was to learn what knowledge, motivation, and organizational
structures teachers believed can improve gifted identification for African American students
from 0% to 5% by December 2017. Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s primary goal since the
2015-2016 school year had been that 100% of the African American students in the second and
fifth grades were assessed for the GATE program. From Spring 2017, the Raven Progressive
Matrices was replaced by the CogAT Form 7 (CogAT7) gifted assessment for second grade
students. The GATE site representative provided second grade teachers with parent permission
slips and the date of the assessment. Each year some African American parents refused to allow
their child to take the gifted assessment due to concerns these tests were for placement in special
education programs before state and district policies were changed in 2004 (Graves & Mitchell,
2011).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 50

Researchers agreed with the importance of improved gifted assessment instruments that
addressed the disparity in test results between African American and other groups though claims
that any one test can increase gifted identification for African American students have not been
conclusively proven due to faulty data collection, analysis methods, and school implementation
(Lewis, DeCamp-Fritson, Ramage, McFarland, & Archwamety, 2007; Lohman, 2005; Naglieri
& Ford, 2005) Warne, 2009). School leaders and teachers need to know which instructional
practices aligned with the knowledge measured by the organization’s gifted assessment to assist
African American students to achieve the performance goal (Lewis et al., 2007; Lohman, 2005;
Naglieri & Ford, 2005; Warne, 2009).
Stakeholder goal. Vitruvian Elementary School teachers want to improve the percentage
of identified gifted African American students from 0% to 5%, by the 2017-2018 school year.
Between 2015-2017, African Americans averaged 23% of the total population at the school yet
0% were identified for the school’s gifted program. Another equally important goal teachers
adopted from school’s Focus Plan was to practice a growth mind-set, a psychological construct
useful in education to promote teacher motivation to take risks and learn from mistakes (Heggart,
2015). Teachers then model a growth mind-set for African American students who often avoided
academic risks due to lack of self-confidence (Ford et al., 2011; Rueda, 2011; Siegle et al.,
2016). Clark and Estes (2008) suggested to engage stakeholders first with motivational
strategies, then organizational policy, and last provide the knowledge and skills needed to
prepare students for the gifted assessment to reach the improvement goal.
Assumed organizational influences. There are multiple reasons according to Clark and
Estes (2008) and Schein (2010) and Schneider, Brief, and Guzzo (1996) that explain
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 51

organizational influences on performance goals. Schein (2010) defined culture as, “a pattern of
shared basic assumptions learned by a group as it solved its problems” (Schein, 2010, p 18).
Schein (2010) discussed the meaning of culture through two broad categories: macro culture and
micro-cultures. Macro cultures, according to Schein (2010) focused on the culture of ethnic,
religious, and national groups. On the other hand, micro-cultures are defined as microsystems
such as the GATE program found within a school (Schein, 2010).
Schneider et al. (1996) discussed how organizations are made up of people and change
occurred when the people in those organizations changed as the climate of an organization was
determined by the performance goals set forth by the leadership and staff. Clark and Estes (2008)
and Kezar (2000) and Schneider et al. (1996) reported multiple frameworks that addressed how
available resources, policies, behaviors, and culture are influencers that prevented achievement
of performance goals. Schein (2010) and Schneider et al. (1996) and Kezar (2000) agreed that
effective organizational change occurred on many levels and suggested the use of multiple
strategies since culture within an organization is not as obvious and is imbedded deeply within
the beliefs and values an organization holds.
Cultural model. Clark and Estes (2008) and Schein (2010) discussed the often-hidden
dimension of culture within organizations based on the life experiences of the members of that
organization which influenced their beliefs, values, and attitudes in the workplace. Deficit
thinking, the belief that African American students and their families are the reason for their
academic deficiencies has been widely reported in the literature as a dimension of the cultural
models at schools (Ford, 2014; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Frye & Vogt, 2010; Hertzog, 2005)
Contributing factors to organizational ineffectiveness are the established policies and
practices that impeded change. School district policies and practices influenced school leadership
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 52

and other stakeholders, such as teachers to think, behave, and act in the context of those policies.
For example, the cultural model of the values and beliefs of an organization are reflected in what
the organization does with what is espoused in mission, value statements or other documents.
When goals and resources are provided for schools with higher gifted populations but not for
those with lower or none such as African American students at seven schools in the AUSD, the
organization’s message was gifted education at those schools was not important and teacher
focus beyond intervention education was not necessary (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011;
Schein, 2010; Schneider et al., 1996).
The school’s Focus Plan, similar to the district’s Strategic Plan included data on each
subgroup, except gifted students which prevented intentional change for identifying students of
color for gifted programs (Kezar, 2000). Kezar (2000) and Schein (2010) discussed theories of
culture that fear of exposed underlying beliefs, values, and behaviors operated among individuals
in organizations facing change initiatives. Kezar (2000) and Schein (2010) indicated that to
effect change leaders must make an intentional environment of trust and openness for difficult
conversations.
Other intentional change theories discussed by Kezar (2000) included sense-making such
as understanding gifted assessments, scientific management to develop incentives to encourage
behaviors toward the performance goal. Unintentional change theories such as evolutionary are
caused by outside forces such as budget shortfalls (Kezar, 2000). Institutional theories reflected
state and legislative policy changes such as equity and access indicators while life cycle theories
revealed how individuals and organizations are flexible to the natural flow of changes.
Development of an organizational culture focused on improved gifted identification for
African American students affords the leader multiple cultural theories to understand, utilize, and
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 53

support to successfully achieve the performance goal. (Clark & Estes, 2008; Kezar, 2000; Rueda,
2011; Schein, 2010; Schneider et al., 1996).
Teachers as the stakeholder group. Teachers reflected upon what knowledge/skills,
motivational, and organizational structures they need to determine if African American students
in their class have a learning or performance problem. Once the problem is determined, the right
solution to support improved gifted identification for these students can be implemented (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
Shaughnessy et al. (2014) stated that public schools are responsible to provide equity in
instruction for potentially gifted economically disadvantaged students because economically
advantaged students can buy enrichment learning. Direct engagement of leadership with
allocation of resources that support teachers to examine the underlying issues for improved
gifted identification for African American students promoted equitable academic opportunities
for these students (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2010).
Teacher discourse about race, deficit thinking, and micro-aggressions toward students of
color is an issue teacher needed to address to reach the performance goal from 0% to 5%
increased gifted identification for African American students. Teacher review and completion of
the TOGCF considered academic strengths and alternative categories of giftedness such as
creativity, leadership, and preforming arts of African American students (Ford, 2014; Harradine
et al., 2014).
Grubb (2011) indicated that teachers are reluctant to focus on an enriched instruction at
the expense of basic instruction for students in urban environments. Exposure to community
resources to build prior knowledge and to the classics within the literacy standards are the means
that Grubb (2011) contended teachers infuse enrichment within basic instruction. Teacher
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 54

knowledge and skill to integrate an enriched and challenging instruction within standards-based
instruction are issues to address increased identification for potentially gifted African American
students (Ford, 2010; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Kaplan, 2012; Krathwohl, 2002; Noble, 2004;
Romanoff et al., 2009).
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context

Merriam and Tisdell (2016) indicated the theoretical framework for a qualitative research
study strongly supported framing the problem statement within the area of interest. Gifted
education has been a fascination for this investigator since attendance at teacher certification
classes for gifted students. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explained their use of the term theoretical
over conceptual. The researchers stated that both terms, although used interchangeably by many
in the field, have differences. For example, Maxwell (2013) defined conceptual framework as the
theory of the problem statement. Maxwell (2013) continued that the literature review informed
the conceptual framework that is created by the student investigator. Both Maxwell (2013) and
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explained that the framework was a major part of the design of
qualitative research and included the concepts, theories, and gaps in the knowledge, skills,
motivational, and organizational structure of a research study (Clark & Estes, 2008). For the
purposes of this paper, the term conceptual framework will be used and included much of the
broader view of the term theoretical espoused by Merriam and Tisdell (2016).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 55

Figure 1. Under-identification and improvement conceptual model.

The influencers central to the problem statement of the under-identification of African
American students in gifted programs are knowledge, skills, motivation, and organization. The
intent of the conceptual framework design was to demonstrate the interconnectedness of these
influencers (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis improvement approach, the research questions focused on how to increase the gifted
identification of African American students at Vitruvian Prep Elementary from 0% to 5%.
Another research question related to what barriers existed for gifted identification of African
American students at the research site. Furthermore, the deductive method utilized the research
questions to discover answers based on the conceptual framework and a review of the literature
focused of the research (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Teachers as the stakeholder
group for this study were purposefully sampled with interviews and observations utilizing the
phenomenological method. Creswell (2014) discussed the phenomenological approach as one in
Teacher Competence
Enriched Curriculum
Instructional Design
Motivational Strategies
Teacher Observation
Checklist Perceptions
Culturally Responsive
Instruction
Increased
Identification
Bloom's Taxonomy
Increased Memory
Retention
Student Engagement
Teacher Observation
Checklist Strengths
Equity Minded
Under-identification
Remedial/Standard
Instruction
Limited Memory
Retention
Lack of Student
Engagement
Teacher Observation
Checklist Weaknesses
Deficit Thinking
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 56

which a concept was explored with stakeholders to determine how to resolve the problem of
practice.
Conclusion
The purpose of this project was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the knowledge,
skills, motivational and organizational influences that interfere with the under-representation of
African American students in gifted programs. The analysis began by generating a list of
possible or assumed interfering influences and then by examining these systematically to focus
on actual or validated interfering influences. While a complete gap analysis would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholders to be focused on in this analysis are the
teachers at the research site. Through a qualitative approach using a phenomenological method,
teachers as the stakeholder group are offered the opportunity to be interviewed, observed in their
classrooms, to self-reflect about the knowledge, motivational, and organizational barriers and
solutions for increased identification of African American students for gifted programs from 0%
to 5%.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 57

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
In this research study, the method chosen to address the identified problem is the Clark
and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework. Interviews, observations, and document analysis, are
the three methods of data collection for the study. As the qualitative data is collected and coded,
careful analysis was performed aligned with best practices used successfully by qualitative
researchers (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The research questions and conceptual framework inform the data collection and phases
of analysis. The remainder of Chapter Three includes the criterion for the selection of the
stakeholder group, teachers and sampling of teachers for the observation and interview methods.
Protocols for each of the research methods are discussed with attention to the tools and methods
used by investigators (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Findings and
recommendations based on the data collected and analyzed are then discussed in Chapter Four.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group for the study are the teachers at Vitruvian Prep Elementary
School. There are 12 certificated teachers with a total of seven classes in grades ETK through 5
th

grade. The focus of the study are the seven certificated classroom teachers at Vitruvian Prep.
Though there are several qualitative approaches, the investigator determined that the
phenomenological approach works best since the concept of giftedness has been experienced
directly or indirectly by teachers in the school district. Creswell (2014) and Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) informed that phenomenological research is based on philosophy that gets to the core
beliefs about a topic. At the same time Creswell (2014) and Maxwell (2013) stressed the
psychological aspect of phenomenological research and how participants react to their beliefs,
values, and personal experience with giftedness. Other qualitative research approaches include
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 58

grounded theory based on sociology, ethnography, based on both anthropology and sociology,
and case studies which use data collection methods over a longer period (Creswell, 2014). Per
Creswell (2014), the phenomenological approach was designed to work best for 3-10 participants
which fits well with the 12 certificated teachers at Vitruvian Prep. The criteria for selection of
the teachers for the study was that they be certificated teachers with a class at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary School with African American students in their classrooms.
Research Study Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Up to seven certificated teachers were asked to participate in the study. The
rationale as researched by Moon and Brighton (2008) and Hargrove and Seay (2011) indicated
that teachers have daily interaction with students and therefore are in a position to have
perspectives on barriers and suggestions to improve gifted identification for African American
students.
Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
All 12 certificated teachers were informed of the study with seven certificated classroom
teachers specifically asked to consider participation in the study. Included in the personal
presentation to each teacher was information about the study, its benefits and drawbacks to them,
and interview, observation, and document/artifact data collection methods used. The IRB policy
for confidentiality, ethics, and integrity of data collection by the investigator was discussed and
questions asked and answered to best of the investigator’s ability (Creswell, 2014; Merriam &
Tisdell (2016).
Creswell (2014) recommended a check with professional associations, such as the
Western State Teacher Association for teacher code of ethics which recommended teachers
respect the confidentiality of other teachers and students. Glesne (2015) discussed how code of
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 59

ethics was imbedded within everyday relationships with study participants. When IRB approval
was secured, a letter was provided to all eligible certificated teachers which explained their rights
to engage or not engage at any time before or during the study.
The rationale to choose seven teachers aligned with Creswell (2014) and Maxwell’s
(2013) contention that three to ten participants for phenomenological studies are accepted
investigative practice to collect enough data before saturation of data occurs. For practical
purposes, there may be teacher participants who decided before or later to drop out for any
reason and then are replaced with any of the five remaining certificated teachers. Also, the seven
classroom teachers were the focus of the study due to their daily interactions with African
American students. When IRB approval was finalized, interviews, observations, and document
collection began immediately from late August 2017 through September 2017. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) discussed several types of purposeful sampling that included sample and
convenience sampling, the latter of which included sampling participants within proximity of the
research investigator which is the case for this study.
Interview Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Certificated Teachers with a classroom (seven teachers). All classroom
teachers at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School have African American students. Classroom
teachers interacted daily with students and provided daily instruction. Classroom teachers were
in a unique position to comment on the KMO barriers to improved gifted identification for
African American students.
Observation Convenience Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Criterion 1. Seven classroom teachers were observed because classroom teachers
engaged with African American students on a daily basis and during multiple subjects and
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 60

therefore were in a unique position to provide information about these students. Maxwell (2013)
and Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña (2013) discussed the conceptual framework as the anchor for
the key ideas of the research. Direct observation of teacher instruction and interaction with
African American students supported the ideas presented in the conceptual framework and the
literature review. Informal observational notes about conversations between teachers about
African American students and teacher’s interactions with African American students related to
the research questions, conceptual framework, and literature review was gathered as well.
Multiple methods of data collection supported varying viewpoints about the concept of
giftedness which in turn provided for a more robust discussion about the topic as it related to
African American students (Maxwell, 2013).
Observation Convenience Sampling Access Strategy and Rationale
Teachers had already expressed support for being observed up to an hour during the
school day. The school leader was provided the same information as the teachers with an
opportunity to ask questions and review any concerns during a June and August 2017 meeting.
Glesne (2015) discussed how qualitative investigators provided participants with how benefits
outweigh risks. The concern about how and when to enter teacher classrooms was addressed as
the principal reviewed the study’s aim to research how to improve gifted identification for
African American students. The principal asked questions, received answers to the best of the
investigator’s ability and suggested timeframes to facilitate observations in teacher classrooms
for up to an hour.
A school schedule with recess, lunch, and other scheduling was provided to the
investigator in August 2017 with a calendar to enter observation dates and times. The principal
and teachers were asked to read and sign the provided informed consent forms per IRB
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 61

guidelines and policy before any classroom was entered. Teachers asked consent forms to be sent
by e-mail for time to read and sign, then prepared for the investigator on the day of the
observation. Extra printed consent forms were available in case teachers forgot, misplaced, or
were unable to print one out which happened in five of seven cases. In those cases, the
investigator provided time for teachers to read the consent form and ask any questions.
Permission for the dates and times of the observation were based upon teacher and investigator
agreement through August 31, 2017. School protocol included sign-in at the office, securing a
visitor’s badge, and reviewing the list of teacher visits for that day. Two classes were visited
each of four days to allow for writing reflective notes immediately after each observation.
An updated copy of teacher schedules was requested at the time of scheduling to allow
for efficient changes of observation appointments if needed. A follow-up e-mail was provided to
teachers and staff at least two days before each observation to remind about, the observation
time, consent form, and re-scheduling which was not needed as all seven classroom teachers
approved and were ready for the observation. An updated copy of teacher schedules was
requested at the time of scheduling to allow for efficient changes of observation appointments if
needed.
Research Questions
1. What are the knowledge, skills, motivational, and organizational barriers to improved
identification for African American students for the gifted program at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary School?
2. How can gifted identification for African Americans students be improved from the
current 0% to 5% at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School?
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 62

Data Collection and Instrumentation
For each of the two data collection methods informed consent was requested and secured
from participants and the IRB reviewed and approved the study. Three collection methods was
used to address the two research questions. First, an examination of 2015-2016, and available
data from 2016-2017, 2017-2018 school and district documents related to gifted identification
rates, district and state assessments, district and school equity indicator goals, and any other
documents related to the research questions and conceptual framework. Data from these
documents was utilized to triangulate with data from the interviews and observations.
Triangulation of data methods provided the investigator with different sources to compare or
contrast what was reported within each data method used (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Observation, the second method, included one observation of 60 minutes for each of the
seven certificated teachers. These observations were expected to occur over a four-day period
with two observations per day for three days and one on the fourth day. When the primary dates
were confirmed, they were given to the school manager for the school’s master calendar viewed
by the principal and staff daily to monitor schedules. The purpose of the observations was to take
descriptive field notes related to the research questions and capture the personal encounter
teachers have with African American students. A designated note-pad with pens was used for
descriptive note-taking. Teachers were thanked before leaving each classroom with a note on
their desk and an off-campus location used to immediately record reflections (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016; Maxwell, 2013).
The third method, interviews, contained seven questions designed to get teachers’
answers related to the research questions for their responses to both barriers and solutions to
improved gifted identification for African American students from 0% to 5% at Vitruvian Prep.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 63

Qualitative researchers recommended triangulation of multiple methods of data collection to
increase validity and reliability of qualitative research studies. (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts were used by the research investigator to review information that
was at the research site before and during the collection of data. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
discussed five types which are public records, personal documents, popular culture documents,
visual documents, and artifacts. Public and personal documents were the most commonly used
for this research study. Informed consent was provided for any individual that had access to
personal and sensitive documents needed for the research study. The IRB form protects the
human rights of participants, including investigator use of data about students (Creswell, 2014).
The school leader of the school site agreed to provide documents related to the two research
questions, conceptual framework, and literature review and formatted to protect student and
teacher information as applicable. All documentation was used for research purposes only and
protected from abuse by IRB policy.
Public documents included federal, state, school district, reports such as the Local
Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP), Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
scores, and district committee documents such as the GATE and Equity and Access Advisory
committee agendas and recommendations. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) funds
eight state priorities, including goals for equity and access for historically under-served students
and was available as a public document to review. The LCAP was the school district’s
performance goals plan that received LCFF funds to achieve selected goals and was also
analyzed for relevance to the research questions and conceptual framework. Vitruvian Prep’s
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 64

School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA), School Focus Plan and any documents related to
SBAC scores and the GATE program and identification rates were reviewed.
Observation
Teachers were asked to allow the investigator to observe them during instruction of
students, given informed consent forms which they all did and provided specific dates and times
that worked for their schedule between in August 2017. Teachers were reminded of their
observation up to two days before and given the opportunity to ask questions and opt out of the
research study at any time. All seven certificated teachers were observed teaching.
As a participant-observer, a challenge emerged to work with participants while observing
them for research purposes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Teachers for the study were given the
option to opt out at any time and informed about the informal observations that may occur
outside the classroom such as on the playground, in the cafeteria, auditorium, and other locations
where they interacted with students. For these purposes, a smaller notebook to observe and
record anecdotal teacher interactions specifically with African American students outside the
classroom that related to the research questions was utilized.
The benefits of participation in the study were conveyed to teachers as it related to the
research questions and 0%- 5% performance goal for African American students identified for
gifted programs and approved by the school leader. Each classroom teacher’s observation was
completed in an hour by August 31, 2017. Notebook pads with pens were used to take notes of
observational descriptions, quotations of teacher and students, and investigator comments
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A cellphone timer set to vibrate was used to manage time at 15-20-
minute increments during the observation lesson with reflective notes written after each
observation off-campus was fulfilled for each of the seven teachers observed.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 65

The area of focus was the teacher’s interaction with all students with specific attention to
interactions with African American students, how instruction was delivered, and students were
engaged with that instruction. Before, during, and after the observation, relationships with
teachers were developed and enhanced to promote trust (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
observation protocol (See Appendix A), included use of a notebook, pen, and research questions
to remind about the purpose of the observation (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Time
was marked every fifteen to twenty minutes to reflect and write quick notes about what had been
observed. Amongst the three options of verbatim, paraphrase, and summary notes, paraphrased
and summary notes best captured the investigator’s descriptive and reflective observations
during and after each observation (Bogden & Biklen, 2007).
Interviews
Interviews are defined by Merriam and Tisdell (2016) as a means of data collection for
qualitative research. The intent of the interview was to ask questions that probed teachers’
knowledge, motivation, and organizational models for the barriers and solutions to improved
gifted identification for African American students at Vitruvian Prep Elementary School.
Discussion of the research study, informed consent provided and received from each teacher, use
of a voice tracer recorder to transcribe after, and focus on asking good questions were important
steps in the interview process. For this study seven certificated classroom teachers at Vitruvian
Prep were chosen based on informed consent and their daily interactions with African American
students. The advantage of interviewing teachers as a participant-observer was that of an insider
to the culture and language of the educational setting. It was a potential disadvantage if teachers
were reluctant to freely express their answers with a colleague in the educational profession.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 66

Choosing the type of interview to conduct research was important as there were three
main formats: highly structured, semi-structured, and unstructured. Highly structured interviews
are those that have prescribed questions, semi-structured have some prescribed questions and
other open-ended questions, while unstructured allowed greater flexibility to probe more deeply
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The focal point for all three types of interviews was to produce good
questions that addressed the conceptual framework and research questions.
Interviewees were first asked structured questions related to their educational background
and proceeded with semi-structured and open-ended questions that allowed for thoughtful and
detailed answers. The initial background questions were provided and allowed a relaxed
environment for teachers to express information about themselves before delving into
cognitively demanding questions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Creswell, 2014). With the permission
of the teachers interviewed a voice tracer connected to the investigator’s laptop was utilized to
capture teachers’ answers, then later listened to and transcribed for analysis. Teachers were
offered a copy of the transcript as a member check for accuracy and any comments.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed four broad groups of questions and six types that
each has a job to do for the qualitative researcher. The four categories included, hypothetical,
devil’s advocate, ideal position, and interpretive questions while the six types of questions
related to experience and behavior, opinion and values, feelings, knowledge, and background
questions. The open-ended questions included at least three of the four categories and five of the
six types with follow-up questions that probed teachers’ answers more deeply as related to the
conceptual framework and research questions. Since interviews were after school and proposed
for up to one hour each teacher determined the timeframe by their answers during the interview
and for some, informal discussion with anecdotal notes taken after the formal interview
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 67

concluded. The school leader designated the room used for a quiet and confidential meeting.
With a Do Not Disturb, Interview in Progress sign posted on the door before the interview began
and taken down when it concluded distractions were minimized and eliminated.
Data Analysis
For the three methods of interviews, observations, and document and artifact collection
data analysis began during data collection. Analytic memos provided initial thoughts, reflections,
and some questions after each interview, observation, and document was collected and written
about in a separate writing portfolio pad for this purpose.
After each interview was completed and participant thanked, reflections were noted in a
writing portfolio to capture the immediate nuance and tone of the interview as soon after as
possible. The recording of the interview was listened to before transcription and notes taken.
After each transcription, the interview is read, notes taken, and phases of analysis conducted to
determine the findings and recommendations from the data analysis. Maxwell (2013) suggested
qualitative investigators develop ideas about the data and organize it as it is collected. In the first
phase of analysis, open coding including empirical and in-vivo codes were captured using an
excel file and headings related to the research and interview questions. Then as typicality
indicated by repeated codes occurred, the second phase of analysis developed the repetitive
codes into axial codes that were formed based on the topic of the research study. In the third
phase of data analysis, patterns were developed that identified themes which were the findings
that emerged to answer the research questions. The fourth and last phase of data analysis
included the findings of the study and recommendations based on the findings proposed to
address the two research questions (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2016; Merriam & Tisdell, 2013).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 68

Before each observation and interview began, the research, questions were reviewed by
the investigator that formulated a plan for what to observe and prepare to ask for the interview
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Practical considerations were the layout of the room, including
access to plugs for the laptop, nearby restrooms, lighting, adult seating, and an uncluttered
environment that prevented distractions for the interviews. An observation template was created
and used during the observations to take observational notes and any reflective notes or
questions. Another notebook was used to record reflective notes as soon after each observation
as possible. (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A writing pad using pens was also taken to allow space
for drawing the layout of the classroom.
Documents and artifacts were analyzed for evidence consistent with the concepts in the
conceptual framework. Public documents interpreted by the school district such as state
assessment scores and non-public documents such as district assessment scores, gifted
assessment and identification information, Review 360 software management discipline data,
were requested from the school leader, and informed consent provided to access for research
purposes. These documents were categorized into what Maxwell (2013) labeled organizational
topics such as types of knowledge, motivation, and organizational structures. Maxwell (2013)
continued that qualitative investigators used data analysis strategies beyond organizing by topics
such as disaggregating knowledge into procedural and conceptual descriptions. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) stated the value of document and artifact collection allowed the investigator to
view the history and changes over time of an organization. Information from these research
neutral documents and artifacts were viewed from the lens of the conceptual framework and the
research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 69

Credibility and Trustworthiness
For each of the three data collection methods, interview, observation, and
document/artifact collection, a research-based protocol was utilized. Creswell (2014) discussed
general and specific designs that researchers used for qualitative research. For example, Creswell
(2014) emphasized that qualitative research included a sample to study, a method of data
collection and writing about the data collected. Research by Creswell (2014) and Maxwell
(2013) and Merriam and Tisdell (2016) discussed the varied writing structures used for
qualitative research. Maxwell (2013) stated that the questions that frame the study are critical for
the literature review while the literature review often determined how others viewed the
importance of the selected topic.
For the study about the under-identification of African American students in gifted
programs, there was a plethora of literature, a good start that began the research. Use of
Creswell’s (2014) checklist of steps to design a qualitative study such as use of multiple sources
of data that included interviews, observations, and document and artifact collection were used for
this study. Multiple sources, also called triangulation, acted as a check on each other for finding
themes related to the research questions. Triangulation assisted with development and
maintenance for the credibility of the research. This in turn required adherence to specific
methods and characteristics of qualitative research which Creswell (2014) and Miles et al. (2014)
indicated were important characteristics for research credibility such as the notes, reflections, and
recordings of the researcher. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) and Slayton (2016) reviewed the
importance of developing personal relationships with study participants while learning what and
what not to say to participants. The more self-reflective an investigator was about the about the
materials collected, the higher the trustworthiness of the data collected.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 70

Triangulation of data supported the credibility and trustworthiness of the qualitative
research design for this study as the interviews gave perspective on the past, observations were
about the present, and document analysis about the past, present, and sometimes future
information. (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013).
Validity and Reliability
The validity and reliability of this qualitative research study was enhanced by the
attention given to the ethical practices of methods utilized (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Merriam
and Tisdell (2016) and Creswell (2014) recommended several strategies useful for qualitative
research that this investigator found helpful for checking the validity and reliability of data
collected which included triangulation that provided different perspectives of participants using
different data methods related to the same research questions. Member checks to confirm with
participants that the data collected was accurate such as with interview transcripts and clarifying
questions from observation notes. Research investigation took the necessary time to collect
enough data until no new information was forthcoming known as saturation of data (Creswell,
2014; Maxwell, 2013). Self-reflection by the investigator especially for potential bias in
relationship to the study was frequently revisited. Collaboration with research colleagues about
the data collection methods and findings from those methods supported the focus on the research
questions and conceptual framework. Management of the data in a way that allowed for accurate
coding with rich data collection notes assisted with the write-up of the findings for the study.
However, Maxwell (2013) argued that some of the above strategies are generic and not
useful unless the investigator utilized the strategies though agreed with triangulation of multiple
sources and collecting substantial data until saturation. Maxwell (2013) included intervention as
a strategy to support the improvement purpose of a study and look for the negative case about the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 71

study. In this way, investigators discover errors in their own interpretation of the data or a desire
to prove something that is not apparent in the data. Besides potential data bias, the researcher’s
personal background and reasons for the study are explored to counter any bias in the collection
and analysis of the data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Creswell, 2014).
Ethics
Infused within all data collection and analysis of data are the ethics and integrity of the
investigator and research methods. IRB policy, informed consent of participants, and the
research method protocols and strategies added to the credibility, trustworthiness, validity, and
reliability of the investigator and research study.
Per Creswell (2014), there are critical steps before beginning a research study that
included an examination of the code of ethics for one’s own professional organization such as
the Western State Standards and Code of Ethics for the Teaching Profession for certificated
teachers. The six teaching standards are integrated within teacher evaluation forms to determine
teacher obligation with state, district, and school standards and guidelines for the instructional
and cultural care of students.
Then as the investigator for the study a research plan was reviewed by the IRB to check
for any potential risk to teachers or students at the study site. Within the investigator’s
introductory letter about the study, potential risks and benefits were provided, concerns and
questions answered personally, and informed consent explained. Creswell (2014) and Maxwell
(2013) discussed the importance to get permission for the study, select a study that is ideally
separate from one’s own workspace, and be aware of and recognize the contributions of others to
the dissertation. The school leader gave permission for the study and as a participant-observer at
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 72

the research site the research study had established guidelines per IRB policy to conduct the
investigation.
Limitations and Delimitations
Administrators, teachers, and students must trust the information provided for the study
was treated with confidentiality and protected in a safe and secure location while on and off
campus (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). One challenge of this study was the investigator
performed professional duties as an employee of the school district while adhering to the ethical
responsibility of an investigator to maintain the trust developed from established relationships.
Another challenge for the investigator was to balance personal advocacy for the research study
with the ethical obligation to follow research method protocols to collect, analyze, and report
findings based on the phases of analysis. Creswell (2014) stated that research within the
organization’s work environment was not the optimum situation though guidelines existed for
the investigator and most important were the relationships of trust established and transparency
provided to participants per IRB policy.
In full disclosure, the African American race of the investigator matters because of
attendance at a similar type of elementary school that educated African American students in a
similar urban school environment with a non-functioning gifted program. Teachers were asked to
nominate their highest ability African American student based on multiple academic assessments
to send to another school with White students which had an established gifted program. The
further goal was to include one academically high performing African American student from
each of the area’s five elementary schools with majority African American students to begin to
integrate the majority White school. The next step was to prepare African American students for
the gifted only class by each student in the highest ranked non-gifted class for a few months to
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 73

review our skills and work habits. Teacher observation and recommendation were required for
transfer to the gifted only class which led to middle and high school advanced classes and
preparation for college, for which I am grateful and may never have considered without the
challenge of the gifted program.
Connor and Baglieri (2009, p. 347) suggested the school culture of schools with high
percentages of African American students may have been influenced by “master scripting,” in
the form of a pedagogy that provided remedial rather than rigorous instruction to students. Due
to educational policies for school integration at the time, a transfer to the White school did lead
to a rigorous, challenging and enriched education. The question of why schools with majority
African American students did not have gifted programs or a similar level of instruction and
teacher expectations for students as the White school troubled the investigator. As an educator
who taught at both academically high- and lower-performing schools, differences were noticed
in how African American students performed academically in each educational setting. An
increased interest to provide equity and access for African American students in gifted programs
at their local urban school propelled interest for this topic. Bensimon et al. (2007) discussed the
term equity-mindedness as a construct that among several indicators was an educator that
worked to eliminate inequality in educational outcomes for students of color. An equity-minded
educator views disaggregated data by race for awareness of inequities and then seeks the
knowledge, motivational, and organizational strategies needed to address the complex issue of
improved equity and access of African American students in gifted programs (Bensimon et al.,
2007).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 74

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to explore teachers’ experiences with the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational systems in order to learn what gaps teachers identified related to
the first research question. Also, the intent was to discover what teachers’ see as solutions to
improve gifted identification for African American students from 0% to 5% at Vitruvian Prep.
Due to federal, state, and AUSD’s increased interest in equity and access for African American
students in rigorous academic programs, teachers were the stakeholder group of focus.
A review of the literature reported that teachers are most able to recognize, prepare, and
refer students for gifted identification as a prerequisite to placement in gifted programs. The first
three chapters of this dissertation included an introduction to the problem of under-identification
of African American students in gifted programs, and a review of the literature detailed the
research on this topic. A qualitative phenomenological research design was chosen for this study.
In this chapter, the findings derived from the data are anchored by the aforementioned
conceptual framework.
Data Collection for Phenomenological Study
The findings for each theme that emerged from the data are presented separately within
this chapter. Each of the three methodologies employed are presented within the KMO
framework. Themes were reviewed, coded, and analyzed utilizing both a traditional step-by-step
process and NVivo technology software results deemed acceptable for use in qualitative research
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; NVivo, 2017; Saldaña, 2013).
Vitruvian Prep, its surrounding community, academic assessment and gifted
identification scores, with attention to African American students, are provided (AUSD gifted
assessment data notes, October 2016; Vitruvian Prep assessment data notes, August 2016). Then,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 75

information about teachers’ experience, racial and educational background, including GATE
certification training, are provided (AUSD website notes, 2016-2107). After that, a brief
description of the physical structure of the school and introductions to the each of the seven
teachers, using pseudonyms to protect their identity, are provided. Finally, the
phenomenological, or lived, experiences of participants are provided to answer the first research
question regarding existing barriers and the second research question regarding improvement to
reach the organizational goal.
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School and Surrounding Community
Vitruvian Prep is one of the least populated schools in the medium-sized AUSD located
in an urban city with most schools reflective of the racial and income composition of their
surrounding neighborhoods. Vitruvian Prep, though in a diverse community of an estimated 55%
Hispanic, 20% African American, and 20% White residents, had a student population that was
Hispanic (70%) and African American (25%) in 2016 (Vitruvian Prep, 2016). These rates
indicate that eligible students were choosing to attend other schools. Socioeconomically, 80% of
the school’s neighborhood had a median income above the poverty line, while 20% were below
the poverty line and reflected in the 86% of Vitruvian Prep students who qualified for free or
reduced-price lunch (Census American Community Survey, 2017; Vitruvian Prep SARC data
notes, June 2016). In addition, 29% of students are English learners, 13% receive special
education services, 5% are foster youth, and 5% are identified as gifted (Vitruvian Prep SARC
student data notes, June 2016). Unlike state assessment data, available publicly, GATE data were
not included on the SARC or any of Vitruvian Prep’s publicly available school documentation.
Instead, GATE information was requested and received from the school principal (Vitruvian
Prep, 2015, 2016, 2017).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 76

As shown in Table 3, the results of the SBAC showed that 29% of students were
proficient in English language arts and 22% were proficient in math (Vitruvian Prep SARC
student data notes, 2016). A closer view of the data disaggregated by race revealed that African
American students scored below the majority Hispanic student population. Achievement gaps are
indicated between students of color and White students, but the SBAC did not calculate for the
school’s White population because there were fewer than 10 White students who took the SBAC
assessment.
Table 3
2016–2017 Percent of Vitruvian Prep SBAC Proficient Students and Percent of Students GATE
Identified
Percent English Proficiency Percent Math Proficiency Percent GATE Identified
All Students 29% All Students 22% All Students 5%
Hispanic Students 34% Hispanic Students 26% Hispanic Students 5%
African American
Students 16%
African American
Students 13%
African American
Students 0%
Note. Vitruvian Prep SBAC and GATE assessment results, 2016-2017.
Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s Teacher Composition
Vitruvian Prep’s teachers are divided by primary grades from ETK through second grade
and by upper elementary grades third through fifth. There were two teachers from primary and
five teachers from upper elementary included in the study. The average number of years teaching
was 14 with the average number of years teaching at Vitruvian Prep was eight as of 2017.
Educationally, five of the seven teachers held both a bachelor’s and a master’s degree while two
teachers held a bachelor’s degree with some completed graduate coursework.
Teachers’ gender, racial, and ethnic composition, Figure 2 indicates the ethnic and
racial make-up of the certificated (licensed) teachers. Twenty-seven percent are African
American, 36% Hispanic, 18% are White, and 18% Asian. Though 100% of the teaching staff
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 77

including the teachers recruited for the study were female, the significance became the
recruitment of a racially and ethnically diverse group of teachers to collect data that represented
a variety of professional and rich answers within the context of teachers’ lived and cultural
experiences.

Figure 2. The ethnic and racial make-up of the teachers interviewed at Vitruvian Prep
Elementary. Source: Vitruvian Prep Dashboard, 2016-2017.

Teacher GATE certification status and educational background. Of the seven
teachers interviewed, two were in progress for re-certification and five others were not certified.
Among AUSD’s 2016 GATE project proposal recommendations was to increase teacher GATE
certification district-wide by 5% to support teachers in differentiating instruction for students in
GATE programs. GATE certification training included GATE teaching standards, Kaplan’s
depth and complexity model and differentiated instruction with depth, complexity, novelty and
acceleration for high ability, creative, and gifted students (AUSD, website notes, 2015-2017;
Kaplan, 2012; NAGC, 2015).
Two of the seven teachers had a bachelor’s degree in Early Childhood Development, two
in Reading, one in Human Development, another in Childhood Development, and the seventh
teacher was in the performing arts. Five of seven teachers had a master’s degree which included
two degrees in Reading, one in Early Childhood Development, another in Education, and the
27%
18%
36%
18%
African
American
Teachers
Asian Teachers Hispanic
Teachers
White Teachers
Racial/Ethnic Percentage of Vitruvian Prep
Teachers
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 78

fifth in Design-Based Learning. The ETK-second grade teachers were a primary team of the
same four teachers for the previous two years with three of the four teachers teaching a different
grade three years ago. The third-fifth grade upper elementary team included five teachers, two of
whom were replacements and one other teacher in a different upper elementary grade within the
prior two years. As a phenomenological study, the lived experiences of teachers including GATE
certification training status, subject matter academic background, and grade placement were
likely to inform teacher responses to the research questions (Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Summary of Interview Method
Findings obtained from AUSD documents served as a backdrop to the interviews and
observations. For this study’s focus, seven questions were asked with follow-up probe questions
included as respondents’ answers dictated. Seven teachers were interviewed for an average of
about 37 minutes per interview. A voice tracer was utilized to capture interviewees’ answers, and
recordings were downloaded onto a secure computer as MP3 files. These were later transcribed
from the recordings. Each transcription was read once for initial reflective notes and several
more times to code for typicality, categories, and themes related to the conceptual framework
and research questions. Observations of each of the seven participants lasted an average of 60
minutes each. Reflective notes were written immediately after each observation, and codes were
developed from both the observational and interview notes. Interview and observation data
collection occurred over a one-month period, and participants had the opportunity to review their
transcripts for accuracy. A description of each teacher’s classroom is presented below to
introduce each of the seven participants.
Participants taught one of the primary grades between ETK through second and upper
primary grades between third through fifth. Two of seven teachers at Vitruvian Prep had
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 79

experience teaching both primary and upper primary grades within the past three years. During
the interviews, most participants indicated they had retained their current teaching assignment
for the previous two or three years. The importance of teacher grade level experiences was that
gifted assessments were, until Spring, 2017 given primarily for second and fifth grade students
with program implementation expected between third and fifth grades. If teachers had varied
grade level experiences, they were potentially more familiar with gifted identification and
programming. The seven teachers were named Amboise, Interes, Piza, Tuscany, Ermine, Roc,
and Nota; all pseudonym names to protect their identities.
Summary of Interview and Observation Method
The findings are presented with documentation integrated with interviews and
observations. Interview transcriptions were also uploaded to NVivo, a software program
designed to aid management of rich textual interview and observational memo data (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2011; NVivo, 2017). Observations were 60 minutes long, as those observed revert to
their regular patterns after the first 15 to 20 minutes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2011). Participants
were able to opt out of the research at any time. During the observations, descriptive notes were
added at 15-minute intervals to maintain connection with the research questions.
Research Questions
Teacher experiences related to the following two research questions anchored in the
conceptual framework and inform data and analysis:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers to improved gifted
identification from 0% to 5% for African American students in gifted programs?
2. How do teachers view their role to improve identification of African American students
from 0% to 5% in gifted programs?
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 80

Teachers’ Perceptions of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Barriers
Though all three methods informed the two research questions, the first research question
was addressed first. An examination of the data collected from the lived experiences of seven
teachers revealed three major themes related to the KMO model and as barriers to improved
gifted identification for African American students: gifted identification methods, mindsets, and
learning environment. Student names presented throughout the findings are pseudonyms to
protect the identity of students and used to enhance the study’s narrative.
Knowledge Barriers
Factual knowledge. Participants’ factual knowledge responses about the GATE program
at Vitruvian Prep included those of four teachers who said they did not know anything about the
program, such as Piza who stated, “I don't much about it.” Amboise relayed, “Not sure, but not
focused on GATE.” Tuscany said, “I don’t know anything.” Ermine paused as she answered, “To
be honest with you, I don't know too much about it.” Two other teachers, Roc and Interes
summarized that second and fifth graders were assessed every year while Nota stated there was a
GATE program “in progress at this school.” Of interest was that two participants gave the Spring
2017 revised CogAT7 gifted assessment, the last time both second and fifth graders were
assessed as the usual Fall (2017) assessment was reduced to providing access to only second
graders and students listed as new to the district (AUSD GATE Advisory Meeting Notes, June
2017).
From 2012 to 2015, per documentation from AUSD and Vitruvian Prep, all schools were
provided with the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices Gifted Assessment for second graders
and the CogAT Form 6 for fifth graders during an annual one-week testing window. Test
booklets were used, erased, and reused due to limited funding until 2013-2014 when LCFF
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 81

became the funding source and states allowed districts with stakeholder input to use monies
based on district priorities. The result was a purchase of an online gifted assessment system with
the revised CogAT7 installed first for second and fifth graders in Spring 2017 and access for
students referred by teachers from other grades. At Vitruvian Prep, those were students new to
the district. CogAT7 was created by Lohman (2011) to assess knowledge students acquired from
class and their own level of abstract thinking. Ermine reflected on the experience of giving the
Spring 2017 assessment and how students responded:
I think it was too much for them – the computer test and [previous] paper and pen [test].
Just getting it going was a big issue. A lot of the kids, even though we did the parts, a lot
of the kids were getting bored. It was mostly lots of pictures. Some kids were into it and
some it was too boring for them and they could not handle it.
Procedural knowledge. Procedural knowledge, the second of four knowledge
dimensions, focused on the identification method process such as how students are selected for
identification. Interes and Roc provided their experiences of the process: “Students are assessed
in second and fifth grades,” and “Children are identified in second grade.” Procedural knowledge
can be embedded within factual and conceptual knowledge. Three participants spoke of the test
given annually, indicating that factual and procedural knowledge about the assessment was
limited to teachers who either gave the assessment in 2015 or 2017 or had been involved in
GATE certification training. The test was not given in Fall 2016 due to the change to the online
platform and instead given in Spring 2017 and the normal cycle in Fall 2017.
For example, during the Spring 2017 and Fall 2017 semesters, when the revised and
online CogAT7 was given to second and fifth graders and then only second graders respectively,
school documentation listed the word GATE twice, once for the time of the GATE site
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 82

representative meeting at the school district and another time for one GATE parent advisory
meeting, which was cancelled because, as the GATE site representative stated, “The district said
we have too few GATE students, so we don’t need to have parent meetings” (Vitruvian Prep,
2016, 2017). In contrast, state SBAC testing was mentioned in over 12 documents in several
locations for third, fourth, and fifth grade teachers giving the test (Vitruvian Prep, 2016, 2017).
Lack of attention and promotion of gifted program identification methods was a barrier to
improved identification for African American students in gifted programs because the cultural
model framework was such that gifted education was not as valued, affecting teacher knowledge
about the process.
Conceptual knowledge. Conceptual knowledge, the third knowledge dimension
proposed by Clark and Estes (2008), provided the underlying theory and principles of an area of
study such as gifted identification methods and knowledge of gifted characteristics. Gifted and
potentially gifted students exhibited several gifted characteristics related to their high
participation in academic competitions such as the ability to see relationships and make
connections, intense concentration needed to complete assignments for the event, enjoyment of
intelligent risk-taking, expression of original ideas, and creativeness to put ideas together in
novel ways referred to among several researchers (Dalia & Gagne, 2013; Vitruvian Prep, 2017).
Besides the gifted assessment, teachers were required to complete the Teacher
Observation of Gifted Characteristics Form (TOGCF) for every student assessed for giftedness.
Teacher conceptual understanding of positive gifted characteristics supported their perceptions of
gifted and potentially gifted students. Often, understanding gifted characteristics for under-
represented students becomes a barrier when positive characteristics, such as intelligent risk-
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 83

taking, are interpreted as deliberately defiant risk-taking (Arizona Department of Education, n.a.;
AUSD GATE meeting notes, September 2017; Ford, 2013).
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge is the ability to self-reflect and
monitor the progress of that reflection through planning and adjustment of that planning toward
stated goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Amboise addressed ambivalence about the
role GATE education had at Vitruvian Prep when she said, “I recognize different types of
intelligences and provide challenge for students but do not observe a strong district focus about
GATE.” Amboise’s perspective recognized types of intelligences common to two categories of
giftedness for high intellectual and specific academic ability. Multiple intelligences theory
provided teachers with a variety of teaching strategies to use for different learning styles.
Interes stated, “I learned to use depth and complexity icons,” a gifted education teaching
method designed to encourage high ability, creative, and gifted students to use their high
capacity for learning to interrelate lesson components to acquire the larger, global view of the
subject as experts do (Kaplan, 1996). Gifted program and identification methods were barriers
teachers expressed that impede improvement of African American in gifted programs when
students were provided these methods without context, interest, or relevance to their cultural
identity (Ford, 1995; Ford, 2015; Moon & Brighton, 2008; Palmer, 2010; Zhbanova, Rule,
Sticher, 2015).
Gifted program knowledge dimensions were validated as a barrier to improved gifted
identification for African American students indicated by some teachers indicated they knew
little or nothing about the gifted program, and this lack of knowledge indirectly affected answers
to all other questions, which reported that gifted program opportunity existed because AUSD
provided an annual assessment. Teachers were also unaware of changes to include advanced
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 84

scores on SBAC state test results, which may aid in identifying potentially gifted students.
School documentation provided whole-group information, rather than disaggregated, so teachers
have developed lessons for all students without information on which students needed culturally
competent education.
Motivational Barriers
Engagement Some research on teacher motivation, related how either high or low levels
of stress determined teacher’s beliefs and behaviors towards students. According to Czubaj
(1996) teachers with an internal locus of control believed they had more autonomy in their work
environment resulting in more positive interactions with students. Less positive interactions with
students occurred when teachers believed they had less autonomy when others such as district
and school personnel dictated and controlled their work environment. Gagne, Reeve, and Sue,
(n.d.) discussed how automotive-supportive or automotive-controlling motivational theories
impacted teachers’ social and instructional interactions with students. Automotive-supportive
motivation contains several constructs teachers convey to students to improve learning outcomes
such as tone of voice, feelings and behaviors toward all students and particularly African
American students to develop self-motivation for attentiveness, persistence, and cognitive effort
to engage with learning. Teachers demonstrate automotive-controlling motivation when they
prescribe how they want students to interact with learning, negating students interests and
cultural context for learning. teachers
Research by Dweck (2008) and Wasserberg (2014) indicated that, when African
American students believed others believed they would not do well on tests, persistence and
effort diminished, contributing to a cycle of poor learning outcomes reflected in lower
classroom, state and gifted assessment results. Some teachers indicated that African American
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 85

students may be gifted but do not do well on tests in general, and the gifted assessment in
particular. Nota said, “[African American] students needed help with focusing. They don’t have
the strategies to take the test and it is hard for them to show [what they know] on the test.”
Assistance with focus is a motivational construct connected to multiple motivational theories
including task value (Pintrich, 2003), meaning students need to find value in the task to engage
and successfully complete it. Ermine reflected, “I noticed a lot of kids were trying to get it over
and probably did not test as GATE students and they are GATE in different areas.” Engagement
as a motivational construct affects teachers’ positive interaction with students by their beliefs,
behaviors, and level of autonomy they experience within their job. Student motivation to learn is
affected by teachers motivation to interact and provide the instruction needed to focus on the task
at hand, be persistent, and put forth the mental effort toward the performance goal. (Czubaj
(1996); Gagne, Reeve, and Sue, (n.d.); Rueda, 2011).
Expectancy-value theory. Other research on teacher motivational theories included teachers
intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for teaching and the influence of these reasons on students’ self-
efficacy for learning. Expectancy-value theory as a motivational construct for teachers included
propelling teachers to believe performance goals were important to achieve, availability of
rewards such as recognition for doing so, and the value of achieving the performance goal for
both teachers and students (Gemeda, 2015; Han & Yin, 2016).
Expectancy-Value Theory as a motivational construct for improved gifted identification
was a barrier for African American students when taking the assessment if teachers were unable
to connect students with the benefits of taking the assessments to their social, emotional, and
racial identity (Eccles, 2009; Pintrich, 2003; Zhbanova et al., 2015). Tuscany shared her
experience of bringing benefit to African American students for education in general when she
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 86

said, “They have given up that they are not smart to be a doctor, but to share their heart, love,
care and maybe they would want to be a loving doctor, teacher, or president.” Ermine
experienced parents as a barrier when she said, “Some of our parents opt [their children] out of
testing.” Numerous studies have indicated that standard forms of assessments are inherently
biased toward students of color, and parents of African American students are skeptical of such
testing.
Engagement and expectancy-value motivational theories were validated by some
teachers who stated the importance of positive teacher-student interactions for achieving
academic outcomes.. Teacher motivation was also explored as significant to improved African
American student self-efficacy and self-determination to reach performance goals. Engagement
theory proposed the importance of the process of beginning, continuing, and completing a task.
Expectancy-value theory relates to how individuals are influenced by how others view them and,
due to daily interactions with teachers, teacher belief in their abilities builds students’ confidence
that they can both do a task and want to do that task. Without that confidence, as Interes stated,
African American students are unlikely to take risks to show their potential giftedness.
Organizational Barriers
Cultural model. Giftedness as a social construct had not been definitively defined
although definitions were offered and periodically updated by the federal government with some
form of the definition used by most states. Western State made seven categories available,
including the freedom to design an undefined category for districts to consider for use in gifted
programs. Organizational leaders adopted the gifted categories of intellectual and specific
academic ability for AUSD schools and Vitruvian Prep over several decades of different
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 87

administrations, indicating gifted program structure has been maintained for the status quo and
not innovated to include students of color.
Both identification categories utilized the CogAT7 assessment, which included the
quantitative, verbal, and non-verbal battery and three parts within each battery. For example, the
quantitative battery included abstract math in number series, number puzzles, and number
analogies. The verbal battery included abstract English language arts in verbal classification,
sentence completion, and verbal analogies. The nonverbal battery included abstract spatial
reasoning in figure classification, paper folding, and figure matrices. Ermine responded about the
CogAT7 assessment,
I noticed a lot of kids were trying to get it over and probably did not test as GATE
students and they are GATE in different areas. I think we need to do more observations
and not just that test.
Some other teachers discussed expanding the categories to identify more African
American and other students, as indicated in Table 4. According to some teachers, the two
identification categories have been barriers for African American students, which researchers
proposed expressed their giftedness in ways similar and dissimilar to the general population
(Cokley, 2003; Ford, 2014). Carter, Williams, and Silverman, (2017) discussed the socio-
emotional support high-ability African American students needed to overcome high anxiety
during periods of testing, impacting their results and access to gifted programs.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 88

Table 4
Categories for Gifted Identification with Scores Required
Western State Gifted Identification
Categories
Definition of the Categories Assessment Method used for the
identification category tested by
AUSD and Vitruvian Prep
Intellectual Ability A student who demonstrates
intellectual development at an
extraordinary or potentially
extraordinary level in comparison
to other students of the same age.
CogAT Form 7 for second graders.
Composite Scores of >98%.

Specific Academic Ability
A student who excels at an
advanced level in reading or math.
CogAT Form 7 for second graders.
Secondary Review: Composite
Scores of >95%.
Quantitative (Math) or Verbal
(English language arts/Literacy)
score of >98%
High Achievement A student who frequently scores at
highly advanced levels on
achievement test.
Not Applicable
Creative Ability A student who demonstrates the
characteristics to observe and relate
different phenomena, persistence to
think and produce innovative
results despite obstacles and
challenging problems.
Not Applicable though category
was used in GATE certification
trainings.
Ability in Performing & Visual
Arts
A student who develops and
participates in performances and
advanced levels in the arts at an
above excellence level
Not Applicable
Western State Gifted Identification
Categories
Definition of the Categories Assessment Method used for the
identification category tested by
AUSD and Vitruvian Prep
Leadership Ability A students who demonstrates the
characteristics of leadership
including the ability to influence
others positively with problem-
solving, writing, and speaking skills
with visionary goals.
Not Applicable.

(Eliminated by AUSD GATE
leadership in Fall, 2014.)
Other Education Code Categories
Criterion aligned with State
Standards
Local Educational Agencies and
school district leadership can
develop own categories based on
criterion aligned with State
Standards that includes equal access
for all students.
Not applicable.
Source: Western State Gifted and Talented Education Resource Guide.
Cultural setting Though AUSD GATE leadership revised the checklist with positive and
negative examples of gifted characteristics, few teachers were afforded the opportunity to expand
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 89

their conceptual knowledge of giftedness, as evidenced by teachers expressing five of 25
characteristics during the interviews.
As of Fall 2017, only second grade teachers and teachers of students new to the district
received the checklist to complete. Within Table 4, some teachers expressed inclusion of other
categories, such as leadership and performing arts, which aligned with some of the gifted
characteristics on the TOGCF. Yet, though the checklist included characteristics for intellectual,
leadership and creativity categories, there were two related categories, intellectual and special
academic ability, tested. A secondary review existed for intellectual (instead of high intellectual),
and high (specific) ability, as listed on the AUSD website and expressed as a need by some
respondents (AUSD, GATE Meeting Notes, December 2016). Table 4 lists the alternative
categories and their alignment with the TOGCF teachers complete for each student tested with
the assigned positive and negative example of each characteristic developed by AUSD and
GATE site representatives in 2017 (AUSD, GATE Meeting Notes, September 2016).
Table 5
Teachers’ Perspective for Alternate Categories to Identify Giftedness Aligned with Vitruvian
Prep’s TOGCF Form and Western State’s Identification Categories
Teacher Alternate Ways to
Identify African
American Students
Alignment with
Vitruvian Prep
TOGCF Form
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Positive
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Negative
Piza Plan for ways other
than giftedness just
for academic,
include music, art,
creativity to assess
students.
#25
Demonstrates
exceptional ability in
art, dance, music,
theatre

W.S. Performing and
Visual Arts
communicates
well with
symbols,
movement, and
oral language

Struggles with
self-control and
use of symbols,
movement, and
oral language
within school
setting

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 90

Table 5, continued
Teacher Alternate Ways to
Identify African
American Students
Alignment with
Vitruvian Prep
TOGCF Form
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Positive
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Negative
Amboise Visually, sculptural,
dance, especially
the visual arts,
music. Who knows
if there was that
opportunity who all
might blossom?

# 25
Demonstrates
exceptional ability in
art, dance, music,
theatre 25

W.S. Performing and
Visual Arts

Roc Their mind is going
so fast, their mind is
going miles per
minute, so they may
not show the skill
sets of an
(academic) gifted
student.
#12
Tends to lose
awareness of
time/intensity towards
a task or problem.

W.S. Creativity
Is persistent in
pursuing and
completing self-
selected tasks.
Resists
transitions and
moving onto
new topics of
study
Tuscany I find the more
leadership roles that
I give them is very
helpful. They want
to help.
#2 Displays
leadership.

W.S. Leadership
Accepts and
carries out
responsibilities
Adapts readily
to new
situations and
changes
Is sought out by
others (could be
positive or
negative)
Questions
authority (is
considered a
“trouble-maker”
or instigator)
Is seen as
“bossy” (wants
to be the center
of attention)
Is seen as
manipulative or
strong willed
Teacher Alternate Ways to
Identify African
American Students
Alignment with
Vitruvian Prep
TOGCF Form
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Positive
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Negative
Nota “Enjoy what you
are learning.”
#11 Is inquisitive and
curious - asks lots of
questions.

W.S. All categories
Questions,
explores,
experiments
Refuses to
follow rules
unless
understands
“why”

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 91

Table 5, continued
Teacher Alternate Ways to
Identify African
American Students
Alignment with
Vitruvian Prep
TOGCF Form
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Positive
TOGCF
Examples
Perceived as
Negative
Interes “Good models that
African American
students can
emulate and want to
show their academic
abilities.”
#2 Displays
leadership.

W.S. Leadership
Accepts and
carries out
responsibilities
Adapts readily
to new
situations and
changes
Is sought out by
others (could be
positive or
negative)
Questions
authority (is
considered a
“trouble-maker”
or instigator)
Is seen as
“bossy” (wants
to be the center
of attention)
Is seen as
manipulative or
strong willed
Ermine “I think as a school
we need to try, for
identifying, out of
the box thinking”
#W. S. Undefined
category

Source: (AUSD GATE Meeting Agenda, TOGCF Checklist, September 2017); Western State
Gifted and Talented Education Resource Guide W.S. means Western State with the
accompanying identification category.

The need for district and school leadership to fully implement and evaluate current gifted
program practices was validated by most teachers who stated they knew little about the gifted
program at Vitruvian Prep and did not experience support from the district or school leadership
for current and potentially gifted students. Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort, Peetsma, & Geijsel (2011)
discussed the importance of school and district leadership to provide the vision, personalized
support for teachers, and professional development training educators needed to support
themselves and students to reach established learning goals.
Teacher Experiences with Mindsets Within the Context of Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Barriers
Growth mindset knowledge dimension barriers. The growth mindset motivational
framework aimed to assist educators’ improvement of student achievement by better
understanding how students viewed their ability to learn (Dweck, 2008). Students with a fixed
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 92

mindset believed their intellectual abilities remained at a certain level and spent their time
demonstrating an outward appearance of intelligence without expending the necessary effort and
intellectual curiosity to learn and solve problems. Students with a growth mindset believed their
intellectual abilities can grow with the necessary effort that led to learning and problem-solving.
The mindset framework, applicable to adults as well as students, was Roc’s experience as she
reflected on why African American students have the lowest rate of gifted identification at
Vitruvian Prep: “Probably the mindset of us as teachers. Our mindset is set with a narrow
mindset based on the community they come from, fixed mindset.” Though growth mindset was
the goal, recognition of both growth and fixed mindsets by teachers within themselves may assist
to observe similar traits as viewed in Figure 10.
Some teachers partially validated the need to recognize the effects of growth mindset
motivational strategies on students improved academic outcomes and the effects of fixed mindset
theory motivational strategies on teacher’s lowered perceptions of the academic ability of
African American students in at-risk schools.
Growth mindset motivational barriers. Growth mindset theory was proposed as a
lifelong process with the purpose in education to develop the full potential of students.
Therefore, teacher perceptions about one gifted assessment given once in a student’s lifetime
defining their academic abilities were not accurate. Roc stated such when she said, “They know
there is this test. Even if you don't pass the test, we can build on the skills you have to take it
again. Participate in Math and Science Club. There are other ways to show you're gifted.” Roc’s
statement supported research finding that the urban location of the school, low socioeconomic
status, and race of the students influenced teachers’ expectations of the academic ability of
African American students and were barriers to improved identification (Boykin & Noguera,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 93

2011). The implications of a fixed mindset for teachers, from Roc’s perspective, was that, “a pre-
conceived mindset limits teacher’s view of the potential of African American students.” Interes
provided a similar perspective when she said, “There are teachers who do not believe African
American students can learn at the same level or beyond other students.” If teachers believed
African American students will not do well on gifted assessments, African American students
highly influenced by how they are perceived by teachers come to believe that as well, which
continues the motivational barriers to improved gifted identification for these students (Boykin &
Noguera, 2011). Expectancy-value theory explained the phenomenon that what teachers expected
of students was what students were likely to present in the classroom and on assessments
(Lazowski & Hulleman, 2016; Pintrich, 2003; Toshalis & Nakkula, 2012; Wigfield & Cambria,
2010).
Growth mindset motivational theory strategies were validated by some teachers as
needed for improved gifted identification results though more importantly for lifelong learning as
Roc expressed one assessment given once in a student’s life does not define their academic
potential forever.
Growth mindset organizational barriers. Within the cultural model of AUSD and
Vitruvian Prep, leaders and teachers believe they have the growth mindset and are assisting
others to overcome their fixed mindset and develop the growth mindset. However, Dweck
(2012), in an update to motivational theory, stated that people fluctuate between both mindsets,
and ongoing metacognitive reflection was required to know when that was happening, why, and
the procedural steps to change it. Roc reflected on her understanding of growth mindset and
under-identification of African American students in gifted programs when she said, “We don't
see them for who they can be. They can thrive.” Vitruvian Prep provided professional
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 94

development for teachers in 2015 about growth mindset theory, and teachers determined that
they would encourage effort in students. Dweck (2015) reflected that, during many observations
of teachers, she noticed the theory was applied to only support student effort without getting
students to achieve results based on those efforts. Growth mindset theory was as much for
teacher self-reflection as for improving learning outcomes for African American students to
support their effort toward gifted identification.
An instructional strategy utilizing CLT, part of information processing (Kirshner et al.,
2006; Mayer, 2011), provided teachers procedural and conceptual knowledge to enhance
learning and assess time on task for students. Tuscany and Ermine reflected that teachers needed
time to observe students for giftedness and how they learned. Tuscany said, “It would be good to
know what student’s gifts are and give teachers time to do this inventory.” Ermine relayed,
“There have to be more teacher observations, to evaluate GATE testing.”
Some teachers partially validated the need for time to self-reflect about how to use
growth mindset motivational strategies for observations of gifted characteristics in African
American students. Growth mindset training was provided once within the past three years but
never evaluated toward any performance goal or improved gifted program outcomes.
Racial bias knowledge dimensions. Racial bias is a fixed mindset. Racism, the view of
others based on their shared biological features, led to discrimination based on those features
(Cornell & Hartmann, 2007). Interes reported that her son was provided, “Attention for behavior
concerns but not for his high academic abilities.” Several teachers indicated their experiences
that forms of racism, prejudice, or discrimination toward African Americans in society,
particularly in schools, led to perceptions about these students gifted potential. Amboise
experienced African American lower under-identification as related to “institutionalized racism,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 95

top to bottom. I firmly believe that. I think it is built into the economic system, housing, it is built
into the education system” Piza related, “We can't make that assumption that African American
[students] are less intellectual by virtue of, you know, their ethnic background.” Most teachers
believed that historical racism influenced how African American students were viewed
intellectually in society and the school setting. Implications of racism within the factual,
procedural, conceptual, and metacognitive knowledge dimensions affected whether teachers
understood, reflected, and planned how to include motivational strategies specifically to engage
African American students with the rigorous instruction required for improved results.
Racial bias was validated by some teachers as a factual, conceptual, and metacognitive
knowledge barrier to improved identification for African American students in gifted programs. .
Some teachers bluntly named racism in the form of mindsets as the barrier for African American
student under-identification in gifted programs. Most teacher comments about racism related to
historical, societal, and institutional racism.
Racial bias as motivation barrier. Identity theory, a sense by students of color of not
belonging to the White dominant culture and, therefore, not being fully accepted in many areas
of society affected how African Americans approached gifted identification (Ford et al., 2011;
Robinson, 2016). Robinson (2016) elaborated that African American students sought to find their
own identity while experiencing a sense of otherness or separation from mainstream society due
to their race. Amboise reflected on the concept of otherness and its relationship to African
American students when she explained combating otherness meant to create, “an environment
where they feel the same footing with everybody, so that there is not a feeling of otherness.”
Nota summed up the essence of the need for African American students to be recognized,
engaged with, and provided challenging curriculum despite the history of racism when she said,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 96

“Then that attention can help with learning in school. Give them attention.” Teachers validated
the need of engagement strategies for improved identification of African American students in
gifted programs.
Deficit thinking limited teachers’ views of the academic capabilities of African American
students. Deficit thinking was expressed as racial bias and a means to blame students for their
inability to do well in school, often represented by assessments (Ford, Wright, Washington, &
Henfield, 2016; Valencia, 2002). However, there are students in the regular classroom who
believed that others viewed them with deficit thinking and reacted accordingly, as Tuscany
experienced when she encountered an African American student who exhibited unruly behavior.
Tuscany explained that, before she began to address the student’s behavior, he told her she was
supposed to send him to the office. The student assumed the teacher would agree, which Tuscany
reflected when she said,
We don't have any children that are identified because that little boy was gifted but was
hiding under all these bad choices because “this is how you see me, so this is how you
think I am. This is how I am going to be.
Some teachers believed that institutional racism has always existed due to the history of slavery
and continues to exist and was, therefore, a continuous barrier for African American students’
access to gifted programs. Racial bias as a motivational influence affecting the positive self-
identity of African American to perform successfully on academic assessments was validated by
some teachers based on experiences with how some students viewed their cognitive abilities.
Cultural model barriers. Vitruvian Prep as an educational organization can be studied
from a variety of perspectives to understand whether current systems are appropriate to address
the performance goal (Bolman & Deal; Schein, 2010). For example, the school’s SPSA and
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 97

focus plans were geared toward peripheral supports related to getting students incrementally
toward proficiency each year. There was no school-wide system in place that considered
acceleration for high-ability, gifted, or potentially gifted students. Some teachers reflected the
need to provide African American students with more than basic instruction, such as Piza, who
said, “Teach them the same information, not less, because you might assume that because they
are African American they did not have the same upbringing or the same push from the parent,
from the home as other ethnicities.” Some teachers reflected and validated that the school system
mirrored society’s view that African American students were less academically capable than
other students since teachers stated they had not received any support or resources for identified
and potentially gifted students.
Cultural setting barriers. Within the cultural setting of the district and school, there
were directives and initiatives promoted nationally and filtered to the state, district, and school
and adopted to decrease negative student trends. Vitruvian Prep reduced suspensions of African
American students, the highest suspended group between 2015 and 2017 from 50% to 25%.
Absences of 15 or more days remained highest for African American students at more than twice
the absence rate of Hispanic students in 2017: 27% to 10%. African American students were
30% of the special education population in 2017. The process for special education identification
starts with a teacher referral, and there were more referrals than students who qualified, meaning
systems and resources were established to support African American students within a system
related to negative assumptions about them and subsequent self-fulfilling prophecies by students
about themselves (Ford, 2014). Within these systems are overt and subtle forms of bias, such as
microaggressions, described as unintentional words, behaviors, and actions teachers, school and
district leaders perpetuate by words and behaviors which contribute to continued barriers for
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 98

African American student identification in gifted programs (Ford, 2015). Table 6, lists types of
microaggressions, their definitions, with quotes from teachers which support the definitions
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, 2017; Delgado, Stefancic & Lindo, 2012; Ford, 2013; Sue, 2010).
Teachers did validate racial bias as a barrier to improved identification for African American
students in gifted programs though did not directly validate the types of microaggressions
verbalized in the interviews and observed by the investigator during classroom observations. The
significance of teachers’ view of racism as overt within society and institutions, without
conscious awareness of the daily impact of microaggressions on African American students
continued barriers for improved gifted identification and high academic expectations of teachers
for these students.
Table 6
Types of Microaggressions African American Students Faced Based on Teacher Perspectives
Types of Microaggressions and Definitions Supporting Quotes from Teachers
Microaggression
Verbal or non-verbal, intentional or unintentional
actions that convey negative beliefs about non-Whites
in comparison to positive beliefs about Whites.
“Pre-conceived mindset limits teacher’s view of the
potential of African American students.” (Roc)
Microinvalidation
Actions and behaviors that result in the cultural
experiences of African American and non-White
students treated as less than White culture and
experiences.
“…Might be a mindset… of the races who are in
charge, …and be more apt to overlook Black people
because of the history of this country and they might
categorize African American differently than others as
being less.” (Piza)
“We can't make that assumption that African American
are less intellectually by virtue of you know their
ethnic background.” (Piza)
Microassault
Intentional beliefs that convey non-Whites are different
from Whites and therefore cannot achieve at the same
level of success as Whites.
“Assumptions they are not able to achieve the same
because of their race.”
“Assumptions they are African American and did not
have same upbringing.”
“Assumptions they are less intelligent because of
ethnic background.”

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 99

Table 6, continued

“Think it is an assumption in the society because some
people might assume that all Black people come from
the projects and that they all come from single families,

single female and don't have the same upbringing as
other people.” (Piza)
“Why do they (African American students) act like
that? Is that normal?” (Nota)

Achievement and Opportunity Gaps Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Barriers
Achievement gap. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2013) defined
the achievement gap as “when one group of students outperforms another group, and the
difference in average scores for the two groups is statistically significant” (p. 210).
Some teachers recognized that high ability and potentially gifted African American
students’ academic needs were not addressed and an enriched curriculum was needed. Teachers
at Vitruvian Prep viewed the continued achievement gap as a barrier to improved gifted
identification for African American students because the instructional goals were related to
proficiency and not to advanced learning typically employed for high-ability, creative, and gifted
students.
Enriched curriculum. Challenging and enriched curriculum takes students out of their
regular routine to expose them to multiple layers and levels of the curriculum, such as
experimental and discovery activities (NAGC, 2018). Teachers have primarily focused on
intervention instruction to close the achievement gap while an enriched, challenging, and
accelerated curriculum that specifically addressed high-ability African American students was
minimal or non-existent. Some teachers’ answers reflected knowledge about AUSD’s adoption
of the Common Core Standards that guided teacher’s instructional decisions to prepare students
for district and state assessments (AUSD, document notes, August 2016).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 100

Most Vitruvian Prep teachers related to the need to close the achievement gap and the
value of enriched curriculum to engage students toward closing that gap and reaching
proficiency. Teachers will usually default to remedial instruction instead of enrichment to close
the gap, affecting the rigorous instruction high-ability and potentially gifted students need. Table
7 displays some teacher’s experiences with their instructional focus on closing the achievement
gap, enrichment of curriculum, or both, and cultural model and cultural setting organizational
barriers to gifted identification for African American students.
Opportunity gap. The opportunity gap is used interchangeably with the achievement
gap. Some educational groups sought to reframe the discussion from blaming students for
learning deficits to blaming unequal instructional practices in schools (Dai, 2013; Darling-
Hammond, 2007a; Pitre, 2014). Amboise discussed the achievement gap as an opportunity gap,
“First of all, in terms of the achievement gap, it is more of an opportunity gap. I think anybody
can achieve given the opportunity.”
Amboise was asked if the opportunity gap equaled an equity gap, and she stated, “Oh, yes, big
time.” Amboise confirmed the need for curriculum to reach students’ multiple cognitive levels
with enrichment as a source of motivation
Some teachers expressed the need to teach district-required learning standards and
instructional curriculum, although they were ambivalent about how to consistently enrich the
curriculum. Odom and Kelly (1998) and Mayer (2011) described meaningful learning as hands-
on discovery that engaged students for conceptual learning. Mayer (2011) stated that it was
cognitive thinking, and not just discovery activities, that strengthened working memory capacity.
Lohman (2011) emphasized that the CogAT7 gifted assessment was designed to assess what
students learned in school (Kirschner, 2002; Lohman, 2012; Mayer, 2011; NAGC, 2012; Odom
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 101

& Kelly, 1998). Opportunity, enrichment, and achievement gaps are each a barrier to the
performance goal due to teacher ambivalence about how to address district and school academic
performance goals.
Some teachers partially validated the achievement gap and lack of enriched curriculum as
a barrier to improved gifted identification for African American students in gifted programs.
Opportunity gap was a new finding not included in the literature review and included by one
teacher who expressed the view that, “… all students can achieve, but not all have the same
opportunity.” Grubb (2011) mentioned that teachers preferred to focus on basic instruction with
the goal of closing the achievement gap. Some teachers believed that enrichment enhanced basic
instruction, and others said African American students did not do well on them, which validates
stereotype threat theory (Ford & Grantham, 2003; Zhbanova et al., 2015). Some teachers
indicated that African American students had less opportunity to access challenging curriculum
due to perception of others in society about their abilities.
Table 7
Teacher Experiences with the Achievement Gap, Enrichment, and Opportunity Gap
Concepts Teachers’ Experiences Organizational Barriers
Achievement Gap
When the statistical difference
between one group and another
group’s achievement scores are too
great to ignore.
“I think that it is important to bridge
the gap between what students know
and what they are expected to know
… to bring them up to what is
required of the school
district.” (Piza)

Cultural Model: AUSD determines
what curriculum teachers provide
for students.
Cultural Setting: What AUSD
prioritized was what teachers
valued when providing curriculum.
“…It depends what the district
offers the student. We are trying to
close the achievement gap...”
(Nota)
Cultural Model: AUSD determines
the curriculum teachers use for
instruction.
Cultural Setting: Teachers focus
was to close the achievement gap
“… I think we need to close the
achievement gap because we need
to close the gap and that is
important.” (Ermine)
Cultural Model: AUSD leadership,
Vitruvian Prep leadership, and
Teachers have adopted a closing the
achievement gap mindset.
Cultural Setting: Teachers value the
role to close the achievement gap.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 102

Table 7, continued
Concepts Teachers’ Experiences Organizational Barriers
“It has always been close the gap
and kids should not go below grade
level and do what we can to get to
grade level and the kids who are
gifted are left to the side. “ (Roc)

Cultural Model: AUSD has focused
on closing the achievement gap so
teachers have followed that focus.
Cultural Setting: AUSD has not
demonstrated attention to gifted
identification and education for at-
risk African American students.
Enrichment
Curriculum that includes multiple
levels of cognitive thinking within
project-based and discovery
activities.

“When we offer differentiation in
the learning.” (Nota)

Cultural Model: AUSD GATE
leadership provided teachers with
the differentiation of instruction
model.
Cultural Setting: AUSD values
differentiated instruction for
students.
“I'll give like the eclipse. I felt that
was enriched science. We did a lot
of extra things.” (Tuscany)
Cultural Model: AUSD supported
specific enrichment activities for
teachers to provide to students.
Cultural Setting: AUSD valued
current global events that connected
students’ interest with learning.
“…At the same time, we need to
provide enrichment for those kids
that are beyond grade level …who
need that extra
enrichment…(Ermine)
Cultural Model: AUSD attention
was on closing the achievement gap
by differentiated instruction.
Cultural Setting: AUSD valued and
supported enrichment at schools
inequitably.
“It has always been close the gap
and kids should not go below grade
level and do what we can to get to
grade level and the kids who are
gifted are left to the side.” (Roc)

Cultural Model: AUSD attention
was on closing the achievement
gap.
Cultural Setting: AUSD values
closing the achievement gap.
“The richer the curriculum … the
more room there is for variance …
for accessibility for all levels.”
(Amboise)
Cultural Model: AUSD provided
training for differentiated
instruction with attention to high-
end differentiation at some schools
and low-end differentiation at other
schools.
Cultural Setting: AUSD accepted
different levels of differentiated
instruction at different schools.
“Achievement gap is important to
close though enrichment is needed
to support learning.” (Interes)
Cultural Model: AUSD focus was
on closing the achievement gap.
Cultural Setting: AUSD valued
closing the achievement gap with
support for enrichment as current
events dictated.
Opportunity Gap
Paradigm to shift school systems
thinking from student’s learning
deficits to equitable distribution of
resources for improved student
outcomes.
“First of all, in terms of the
achievement gap. I kind of question
that terminology - to me it is more
of an opportunity gap because I
think anybody can achieve given
the opportunity.” (Amboise)
Cultural Model: AUSD provided
inequitable resources for schools
based on expectations of
achievement results.
Cultural Setting: AUSD valued
closing the achievement gap.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 103

Learning Environment and Teacher Observations
With the two themes generated by teachers’ responses, classroom observations
triangulated with interview and documentation helped further develop data analysis. Seven
teachers were observed in their classrooms for one hour, and reflective notes were taken soon
after in a quiet location to prevent distractions and allow free flow of initial thoughts and
potential connections to the knowledge and motivational concepts gained through the literature
review.
Instructional strategies reviewed in the literature included Bloom’s revised taxonomy and
CLT, part of information processing theory. Motivational theories included engagement and
expectancy-value theory. Aspects of the learning environment related to different aspects of
teaching and learning strategies that teachers noticed assisted with gifted identification for
African American students. Vitruvian Prep’s focus plan had influence, as it included references
to building relationships with students and to providing a physically comfortable environment.
Each teacher’s classroom had an LCD projector and mounted screen, a whiteboard, and subject
matter posters and charts on the walls. Every classroom had book shelves with books on topics
such as social studies and science. Bulletin boards had some student work with their names and
the subject matter standards.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 104

Table 8
Observational Data of Teacher Lessons for evidence of Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy and
Cognitive Load Theory
Teacher Remembering
Level 1
Understanding
Level 2
Applying
Level 3
Analyzing
Level 4
Evaluating
Level 5
Creativity
Level 6
CLT
STM

CLT
WM

CLT
LTM

Amboise X X X X X
Interes X & O X & O X & O X & O X & O X X
Piza X X X X X X X
Tuscany X X X X X X X
Ermine X X X
Roc X X X
Nota X X X X X
O = Depth and complexity model icons aligned with Bloom’s revised taxonomy.
All seven teachers indicated they provided the same instruction for all students regardless
of race or ethnicity, with some exceptions for connections to students’ cultural background to
connect their interest and understanding with the lesson. Some teachers explained they
differentiated lessons based on the ability levels of students, not on their race or ethnicity.
Amboise’s lesson was a writing assignment about three goals students wanted to achieve
and how would they achieve them. After reviewing chart models and engaging in discussions,
students worked in pairs or independently to complete the assignment. All four of Bloom’s
revised taxonomy knowledge dimensions and four of six cognitive processes were observed:
remembering the objective, (student’s future goals), understanding, (concept of goals), applying
conceptual understanding, (writing future goals), and analyzing (the process required to achieve
them). Cognitive load theory, primarily activating the short-term memory to access the initial
components of the lesson, was observed.
Interes taught a math lesson and, in the interview, stated she was GATE certified and
used depth and complexity model icons which she integrated with the four knowledge
dimensions and five cognitive levels of Bloom’s revised taxonomy. These included language of
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 105

the discipline such as the phrase “friendly number,” “decomposing,” and “reasonable” which
aligned with remembering and understanding; details, as in the steps needed to solve the friendly
number aligned with application and analysis; patterns discovered in the guided lesson for the
problem-solving story aligned with analysis and evaluation; and rules indicated by the reasons
and structure of the problem-solving story aligned with analysis and evaluation (Kaplan, 1996).
Cognitive load theory, activating both short-term memory and working memory, were observed
based on the ongoing math problem from the day before and students’ responding to the
teacher’s directions to review steps required to solve the problem.
Piza taught a lesson on current events utilizing a video news source with a discussion of
what students remembered from the week’s daily news videos using the five W’s (who, what,
when, where, why) and one H (how). The reading strategy aligned with the tenets of short-term
and working memory components of CLT and with Bloom’s revised taxonomy knowledge
dimension’s four components of cognitive reasoning skills. Rhoder (2002) proposed students’
practicing one or two reading strategies allowed for transfer to other curriculum and to students’
retention of information, just as during the process in CLT.
Tuscany’s lesson conveyed a narrative story based on her childhood. The objective was
for students to learn a lesson from her story as a model to tell their own stories with a lesson to
their pair-share partners. Tuscany applied the four dimensions from Bloom’s revised taxonomy
and four of the six cognitive levels in presenting the narrative and discussion. In guided practice,
some students selected a partner and others were assigned partners to take turns to listen to each
other tell their story. Students were asked to remember their partner’s story and convey
understanding of the story and the lesson learned to orally present a summary of both. When
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 106

some students had difficulty remembering a story to tell, Tuscany stated, “Sharing can be
challenging.”
Ermine introduced the lesson objective to take the math diagnostic assessment and stated
it was an assessment to see what students know. She read to the students from the math
diagnostic directions, saying, “Some problems may be difficult and other questions may not be
difficult. Some questions you may not have learned, but do your best.” She showed a video
introducing the math diagnostic assessment and asked, “What is diagnostic?” An African
American student, Benny, raised his hand, was called on and said, “Diagnostic is ‘preparing for,
puts you at a level the better you get and know to answer questions.” Ermine told Benny, “Really
good answer. Thank you.” Ermine prepared students for the math diagnostic test with the
directions and procedures, and each of the knowledge dimensions were briefly applied with three
of the cognitive skills provided by the teacher. Cognitive load theory was not observed as
Benny’s the answer was not rehearsed or remembered from a previous day.
Roc prepared students to take the school’s district’s reading comprehension assessment.
She read from the diagnostic website with the following directions, “Some will do exceptionally
well. Others will struggle through it. Do the test the best you can. Test will help me to help you.”
She reminded students that, when they finished the test, there were plenty of books available to
read. During and after the test, Roc monitored and encouraged each student with the words, “Do
your best.” Roc directed students to begin their paper and pencil reading diagnostic assessment.
After all but one student completed the reading diagnostic assessment, Roc directed students by
table groups to find a reading spot and read for 20 minutes. Students got pillow chairs, bean
bags, butterfly chairs, sat on the couch and the carpet during the reading block time. Roc used
four of the knowledge dimensions getting students ready for the reading test and three of the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 107

cognitive skills. During reading block time, she used three cognitive skills with students to
discuss the books they were reading. Cognitive load theory was not directly observed.
Nota taught a daily warm-up lesson before taking students to their play area. Nota rang
the chime, and students responded by standing up, hands up. Nota and students performed I say,
you do routines that included counting, weather, days of the week, and review of the day’s
agenda. Classroom management strategies were practices, such as “body still, eyes on me, eyes
are closed.” Students then lined up by twos, and Nota led them to the play area and dismissed
them four at a time to play at different play stations. Nota handed out tricycles and manned the
water tub area. Students were asked to line up at the water tub to play with the water toys. Eight
students crowded around to play. Then Nota changed it to four at a time. Nota utilized three of
the knowledge dimensions, three cognitive skills, and two CLT components, short-term memory
and working memory, as evidenced by students remembering the routines, songs and
movements.
Teaching to provide access to all instructional levels, particularly the contextual needs,
specific to African American students was directly observed during two observations (Subotnik,
Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011). Bloom’s revised taxonomy was observed in varying
degrees in all seven classes with one that accessed all six cognitive levels during the lesson.
Though not necessary for every lesson, the purpose was awareness of the cognitive levels in
order to prepare lessons to provide cognitively higher levels of instruction.
Cognitive load theory was observed in five of the classrooms, with one teacher activating
all three components. Interestingly, the motivation scores for African American student
engagement were high as well. Cognitive load theory was validated as an instructional strategy
that, with professional development and practice, can be a powerful tool to activate the brain’s
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 108

memory storage of information and helpful for gifted assessments. Barriers to gifted
identification for African Americans included the misalignment between the methods used and
those that students have potential to develop through training and practice.
Teachers Motivational Strategies: Engagement and Expectancy-Value Theory
All seven teachers used a plethora of motivational strategies primarily to engage students
with learning. During the observations, attention was on how and when teachers engaged African
American students. The following charts provide information these students engaged most with
learning when they collaborated with other students. All the teachers used levels of Bloom’s
revised taxonomy and some CLT process, although they had challenges connecting those
strategies with African American student engagement.
For Amboise’ engagement data (Table 9), during 35 minutes of the lesson, only one
African American answered a question while another asked, “What do we do?” The teacher
responded by saying, “Write three goals and how you will achieve those goals. What am I asking
you to do in your own words? Do you understand?” This suggested that five of six African
American students were not engaged with the lesson.
Table 9
African American Students’ Engagement With Lesson
Amboise’s Class
17 Students
Whole Class Lesson
35 minutes
Pair Share Activity
0 minutes
Independent Activity
25 minutes
Six African American
Students
1 of 6 students = 17% 0 of 0 = n/a 4 of 6 = 67%
Eleven Hispanic
Students
11 of 11 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a 11 of 11 = 100%
Note: n/a means not applicable

Interes’ engagement data (Table 10) reported that African Americans students were most
engaged in either listening or speaking during pair share time, which was also the shortest time, 4
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 109

minutes. Independent time required self-motivation and goal orientation to complete the task,
and 40% were engaged sitting with the teacher. This suggests teacher’s personal connection to
African American students engages with learning as well as pairing with a partner.
Table 10
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Interes’s Class
21 Students
Whole Class Lesson
45 minutes
Pair Share Activity
4 minutes
Independent Activity
11 minutes
Five African
American Students
2 of 5 students = 40% 5 of 5 = 100%
engaged
2 of 5 = 40% engaged
(2 were in small group
with the teacher)
Sixteen Hispanic
Students
11 of 16 = 69%
(rounded)
16 of 16 = 100%
engaged
13 of 16 = 81%
(rounded)
Note: n/a means not applicable
Piza’s engagement data (Table 11) revealed that, in a smaller class, students engaged
with the lesson often by either calling out or the teacher calling on them in a rotation, so they
were called on more often. Though there was no pair share engagement, during independent
activity time, Piza interacted with each African American student several times during their
writing and research time, suggesting these students want a personal connection with the teacher.
Table 11
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Piza’s Class
7 Students
Whole Class
Lesson
40minutes
Pair Share Activity
0 minutes
Independent Activity
20 minutes
Two African Americans
Students
2 of 2 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a 2 of 2= 100%
Three Hispanic Students 3 of 3 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a 3 of 3 = 100%
Two White Students 2 of 2 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a 2 of 2 = 100%

Tuscany’s class engagement data (Table 12) showed that African American students
were most engaged during pair share time, which was the same time as the whole class lesson,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 110

30 minutes. African American students did not ask or answer questions during the teacher’s
personal narrative story time, though they were engaged with listening and speaking with a
partner.
Table 12
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Tuscany’s Class
12 Students
Whole Class Lesson
30 minutes
Pair Share Activity
30 minutes
Independent Activity
0 minutes
Four African
American
0 of 4 = 40% 4 of 4= 100% 0 of 0 = n/a
Seven Hispanic
Students
3 of 7 = 69% 5 of 7 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a
One Asian Student 0 of 1 = 1 of 1 = 100% 0 of 0 = n/a
Note: n/a means not applicable
Ermine’ engagement data (Table 13) reported that African American students were most
engaged during pair share and independent activity time, which was 40 minutes in total. Four of
five African American students were engaged with the math diagnostic lesson during the whole-
group time. These results may suggest that African American students engage well with
technology as well as with other students.
Table 13
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Ermine’s Class
16 Students
Whole Class Lesson
20 minutes
Pair Share Activity
25 minutes
Independent Activity
15 minutes
Five African
American Students
4 of 5 students = 80% 5 of 5 = 100%
engaged
5 of 5 = 100%
Eleven Hispanic
Students
8 of 11 = 73%
(rounded)
11 of 11 = 100%
engaged
11 of 11 = 100%

Roc’s engagement data (Table 14) showed that African American students were most
engaged during whole-class and independent activity time, which was 57 minutes in total. Four
of five African American students were engaged with taking the reading diagnostic lesson during
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 111

the whole-group time. It may suggest that African American students engage well with
technology and with self-selected reading within the comfortable seating arrangement in the
classroom.
Table 14
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Roc’s Class
16 Students
Whole Class Lesson
30-40 minutes
Pair Share Activity
0 minutes
Independent Activity
20-30 minutes
Eight African
American Students
7 of 8 students = 88% 0 of 0 = n/a 7 of 8 = 88%
Eight Hispanic
Students
7 of 8 = 88%
(rounded)
0 of 0 = n/a 7 of 8 = 88%
(rounded)

Nota’s engagement data (Table 15) showed African American students were most
engaged during the pair share activity, which lasted for 4 minutes of the total 20 minutes of the
lesson. For the first time, African American students were not last in any engagement category. It
may suggest that African American students begin academically the same as other students,
engage well with technology and with self-selected reading within the comfortable seating
arrangement in the classroom.
Table 15
Lesson Observation of African American Students’ Engagement with Lesson
Nota’s Class
21 Students
Whole Class Lesson
20 minutes
Pair Share Activity
4 minutes
Independent Activity
11 minutes
Four African
American
2 of 4 students = 50% 4 of 4 = 100% 0 of 0 = O
Fourteen Hispanic
Students
11 of 14 = 69%
(rounded)
14 of 14 = 100% 0 of 0 =
(rounded)
Three White Students 1 of 3 students = 33%

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 112

Engagement theory was validated through teachers’ instructional design to promote
engagement in the lesson. Engagement in a task demonstrated attention to the task and increased
opportunity for African American students to learn and improve gifted identification.
According to expectancy-value theory, what a student believes about his ability to
accomplish a task is determined by asking the question, “Can I do this task?” Then, if the answer
is, “Yes, I can do this task,” the next question relates to whether the task is worth doing: “Do I
want to do this task?” Though students ask these questions of themselves, it is the teacher’s
observation of the students asking either question allows the teacher to help the student answer
“yes” to both questions (Eccles, 2009). From the engagement data, African Americans appeared
to ask themselves the first question, and results were that the three classes that had whole-group
activity had more than 50% of African Americans participate in whole-class lesson, four classes
had all African American students participate in the pair share activity, and three classes that had
independent activity had more than 50% of African American students engage in the lesson.
Without more direct conversation with the students or awareness of their past ability with
a task, question two was difficult to observe and, therefore, not validated for the study. Question
two is critical as observed in a classroom in which an African American student asked, after 35
minutes, what the assignment was. After getting the answer and the class dismissed to work on
the writing task, the teacher sat with him to encourage and guide him toward completion. As she
left the student, she said, “Push through,” which meant to persist. However, did the student want
to do the task? If not, why not? Information on motivational strategy to use to help students
complete tasks is needed in a variety of situations (Rueda, 2011). For the African American
students who were not engaged in the lessons observed, expectancy-value motivational theory
may be an important one for teachers to learn how to use. Boucher and Helfenbein (2015)
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 113

described the need for teachers to be trained in cultural studies as a means to provide context for
students of color to connect lesson objectives to their lives.
Teachers View of Their Role to Improve African American Students’ Gifted Identification
In order to engage teachers experiences on the second research question, teacher
experiences on the role of the school, parents, students, and teachers was explored. The table for
each question include the group, key concepts from teachers’ experiences, and their supporting
quotes.
Table 16
Themes and Key Concepts
What do you think is the role of the school to improve gifted identification for African American students?
Theme Key Concepts and Supporting Quotes
School Key Concepts
Provide alternate gifted assessments
Gifted Test-Taking Strategies
High ability students Pre-GATE plan
GATE Planning Time
Awareness of GATE
Supporting Quotes
“…Include music, art, creativity to assess students.” (Amboise)
“Strategies for better test-taking by African American students for the gifted
assessment. (Nota)
“A plan for borderline students that are almost there but for whatever reason don't
make it.” (Roc)
“Give time for teachers to research their own class." (Tuscany)
“Knowledge awareness throughout the year rather than just during the annual one-
week assessment period.” (Interes)
What do you think is the role of the parents to improve gifted identification for African American
students?
Parents Key Concepts
Provide enrichment
Observe and learn about gifted characteristics
Support at home
Partnership with teacher and student
Engage with children
Parent GATE training
Healing and Restoration with parents
What do you think is the role of the parents to improve gifted identification for African American
students?
Supporting Quotes
“Parents should be prepared to give lessons in the area that their children show
strengths in.” (Piza)
“Parents need to observe their children for gifted characteristics. They need to
understand what gifted characteristics are.” (Interes)
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 114

Table 16, continued
“Support from home first, making school a priority.” (Ermine)
“You, I, and the students - a circle, right? (Nota)
What do you think is the role of the parents to improve gifted identification for African American
students?
Supporting Quotes
“Talk to your kids…turn off the TV…take them places…” (Amboise)
“We need to work with our parents to work to help them understand what it means to
be gifted. It is not a stigma, is it something good, not bad.” (Ermine)
“We need to find a way to bring our family in to let them see the school of today is
not like the school of yesterday.” (Tuscany)

Students Key Concepts
Improve focus
Goal orientation
Task Completion
Find Passion for learning
Take risks
Supporting Quotes
“Students need to focus on learning, completing assignments, and strive to develop a
love of learning.” (Interes)
“Find their passion to help to inspire them to learn.” (Piza)
“Ask questions if you don't understand… don't be afraid to ask a question.”
(Amboise)
What do you think is the role of the teachers to improve gifted identification for African American
students?

Teachers Key Concepts
Help from others
Instructional Strategies
Goal Orientation
Growth Mindset
Access and Opportunity
Observe students for gifted characteristics
Advocate for child
Supporting Quotes
“I always think of my daughter to learn more about the student who is going to be
gifted or soon identified as gifted.” (Nota)
“Teachers need to be aware of Depth and Complexity, multiple intelligences, and
how to infuse higher order thinking and love of learning into lessons for students.”
(Interes)
What do you think is the role of the parents to improve gifted identification for African American
students?
“Letting them see the long-range goals. Giving them the growth mindset and the
possibilities are there.” (Roc)
“I think it goes back to that whole idea access and opportunity. Make sure that
everyone is understanding what you're teaching.” (Amboise)
“I would recommend teachers observe their students for traits, characteristics that are
above grade level in the way they think, produce work, and are creative with their
learning” (Piza)
“I really think to advocate for that child. you might have to believe in that child
before anybody else, including the parents” (Tuscany)

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 115

Teachers provided their experiences to improve gifted identification for African
American students Some experiences related to the knowledge dimensions, motivation, or
organizational structures.
Vitruvian Prep School Knowledge Dimensions and Organizational Structures
Three of the teachers’ experiences regarding gifted identification related to alternate
methods of assessment, providing opportunities practice for students to practice CogAT7 test-
taking strategies for the, and creating school-wide awareness of the gifted program. Teachers
discussed the first one as a barrier as well. Ermine stated, “That test is not good. We need
something else.” School-wide awareness included teachers and parents realizing the importance
of the topic of giftedness and improving gifted identification for African American students.
Greater awareness supports increased motivation to reach the stated goal.
Cultural model. The key concept of building awareness of giftedness becomes part of
the values of the organization.
Cultural setting. Establishment of a pre-GATE preparatory class and monitoring of
high-ability students toward gifted identification supports the performance goal. Secondly,
resources will be needed to monitor, plan lessons, enrich curriculum, and to review and practice
with GATE test-taking material. In addition, teachers need time to plan and reflect within regular
school hours.
Parents’ Knowledge Dimensions, Motivation Strategies, and Organizational Structures
Knowledge suggestions are for parents to learn about gifted characteristics, such as the
TOGCF, to review and observe their children for positive and negative examples. Additionally,
parents should learn about the GATE program, identification, and resources by attending school
and district GATE parent events.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 116

Some examples teachers expressed included observing for strengths and interests,
supporting their child’s academic development from home with preparation for school and gifted
assessments, partnering with the child’s teacher to learn additional strategies and resources to
develop the child’s gifts and talents, engaging academically with their child to build a stronger
relationship, and participating at school to assist with the healing and restoration suggested by
Tuscany due to past injustices and mistreatment.
Cultural model. The key concepts to support a child’s academic development from
home are to partner with the child’s teacher to learn additional strategies and resources to
develop the child’s gifts and participate in school activities to produce a mindset that education is
important.
Cultural setting. Some examples teachers expressed included parents providing
enrichment for their child outside of the school’s enrichment activities by finding no-cost, low-
cost, and other options referred by school and community resources to develop their child’s full
potential.
Teachers’ Knowledge Dimensions, Motivation Strategies, Knowledge Dimensions,
Motivation Strategies, and Organizational Structures
The key knowledge concept teachers recommended to improve gifted identification for
African American students was to find their passion to support their motivation for learning. This
may include trying and learning new sports, crafts, types of music, books to read, robotics, and
so forth.
The key motivation concept included improved focus, which may be related to interest,
engagement, expectancy-value, task value, attributions, goal orientation both short and long-
term, task completion, not just effort. Recommendations were to start with small goals and build
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 117

from there, to take risks to find areas of interest, passion, strengths, and to utilize the guideline of
growth mindset theory.
Teachers view their role in improving African American students’ gifted identification as
using instructional strategies connected to higher-order thinking and observing students for
gifted characteristics which relate back to improved instructional strategies.
Growth mindset motivational theory, goal orientation theory, and student advocacy are
prominently discussed in the literature. Growth mindset related to several teachers’ encouraging
students to take risks to learn and find their own passion as well as complete tasks. Goal
orientation theory supported guiding students toward short, medium, and long-range goals.
Ladson-Billings (2009) stressed the need for teachers to become advocates for gifted referral by
serving as liaisons with school leaders, parents, and the district to promote the gifts and talents of
African American students.
Cultural model. The key concept to support improved gifted identification for African
American students was building the values and beliefs that encourage review of data and
subsequent attention for children most in need of academic enrichment, not just remediation. To
foster a child’s academic development from home, parents can partner with their child’s teacher
to learn additional strategies and resources to develop the child’s gifts and participate in school
activities to produce a mindset that education is important.
Cultural setting. The key concept was for teachers to get help from other experts such as
the school psychologist, other identified gifted children and their parents, other teachers, and
GATE experts.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 118

From the responses of teachers about the roles of these four groups, what intrigued my
thoughts was that the school leader was not mentioned once in terms of barriers or the
improvement efforts.
According to the Department of Education’s Strategic Plan for 2014-2018, teachers’
instructional practice and successful implementation have the greatest influence on student
achievement (McFarland et al., 2017). Some teachers were aware of the need for African
American students to be in a supportive academic environment though none expressed
knowledge about the higher reported test anxiety for African Americans as compare to White or
other students and how that affected test-taking motivation (Carter et al., 2008; Turner, Beidel,
Hughes, & Turner, 1993; Wasserberg, 2014).
Ermine indicated that some African American parents viewed giftedness as a “stigma,”
and that view, therefore, became a barrier when it caused them to disallow their child to take the
assessment. Research about African American parents revealed that some resisted gifted
identification assessments for several reasons: necessity of test preparation practice materials
meant the child was not gifted, loss of African American identity, a belief in classroom diversity
over segregated gifted classes, or perception that gifted assessments were racially biased. Ermine
suggested teachers provide knowledge to parents about the benefits of gifted identification for
the full development of their child’s academic potential and future happiness (Ford, Coleman, &
Davis, 2014; Ford & Grantham, 2003; Davis, 2014; Vega, 2017; Whelan, 2010).
Vega (2017) discussed how gifted education was viewed differently by African American
and White parents. White parents viewed gifted identification as important to their child’s future,
including college admission, and sometimes as a way to segregate their child within a diverse
educational setting. African American parents were more likely to believe giftedness should not
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 119

be prepped for with practice materials and being part of a diverse classroom was more important
than segregating their child in a gifted class with few other students of color (Vega, 2017).
Tuscany expounded on the painful effects resegregation had on her friends, local schools, and the
African American community, what Gorski (2008) pronounced was economically and racially
based White flight to affluent neighborhoods to avoid integration with students of color:
When you asked [this] question, I did not want to answer it. Some parents have had bad
experiences. I have had bad experiences. I lived through White flight, but I know my
peers that did not go to college were broken, and some of that came from bad experiences
in school. It is so generational. We need to find a way to bring our family in to let them
see the school of today is not like the school of yesterday.
Roc indicated a school-wide plan to include gifted identification information for parents
from the earlier grades until second grade, the first time the gifted assessment was provided.
When African American parents are informed and consulted about school initiatives, their
participation and advocacy can influence teacher instruction, student engagement, and student
academic outcomes (Davis, 2010; Grantham, Frasier, Roberts, & Bridges, 2005).
In terms of engagement with the task, some researchers discussed the importance of
teachers providing culturally responsive instruction that honors diverse students’ race, ethnicity,
and culture (De Gaetano & España, 2010; Ford, Howard, Harris, & Tyson, 2000). Piza promoted
growth mindset theory for students to take risks for learning: “Students can try many different
areas of interest to find their passion and help to inspire them to learn. I try to help students see
their strengths and improve on their weaknesses, so they can eventually be successful.”
Teacher experiences with African American students’ motivational barriers included lack
of focus, interest, and mental effort that hampered academic achievement. Several motivational
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 120

theories related to teacher experiences with African American students, such as expectancy-value
theory, which proposes that students must believe they can fulfill a learning goal and want to
fulfill that goal (Eccles, 2009; Lazowski & Hulleman, 2016; Pintrich, 2003; Toshalis & Nakkula,
2012; Wigfield & Cambria, 2010).
Self-determination, self-concept, attribution and stereotype theories were the major
frameworks of quantitative and qualitative studies about African American students, which
found that environmental, emotional, and relational contexts affect how students perform
academically. Cokley (2003) and Harper (2015) found that African American self-concept
remained high even when academic progress diminished due to students’ attributions to external
factors. Motivation-related research found that African American students often have high self-
concept and low attributions for academic success (Cokley, 2003; Harper, 2015). Harper (2015)
discovered, for example, that the highest-achieving African American students, particularly
males, had the most anxiety during assessments due to stereotype threat. Cokley (2003) proposed
self-concept and attribution theories to combat literature suggesting African American students
were anti-intellectual.
The implications for teachers was that a high student self-concept does not necessarily
correlate with high achievement for African American students as it often does for White
students (Cokely, 2003). Strengthening African American internal attributions for their success
and failure, such as with growth mindset theory strategies, may temper external attributions
(Cokely, 2003; Dweck, 2008; Harper, 2015). Furthermore, some teachers believed a challenging
curriculum meant understanding the gifted mindset, as Nota indicated when she said her
daughter took her knitting to class, so she could have something to do while waiting for the
lesson to engage her. Nota said, “They need to use their imagination, creativity and do
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 121

something, they learn faster if you give a lesson and they know it already. They just get it. They
get things faster. Otherwise, they will be doing something else.” Lesson-planning aimed at
meaningful learning that utilizes CLT processes can allow students to access relevant
information, organize it, and integrate it with their prior knowledge, which helps with memory
storage to access each level of Bloom’s revised taxonomy’s cognitive skills (Anderson &
Krathwohl, 2001; Mayer, 2011; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006)
Yough & Anderman (2006) discussed goal orientation, a means to understand the reasons
students learn as indicated by Roc who stated, “Letting them see the long-range goals. Giving
them the growth mindset and the possibilities are there. Just developing the relationship with the
child to know there is someone there to motivate them.”
Schon (1983) reported on types of reflection, including reflection-in-action. Some
teachers reflected on what they had said and their role in improving gifted identification for
African American. Amboise reviewed for herself the importance of teacher learning and
reflection of that learning:
I think constantly question yourself. Am I making sure that everyone is understanding,
that everyone is participating on equal footing? For all kids, I always wonder what am I
missing? What else can I do? Am I missing something generationally? Am I missing
something culturally, ethnically, racially? Is there something I am missing? Cause I
always assume there is. But then how do I go about if I am missing something? How do I
know what it is? And, to me, that's just an ongoing keep me awake at night, a
conversation.
Recognition by teachers of the need to address critical race theory, implicit bias, and
microaggressions to close the gap between current knowledge and knowledge needed to improve
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 122

gifted identification for African American students was a result of thoughtful reflection. Other
metacognitive reflections came from Tuscany and Ermine, with Tuscany reflecting on how to
manage behavior and emotional needs while providing standard and advanced instruction to
support high ability students: “If kids are bringing in their other struggles and frustrations. So,
while you are being a therapist and at the same time you are monitoring this creative activity can
you strengthen their gifts? It can be overwhelming.” When teachers have organizational
structure, knowledge and motivation gaps, the task becomes difficult to solve without
coordination by school leadership. Yet, despite the challenges, teacher advocacy was deemed
most important for successful academic outcomes (Ladson-Billings, 2009). When Ermine said,
“Some of our kids are not identified and that is a big problem that we have,” she expressed the
need for accountability within school environment to solve the problem. Organizational change
requires a cultural model shift in values and belief that giftedness can be found in all cultures,
races, and ethnicities (Schein, 2010).
Metacognitive experiences discussed by participants indicated an increased awareness of
their role in addressing under-identification of African American students in gifted programs. As
Clark and Estes, (2008) stated, first, motivation was needed to remove barriers, and then
knowledge and organizational changes based on that knowledge are required to address the
problem. Still, some teachers had difficulty specifically naming African American students as
they spoke of “our kids” (Ermine), “the kids are bringing in other struggles” (Tuscany) and “For
all kids, I always wonder what I am missing?” (Amboise). That challenge may be related to a
belief in color-blind instruction (Bensimon, 2004; Borland, 2004; Hertzog, 2005). Organizational
change, according to teacher experiences, related with generic AUSD and leadership priorities
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 123

and created an opportunity to coordinate teacher solutions into a specific gap analysis problem-
solving framework, as teacher motivation is an impetus for change initiatives.
Knowledge gaps about current methods of identification, intellectual and specific
academic ability were needed to reach the performance goal. Some teachers discussed a wish list
of alternative methods of identification, and others discussed their lack of knowledge about
gifted programs. Leadership and the creative arts were mentioned by some as alternative
methods of identification, and some did discuss some organizational changes they felt needed
improvement. Ermine said, “That test is not good. We need to find another method not just that
test on the computer.” Ermine’s comment suggested a need for the GATE site representative,
school leader, and school psychologist to assist teachers to recognize gifted characteristics,
behaviors, and better understand the components of the gifted assessment (Erwin & Worrell,
2012; Robertson, Pfeiffer, & Taylor, 2011; Subotnik et al., 2011).
Table 17
Results of the Spring 2017 and Fall 2017 AUSD CogAT7 Gifted Assessment, 2nd and 5th Grade
Students
Task African American
Students
Hispanic Students Asian Students White Students
Spring 2017 CogAT7
2
nd
& 5
th
grades
0% 0% 0% 0%
Secondary Review
Spring 2017 CogAT7
0 0 1 0
Fall 2017
CogAT7
2
nd
grade
0 0 0 0

Discussion
A review of the literature to confirm, refute, and/or to elucidate additional information to
the body of research about Equity and Access: The Under-identification of African Americans in
Gifted Programs related to the findings from this phenomenological research study. The main
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 124

objective of phenomenological research was to get to what Merriam and Tisdell (2011) and
Moustakas (1994) termed the essence (p. 227) of the topic based on the research questions. Both
the conceptual framework and research questions focused on the Improvement Model to examine
the knowledge, skills, motivational, and organizational gaps to improved gifted identification for
African American students from 0% to 5% and how teachers viewed their role to eliminate those
gaps (Clark and Estes, 2008).
The underlying essence of the research study was Vitruvian Prep Elementary School’s
teachers’ color-blind mindset. Color-blind thinking and application in the classroom hurt
students of color to improve academic outcomes because their specific instructional needs were
not addressed. Some researchers contend that review of disaggregated assessment data enhanced
teacher’s discovery of their cognitive frame of colorblindness, disguised as diversity, which
propelled teachers instead to develop a cognitive frame of equity (Bensimon, 2004; Bensimon &
Malcom, 2012). Equity frame thinking established high expectations and performance goals for
students of color that matched their percentages an organization. (Bensimon, 2004). Though the
literature review discussed teachers’ deficit thinking as a barrier to improved gifted identification
outcomes for African American students, color-blind thinking and actions were proudly
expressed by most Vitruvian Prep teachers without knowledge of the impact it had on African
American student academic outcomes. Diversity and color-blind mindsets were viewed color- as
positive and equality-oriented constructs (Bensimon, 2004, 2005; Ford, 2013). Boucher and
Helfenbein (2015) described the need for teachers to be trained in cultural studies as a means to
provide context for African American and students of color for the connection lesson objectives
have to their life. Cultural competency means to become racially and culturally aware of the
socio-emotional and instructional needs of African American and students of color intentionally
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 125

advocate for them to meet increasingly higher performance goals (Brown, 2004; Ford &
Harmond, 2001; Gaetano & España, 2010; Harmond, 2001; Hertzog, 2005; Howard, 2003;
Johnsen, 2012; NAGC, 2010; Toshalis & Nakkula, 2012; Wright & Ford, 2017; Yamada, 2010).
The second essence of the research study was limited awareness by teachers of a gifted
program at Vitruvian Prep, an unexpected result and due to organizational plans which did not
include gifted program goals in documentation from 2015-2017. Limited awareness of a gifted
program led to lack of knowledge about the battery of tests assessed on the CogAT7 tests and the
required scores for gifted identification. Teachers were motivated to add other identification
categories such as the performing arts and leadership though without input of an assessment
method. Teachers were knowledgeable about five of the twenty-five gifted characteristics, with
an emphasis on creativity, performing arts, and leadership, categories not used by AUSD for
gifted identification. Reflective responses did lead to some teachers stating there were four
potentially gifted students with three of them African American students. Three of the four took
the gifted assessment in Fall 2017 with the results in chapter five.
The third essence of the research study was Vitruvian Prep teachers practiced one
component of warm demander pedagogy, building relationships with African American students,
a concept not expressed in the literature review. Warm demander teachers were those who
prioritized the classroom environment as inviting and supportive to student learning first and just
as importantly provided the rigorous instruction students needed to achieve (Boucher &
Helfenbein, 2015). Both the School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) and the Focus Plan
promoted the need for the socio-emotional well-being of students. Vitruvian Prep teachers
responded with comfortable classroom spaces for student learning and access to materials,
supplies, and resources. Results included for example, lowered suspension rates for African
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 126

American students. Teachers spoke of building relationships, patience with students, giving
praise, showing respect, providing encouragement, and creating a nurturing and caring
environment for African American student learning. However, the other aspect of warm
demander pedagogy was teachers’ insistence to provide instructional rigor and challenge for
African American students which at Vitruvian Prep had not occurred due to most teacher’s
commitment to achievement gap instructional practices (Bondy, Ross, Hambacker & Acosta,
2013; Bondy & Ross, 2008; Rojas & Liou, 2017; Ross, Bondy, & Hambacker, 2008).
The fourth essence of the research study was the absence of Vitruvian Prep’s school
leader from the stated experiences of teachers. Teachers discussed the school and district’s
expectations of their instructional and curriculum practice to close the achievement gap without
mention of the school leader to guide the process. Multiple principles for organizational
effectiveness exists such as the leader’s development and use of situational awareness,
knowledge of the school’s underlying culture, and opportunities to discover undeveloped
programs such as for gifted education. School leader interest and monitoring of school initiatives
promote positive student outcomes and increased staff morale (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty,
2004). Teachers had many perspectives with the phenomenon of under-identification for
African American students in gifted programs and the KMO Improvement Model. As a change
initiative, implementation of the KMO Improvement Model requires coordination of financial
resources and dissemination of academic data by district and school leadership motivated to
assist Vitruvian Prep to reach the performance goal of 0%-5% improved gifted identification for
African American students (Beer, Eisenstadt, and Sector; 1999; Clark & Estes, 2008).

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 127

Summary
Chapter Four included the findings by teachers as the stakeholder group of most
influence to address the problem of under-identification of African American students in gifted
programs. Teachers were interviewed, observed, and with document analysis, multiple categories
were extracted from the data and three themes emerged.
As a phenomenological study, the underlying essence of the findings was discovered with
three other essences distilled from the data. Based on these findings, chapter five provides
recommendations that address the research questions and conceptual framework of the study
utilizing the KMO Improvement Model and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s Implementation and
Evaluation Framework (Clark & Estes, 2008; Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
One of the strategies provided in GATE certification training is the integration of
Kaplan’s (1996) depth and complexity model, 11 visual icons related to depth, complexity,
novelty, and acceleration gifted education themes adopted by AUSD for use by teachers to
support high-ability, creative, and identified gifted students (AUSD document notes, 2017;
NAGC, 2014). Within AUSD, benefits of gifted identification included referral to honors,
advanced placement classes, summer enrichment programs in music, art, science, drama, and a
variety of leadership opportunities targeted to develop students’ intellectual and creative talents
and abilities. A lack of knowledge of the benefits of gifted identification continued barriers to
improved gifted identification for African American students due to the common view gifted
education developed only academic strengths.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 128

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
This study focused on certificated classroom teachers as the stakeholder group of
influencers to increase gifted identification for African American students from 0% to 5%.
Research has revealed that teachers recommend fewer African American students for gifted
programs than students of other races and provide lower scores on teacher observation checklist
forms (Elhoweris et al., 2005). Another goal was that, by May 2016, all parents of African
American students would be informed about the GATE program, gifted identification process,
and invited to GATE parent meetings. African American students at Vitruvian Elementary were
in ETK through 5th grades and between 4and 12 years old. Gifted assessments for Fall 2017
were given to second grade students district-wide and to students new to AUSD or referred by
teachers. Parents and teachers can recommend a student for gifted identification in any grade
beyond second, yet both have been unaware of the process. In some cases, teachers and parents
have not been trained or supported to recognize, nurture, and develop above-average academic
talent.
Knowledge Barrier Influences
From this perspective, one recommendation to emerge from data regarding teacher
experiences is to provide teachers with conceptual knowledge about both generic and race-
specific characteristics of giftedness observed among African American children. An
examination of the school district’s TOGCF form before, during, and after the gifted assessment
throughout the school year is recommended. When 7% of the African American student
population at Vitruvian Prep was initially referred for special education services, there were three
forms with over 150 questions about the social, academic, behavioral, and personal
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 129

characteristics for the teacher to answer. Yet teachers were only familiar with three to five gifted
characteristics out of just 25 on the TOGCF form.
A second recommendation is for teachers to be given time to think and strategize about
the emotional and academic needs of their African American students for academic development
beyond proficiency. The focus on the achievement gap has resulted in little to no attention
provided to African American students with undeveloped high academic abilities.
A third recommendation is to develop procedural knowledge about presenting instruction
from the highest point of the curriculum and then scaffold from the ability of the student to that
level. Otherwise, some teachers shared they taught to the ability of their students. This meant
some were not able to provide instruction beyond students’ low ability starting point, as
evidenced by state assessment scores.
Teachers also indicated they lacked factual, declarative knowledge about the gifted
assessment components, gifted identification categories, and what a gifted program was at their
own school. Most participants worked in education for several years yet had little experience
providing gifted education, a testament to the strength of the achievement gap to overpower
potentially gifted African American students for gifted identification.
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework provided several models, of which the
improvement model was chosen for this study. Monitoring of the improvement model utilizing
the New World Kirkpatrick Model 9 (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) is recommended to
facilitate achievement of the performance goal. Participants provided instruction that, when
enriched, strengthened the academic development of African American students. Hargrove and
Seay (2011) reported teachers’ instructional skills were needed to motivate African American
children.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 130

Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
From the data collection and analysis completed, the knowledge influences in Table 20
represent the complete list of assumed knowledge influences and their probability of being
validated based on the most frequently mentioned knowledge influences on achieving the
stakeholders’ goal. Based on the literature review, including the 1993 federal government
definition of giftedness, and on Clark and Estes’ (2008) suggestion that declarative knowledge
must be applied to achieve an organizational performance goal, these influences have been
validated and have a high priority for achieving the goal. Table 20 also shows the
recommendations for these validated influences based on theoretical principles.
Knowledge Recommendations
Teachers need to know the current federal government’s definition of giftedness which is
used by most states as a guide for gifted programs (Clark & Estes, 2008; Ross et al., 1993).
Information processing theory proposed that meaningful information learned and connected with
prior knowledge is remembered more clearly (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Teachers have had
varying degrees of exposure to gifted education, usually within mandated coursework about
special education as well as work and family experiences. Schraw and McCrudden (2006)
explained that information such as the definition helps teachers to identify and understand the
important points about giftedness as it pertains to culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse
students:
Children and youth with outstanding talent in intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership
capacity, or in special fields who perform or show the potential for performing at
remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 131

experience, or environment. Outstanding talents are present in all children and youth
from all cultural groups. (Ross et al., p. 33)
Besides declarative knowledge that is factual or conceptual, Table 18 also references
procedural knowledge, which, in this study, includes steps to provide enriched and accelerated
instruction for potentially gifted African American students utilizing Bloom’s revised taxonomy
lesson-planning matrix (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) discussed job
aids as a helpful when, for example, teachers have not been using the revised taxonomy but are
familiar with either the original taxonomy or with using lesson plan templates. The lesson-
planning matrix becomes meaningful and is transferable to the classroom to use as an
organizational tool to plan lessons that provide an enriched and challenging curriculum (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Bloom’s revised taxonomy consists of four knowledge dimensions (factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive) and six cognitive processes (remember, understand, apply,
analyze, evaluate, and create) that can be utilized for all subjects and differentiated for all
academic levels. Kirshner, Kirshner, and Paas (2006) discussed the benefit of presenting
information in manageable parts to build capacity for students to learn increasingly complex
information, an element often missing in teacher lesson-planning.
Warm demander instructional strategy and classroom management are proposed to
provide the caring, nurturing, positive relationship building that most teachers indicated was
necessary to motivate African American students to engage with learning objectives. As a
component of cultural competency education, which the literature indicated was instructional and
behavior management specifically for students of color, warm demander teachers also include
rigorous challenging instruction that expresses caring. The intention of establishing a warm
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 132

demander classroom environment is to provide the equitable opportunity and access teachers
believed they had a moral obligation to provide. Responses from some participants supported
their experiences that warm demander strategies assisted with an instructional environment
conducive to learning and strengthening academic rigor (Bondy & Ross, 2008; Bondy et al.,
2013; Rojas & Liou, 2017; Ross et al., 2008).
Table 18
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priorit
y
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to know
the 1993 federal
government definition
of giftedness used by
most states for gifted
programs. (Declarative,
Factual)
HP Y A definition is
information that
teachers can review and
understand as given
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Have teachers
highlight the last
line of the
definition to
remind themselves
of who can be
identified as gifted.

Teachers need to know
how to use the four
dimensions and six
processes of Bloom’s
revised taxonomy.
(Procedural)
HP Y An enriched and
challenging curriculum
requires a job aid for
teachers to use such as
the Bloom’s Lesson
Planning Matrix (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Teachers
will receive a job
aid indicating the
steps to plan their
own lessons with
familiar fictional
or nonfictional text
utilizing the
Bloom’s Lesson
Planning Matrix.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 133

Table 18, continued
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priorit
y
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to learn
the 25 characteristics
listed on the Teacher
Observation Checklist
for Gifted
Characteristics
(TOCGC) before
completing the form for
each African American
student taking the
gifted assessment.
(Conceptual)
HP Y Teachers will be
trained on the meaning
of each of the 25
characteristics in order
to learn to observe
these characteristics in
their African American
students (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Teachers will
discover gifted
characteristics
within their
African American
students utilizing
TOCGC as a
template for
identification of
key strengths of
African American
students.
Leaders and teachers
need to become aware
of biases, prejudice,
discrimination, and
micro-aggressions and
how they are expressed
by self, others, and
within the organization
(Bensimon, 2005).
(Metacognitive)
HP Y Leaders and teachers
learn about the
concepts of bias,
prejudice,
discrimination, and
micro-aggressions and
utilize reflective
practices to ensure
biases and prejudices
are kept in check.
(Bensimon, 2005).
Leaders and
teachers regularly
examine policies
and procedures for
bias and inequities
and seek support
from a leadership
group such as a
school’s
instructional
leadership team.
Leaders and teachers
need to understand the
concept of warm
demander to provide
African American
students with a
nurturing learning
environment with
rigorous “no excuses”
instruction.
(Conceptual)
HP Y Leaders and teachers
learn warm demander
training for staff to
build a supportive
learning environment
and provide scaffold
challenging instruction
for African American
students.
Leaders and
teachers discuss
and implement
supportive
structures for
students’
emotional needs
and instructional
strategies that
address the high
ability end of state
and gifted
assessment
standards.
*Indicate knowledge type for each influence listed using abbreviations: Declarative/Factual;
(Procedural; Conceptual, Metacognitive

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 134

Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Both the definition
of giftedness and the TOGCF are declarative knowledge. The gifted definition is declarative
factual knowledge while the TOGCF is declarative conceptual knowledge.
Based on the history of gifted education in the United States, Terman (1925) and
Hollingworth (1942) emphasized giftedness as a mental ability determined by intelligence tests.
However, since 1993, the federal definition of giftedness includes abilities such as artistic,
leadership, creativity, and special fields determined by each state, as there is no universal
definition of giftedness. According to the California Department of Education (n.a.) glossary of
terms used in state data reports, the definition of giftedness included categories for school
districts to use as a guide in developing gifted programs:
Students who are enrolled in a public elementary or secondary school and are identified
as possessing demonstrated or potential abilities that give evidence of high-performance
capability, are enrolled in Gifted and Talented Education (GATE). High performance
capability is defined by each school district governing board. Each district shall use one
or more of the following categories in defining the capability: intellectual, creative,
specific academic, leadership, high achievement, performing and visual arts talent, or any
other criterion proposed by the district and approved by the State Board of Education in
the district’s GATE application. (CDE, n.a.; NAGC, 2013).
Action Unified School District (AUSD) eliminated leadership as a gifted category and
never had the creative arts category though it was mentioned by some participants as an area of
potential giftedness for African American students. Some respondents wondered what else was
available for gifted identification and most expressed their experience with gifted identification
was limited to the gifted assessment and stated other methods were needed. A review of the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 135

literature revealed multiple conceptions of giftedness that could be utilized within of AUSD’s
adopted view of conception from the federal and state definitions.
Renzulli’s (2012) conception of giftedness to develop talent included creativity, above-
average ability, and commitment to task completion to address the view that giftedness manifests
within these three broad areas. Renzulli (2012) further developed the why of gifted education
and gifted programs, which included the development of future generations of leaders, problem
solvers, and inventors. Participants’ attention to solve the problem of under-identification of
African American students in gifted programs to prepare them for future problem-solving
opportunities provides purpose for teachers toward the effort.
Silverman (n.a.) discussed giftedness as a psychological construct that produces unusual
life experiences for individuals. These experiences include high capacity for creative thinking,
heightened energy, passion, perceptiveness, and an advanced sense of understanding humor.
Silverman stated that recognition of gifted traits required early childhood identification to guide
gifted children toward positive development. In the present study, some respondents relayed their
view that earlier identification and preparation for the second-grade gifted assessment was
needed to prepare students for future advanced learning opportunities.
If teachers do not know the characteristics of giftedness, they cannot observe students for
them. According to Ford (2010), many actions by African- American students indicated some of
those characteristics, such as advanced humor, resourcefulness, and street smarts, translated as
advanced perceptiveness and insightfulness.
Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Instructional
planning using Bloom’s revised taxonomy matrix or any lesson-planning template is procedural
since there are steps necessary to complete the matrix that scaffold a lesson, unit, or project-
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 136

based learning from factual to metacognitive knowledge (Kirshner et al., 2006; Krathwohl,
2002). For example, a lesson about 3D shapes which is spatial reasoning, and a component of
many gifted assessments could include the following that utilizes the six cognitive processes:
Remembering - List the attributes of the shape. (“Easier” Cognitive Thinking)
Understanding - Find items you can use to show the shape. (“Easier” Cognitive Thinking)
Applying - Draw a diagram of the shape. (“Intermediate” Cognitive Thinking)
Analyzing - Identify where the shape is found at home, in class, and at the school.
(“Intermediate” Cognitive Thinking)
Evaluating - Tell why your shape is used in the location it is used. (“Challenging”
Cognitive Thinking)
Creating - Create an item that includes part or all of your shape. Then draw and label
your design. (“Challenging” Cognitive Thinking)
For the observant teacher, cognitive thinking processes can inform their giftedness evaluation as
an indication of a student’s ability to demonstrate a novel, new or unusual, manner of completing
an assignment. At the same time, the teacher can learn at which level students need more
manageable supports or scaffolds (Kirshner et al., 2006).
Metacognitive knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. Leaders and
teachers need to become aware of biases, prejudice, discrimination, and micro-aggressions and
how they are expressed by self, others, and within the organization (Bensimon, 2005). During
professional development sessions, the leadership team should guide teachers to engage honestly
about the concepts of bias, prejudice, discrimination, and micro-aggressions toward African
American students to reflectively examine own instructional practices (Bensimon, 2005). The
leadership team and teacher teams should regularly examine policies and procedures for bias and
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 137

inequities and seek support from a school leadership group such as an instructional leadership
team to include discussions about the impact of bias, prejudice, discrimination, and micro-
aggressions on progress toward the performance goal.
Okonofua and Eberhardt (2015) discussed research showing teacher bias in disciplinary
actions against African American students at twice the rate as against White students. According
to research by Education-Trust West (n.a.b.) discriminatory practices promote inequitable
educational practices for African American students who are, more often than White students,
provided less rigorous academic curriculum to prepare for college and career success (Education-
Trust West, n.a.a). Stevens, Plaut, and Sanchez-Burks (2008) reported that prejudice, can be
decreased using self-affirmation theory by, for example, teachers affirming the positive attributes
of African American students. In addition, recognition of micro-aggressions is needed for leaders
and teachers to reflect on bias toward African American students and how it may have
contributed to their lack of identification in gifted programs (Bensimon, 2005; Ford, 2014; Sue et
al., 2009).
Motivation Recommendations
When teachers provide students with voice and choice options for learning, students
interest and engagement increases. Voice and choice options were chosen because they takes less
time to implement than a model of cultural competency. Graham (2017) discussed democratic
and authority forms of classroom management and found that voice and choice were democratic
forms with limited consequences for poor behavior. These forms of management are favored by
Whites new to the teaching profession who tend to believe consequences are oppressive to
African American students.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 138

Graham (2017) continued that African American students were more secure in an
environment which provided strict boundaries for behavior and a philosophy of academic
excellence as long as infractions were fairly applied. Authoritative classroom management
systems establish the teacher as classroom leader who cares for each student but provides
consistent consequences for misbehavior because misbehavior interferes with learning.
Warm demander teachers build relationships with students and insist on high academic
expectations because students will need to demonstrate their knowledge and motivation for
continued and future educational endeavors for successful life outcomes (Bondy & Ross, 2008;
Bondy et al., 2013; Rojas & Liou, 2017; Ross et al., 2008).
Self-affirmation theory. Teachers need to provide students with choice or options to
engage students’ interest in learning Eccles (2009) and Pintrich (2003) found that learning and
motivation are enhanced when personal interest in the task is activated. This would suggest that
students who express a personal choice for learning will persist and make the mental effort to
reach the performance goal. The recommendation, then, is for teachers to learn what students
value using personal interest surveys and daily conversations reflected in curriculum choices
provided in lesson plans.
Lazowski and Hulleman (2016) provided a meta-analysis summary of an intervention
study that measured the effectiveness of helping students maintain a sense of self-value. Testing
for a values affirmation intervention, 119 African American and 124 European American
students were placed randomly in an experimental task to choose up to three of their most
important values and write about why those values were important to them (Cohen, Garcia,
Apfel, & Master, 2006). The control group chose up to three of their least important values and
wrote about why those values were important to someone else. African American students with
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 139

the experimental task had higher grades at the end of the semester as compared with their peers
in the control group, indicating the importance of choice, voice, and personal interest to maintain
self-value. Self-affirmation theory supports expectancy-value theory because both constructs
relate to the value, interest, and choice to participate and persist at the task which builds student’s
self-worth and belief in themselves (Eccles, 2009; Pintrich, 2003). Rueda (2011) noted that
multiple motivational constructs are useful for teachers to know and implement for a variety of
situations related to student learning and performance.
Table 19
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Motivation
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers need to
provide African
American students
with choice or
options to engage
their interest in
learning.
HP Y Self-affirmation theory
proposed the importance
of choice, voice, and
personal interest to
maintain self-value and
resulting in improved
learning outcomes.
(Eccles,
2006; Lazowski &
Hulleman, 2016; Pintrich,
2003)

Teachers learn about
the interest of their
African American
students through
personal interactions
and using a student
inventory survey to
include choice
options of interest to
students in lesson-
planning.
Teachers need to
develop insistence on
academic excellence
for African American
students through
instructional rigor
within a nurturing
learning environment
N Y Warm demander
component of cultural
competency Instruction
that includes getting to
know students while
insisting they learn at
progressively challenging
levels (Bondy, Ross,
Hambacher & Acosta,
2013; Bondy & Ross,
2008; Rojas & Liou,
2017; Ross, Bondy, &
Hambacher, 2008)
Teacher learn about
how they have
created a classroom
environment
conducive to learning
and need to develop
the steps of insistence
on academic
excellence for
African American
students.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 140

Table 19, continued
Teachers need to
encourage and
develop the self-
efficacy of African
American students to
improve academic
outcomes.
HP Y Self-Efficacy: Learning
and motivation are
enhanced when learners
have positive
expectancies for success
(Pajares & Urdan, 2006)).
Teachers prepare
lessons that have
easy, intermediate,
and challenging
objectives to allow
African American
students to
experience success at
each level.
Teachers need to
develop high
academic and
aspirational
expectations for
African American
students.
HP Y Expectancy-value theory:
Higher expectations for
success and perceptions
of confidence can
positively influence
learning and motivation
(Eccles, 2009).
Teachers become a
credible model of
cultural competency
to successfully teach
African American
students.
(Cultural book bag)

Self-efficacy. African American students often do not believe in their ability to learn
increasingly complex material. Pajares and Urdan, (2006) reported that students have increased
positive motivation to learn when they experience success on a task. This would suggest that
providing students with less demanding and then increasingly demanding learning tasks will
increase positive self-efficacy and more learning. The recommendation for teachers is to prepare
lessons that scaffold complex tasks into smaller chunks, allowing students success at each level
and enabling them to meet the lesson objective.
Clark and Estes (2008) stated that a barrier to motivation is the leader’s belief that they
cannot influence another person to reach performance goals. Eccles (2009) and Rueda (2011)
emphasized that teachers need to recognize whether motivation for learning is related to choice,
persistence, or mental effort and adapt strategies that support students in believing they can do
the task and want to do the task. Teachers should provide easy, medium, and increasingly
challenging objectives, as short-term goals assist African American students to complete learning
tasks with a sense of accomplishment and build their confidence. From a theoretical perspective,
then, increasing self-efficacy increases motivation to learn (Rueda, 2011).
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 141

Expectancy-value theory. Teachers need to provide high academic expectations for
African American students. Eccles (2009) stated that higher expectations for success and
perceptions of confidence can positively influence learning and motivation. This suggests that
teachers can model positive values and enthusiasm for culturally responsive instruction. Teachers
can become credible models of cultural competency with the ability to teach African American
students from their cultural and historical viewpoint.
Expectancy-value theory helped to answer the question of why some students are
successful in school and some are not (Eccles, 2009; Pintrich, 2003; Rueda, 2011). The value of
a lesson objective to a student increases that student’s persistence with the task, which allows
greater investment of mental effort to complete the task (Rueda, 2011). Eccles (2009) and
Pintrich (2003) devised two important questions that students must answer to demonstrate
motivation: Can I do the task? Do I want to do the task? Teachers are challenged to provide the
environment for students to say yes to both questions by modeling positive values through
knowledge of culture and influences of culture on African American students (Eccles, 2009;
Pintrich, 2003).

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 142

Table 20
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priorit
y
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Leaders and teachers
need to view
disaggregated data with
an equity-minded
perspective to create
gifted identification,
English language arts
(ELA), and Math
performance goals for
African American
students. (Cultural
Setting: Accountability)
HP Y Organizational
effectiveness increases
when leaders help the
organization set clear,
concrete and
measurable goals,
aligned with the
organization’s vision,
including use of
disaggregated data to
track the impact on
equity and access goals
(Bensimon, 2005;
Northouse, 2013;
Schein, 2010).
Leaders and
teachers review
and disaggregate
gifted,
standardized, and
trimester ELA and
math data by race,
ethnicity, and
gender with
equity-mindedness
to reach
performance goal
for improved
gifted
identification for
African American
students.
Leaders and teachers
develop shared
meaning of equity-
mindedness to view
patterns of inequity of
African American
student outcomes for
gifted identification.
(Cultural Model:
Diversity)
HP Y Equity, diversity and
access are important
goals in private and
public sectors
(Bensimon, 2005;
Darling-Hammond,
2007b,2010 ; Lim,
Haddad & Daugherty,
2013;).

Leaders and
teachers are
provided
professional
development that
compares and
contrasts equity-
mindedness with
diversity and
deficit thinking to
discover why
viewing
disaggregated data
with equity-
mindedness can
improve African
American student
achievement.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 143

Table 20, continued
Leaders and teachers
learn organizational
learning theory and
how double loop
learning can improve
equity thinking to focus
on the root causes of
the problem of under-
identification of
African American
students in gifted
programs. (Cultural
Setting: Learning)
HP Y Effective leaders and
teachers demonstrate a
commitment to
learning the equity
cognitive frame that
focuses on institutional
practices that affect
inequitable outcomes
for minority group
students such as
African American
students. They promote
an organizational
culture that promotes
responsibility for
student outcomes
(Bensimon, 2005).
Create a growth
mindset culture for
discourse about
the equity
cognitive frame to
improve African
American student
outcomes.
different
perspectives about
equity thinking

Organization Recommendations
Cultural setting. Leaders and teachers need to view disaggregated data with an equity-
minded perspective to create gifted identification, English language arts (ELA), and math
performance goals for African American students. This encourages accountability for the
learning and performance outcomes of these students. Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders help the organization set clear, concrete and measurable goals aligned with the
organization’s vision, including use of disaggregated data to track the impact on equity and
access goals (Bensimon, 2005; Northouse, 2013; Schein, 2010). Leaders and teachers need to
review and disaggregate gifted, standardized, and trimester ELA and math data by race and
ethnicity with equity-mindedness to achieve performance goals.
Miller and Lee (2014) discussed their findings of perceptions of school leaders about the
barriers they faced to improve student achievement and the reality that there were solutions to
overcome those barriers. At Vitruvian Prep, there are four subgroups that are the focus for
improved learning outcomes. They include English learners, socioeconomically disadvantaged
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 144

students, foster youth, and students who receive special education services. Gifted and talented
students are not on the list, but can easily be added. A policy to improve learning outcomes for
all students can be instituted during teacher professional development session by reviewing
assessment and other data by race and ethnicity for each of the four groups monitored
(Bensimon, 2005). Under this policy, teachers would be provided time to meet, discuss, and
review disaggregated data to provide the equitable instruction students of color need to improve
learning outcomes. Availability each student’s assessment profile can potentially strengthen
instructional practices.
Borland (2004) and Lohman (2011), the creator of the CogAT7, indicated one strategy to
improve identification for students of color was to review disaggregated data for the highest
performing students of color and provide accelerated learning for them. Teachers reported five
African American students who were potentially gifted. These students need an individual
learning plan that addresses their needs to prepare them for the gifted assessment. If, at first, they
do not pass, they can be referred for the gifted assessment yearly by their teacher with parent
permission and support.
Cultural model. Leaders and teachers develop a shared meaning of equity-mindedness to
view patterns of inequity in outcomes. Leaders and teachers should be provided professional
development that compares equity-mindedness with diversity and deficit thinking to discover
why viewing disaggregated data with equity-mindedness can improve African American student
achievement. Bensimon (2005) related the necessity for leaders and teachers to learn
organizational learning theory and how double loop learning can improve equity thinking to
focus on the causes of a problem. Thus, there is value in changing the internal mindset of
stakeholders to view the academic and other needs of students of color through a cognitive frame
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 145

of diversity and equity. Teachers who develop a diversity and equity cognitive frame understand
racial and ethnic differences and how those differences affect learning (Bensimon, 2005, 2006).
Educators gain this understanding through professional development, self-reflection, and
applying equity-mindedness when reviewing disaggregated data.
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) stated the importance of maximizing available
resources by focusing on the truth of professional development evaluations. In their original
training evaluation model, four levels of assessment were proposed to evaluate the effectiveness
of training, workshops, and professional development (Kirkpatrick, 2006) These four levels
progressed in difficulty from participants’ reaction and what they thought of the training. Level
Two evaluated what new knowledge and skill was learned to assist toward the performance goal.
After the training ended, Level Three examined what behaviors were exhibited by the
participants that demonstrated their transfer of the knowledge to their jobs. Level Four
determined the impact of the training, transfer, and whether the organization reached the desired
goal.
In the updated version of the four levels of evaluation, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) indicated that each level of training establishes participants’ desired end result. Trainers
are aware of the importance of the goal to the participants and the level of commitment,
confidence, and available resources needed to reach the goal. In the revised model of evaluation
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), the model begins at Level Four and works backwards
monitoring the competencies required to achieve the goal and adjusting as needed to maximize
the effectiveness of the training provided in Levels One and Two. Level Three evaluates the
transfer of knowledge from Level Two through behaviors that indicate adherence to the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 146

organization’s performance goal. In Level One, the key indicator includes whether participants
understand and are interested in achievement of the performance goal. Through use of the four
levels of evaluation with monitoring and metrics for behaviors toward the goal, the truth of the
training becomes evident through achievement of the organization’s goal.
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The mission of the AUSD is to provide an excellent, innovative, and diverse education
for all students as they get prepared for college and career choices. African American students
have not progressed academically based on state assessments and are the lowest-scoring group
among the four-major racial/ethnic groups in the district. At Vitruvian Prep, no African
American students are identified for gifted programs which provide access to GATE certified
teachers and to accelerated and enriched curriculum. Teachers, the stakeholder group for this
study, have the most influence to refer and prepare students for gifted identification assessments
with rigorous instruction and motivational strategies that engage and support students. By
disaggregating the data by race, attention to the problem of under-identification of African
Americans in gifted programs was discovered. The next steps must involve uncovering the
causes of the problem in a school environment open to difficult conversations (Bensimon, 2005).
Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders help the organization set clear,
concrete and measurable goals aligned with the organization’s vision (Bensimon, 2005;
Northouse, 2013; Schein, 2010). However, leaders often create goals without consideration of
data disaggregated by race and ethnicity (Bensimon, 2005), which results in the inequitable
outcomes. Vitruvian Prep leaders and teachers need to view disaggregated data with an equity-
minded perspective to create gifted identification, ELA, and math performance goals for African
American students. Teachers and school leadership should review and disaggregate gifted,
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 147

standardized, and trimester ELA and math data by race, ethnicity, and gender with equity-
mindedness to reach performance goals.
According to Bensimon (2005), the problem with inequity in student outcomes is with
attitudes, beliefs, and actions of school leaders and teachers. Therefore, viewing the data with
equity-mindedness is critical to counter deficit perspectives. Viewing multiple types of data by
race will help address inequitable outcomes. Vitruvian Prep staff should receive professional
development that compares equity-mindedness with diversity and deficit thinking to improve
African American student achievement. Leadership and teachers should create a growth mindset
culture for discourse about equity to improve African American student outcomes, as both
groups may come with different perspectives about disaggregated data. Growth mindset is an
achievement and motivational construct developed and updated by Dweck (2015) that indicates
how individuals think about their level of intelligence, as either fixed or growing, determines
stagnant or improved academic outcomes. In the updated view of growth mindset, Dweck (2015)
discussed how theory and practice were often misaligned because effort without learning was
praised instead of monitoring effort toward learning outcomes. Likewise, for school staff, efforts
to discuss without learning about symptoms of institutionalized racism and color-consciousness
may become barriers to effectively viewing disaggregated data on student outcomes (Bensimon,
2005; Dweck, 2015).
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 21 shows the proposed Level 4 indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics and
methods for both external and internal outcomes for improved African American student
outcomes. If the internal outcomes are met as expected as a result of training and organizational
support, then the external outcomes should also be realized.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 148

Table 21
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. African American
students improve from 0%
to 5% in gifted
identification for gifted
programs.
100% of African American
students are assessed for the
gifted program.
Review gifted data for all
African American students.
2. African American
students improve 5% on
ELA and 5% on Math
standardized assessments.
100% of African American
students are assessed for the
standardized tests.
Review standardized (SBAC)
assessment data for all
African American students.
3. Improved student
motivation for learning
outcomes initiated by
teacher use of warm
demander pedagogy
strategies for learning
environment and rigorous
instruction.
3a. The percentage of African
American students who
identified for gifted programs.
3a. Teachers plan bi-monthly
professional development to
review motivational progress
of African American students
related to improved gifted
assessment.

3b. The percentage of African
American students who
improved in ELA and Math
scores.

3b. Teachers plan bi-monthly
professional development to
review progress of African
American students related to
improved standardized
assessment component(s).

3c. Amount of Resources and
other support reviewed and re-
allocated as needed.
3c. Review funding sources
to support continued
improved of African
American student
performance goals.
3d. Number of Foundation and
other grants reviewed for
connection to African American
performance goals.
3d. Create timeline of
foundation and grants
deadlines to apply on time.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 149

Table 21, continued
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
4. Promote African
American student
outcome success with all
staff, parents, school and
district community.
Promote the academic progress
of any African American
students who obtain proficiency
or above on the SBAC, score
proficient or above on the
CogAT7 profile, or are
identified for gifted programs in
local community newspapers
and the district website
newsfeed
4a. Track accolades,
compliments, and positive
reinforcements among, teachers,
parents, and school community.
4b. Tally school, district, and
community articles, school
Facebook page, and other media
forms about African American
student learning outcomes
success.
4b. Record tally of at least three
media forms such as school,
district, community articles,
school Facebook page, snapchat
and Instagram about African
American student learning
outcomes success on Excel
chart.

Internal Outcomes
5. All seven classroom
teachers maintain equity
cognitive frame to review
disaggregated data to
continue African
American student success.
All seven classroom teachers
develop own schedule with
grade level and in bi-monthly
professional development
sessions.
All seven classroom teachers
record review of disaggregated
data for gifted, trimester, and
standardized assessment scores
for African American students.
6. All seven classroom
teachers develop new
performance goals for
African American
students for gifted
identification.
All seven classroom teachers
monitor African American
student progress for gifted
identification assessment
indicators.
All seven classroom teachers
collect trimester data and review
using equity cognitive frames.
7. All seven classroom
teachers develop new
performance goals for
African American
students for standardized
assessments in ELA and
math.
7a. All seven classroom teachers
monitor African American
student progress for
standardized assessment
indicators.

7a. Add new performance goals
to previous performance goals
to chart on Excel type file.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 150

Table 21, continued
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
7b. All seven classroom teachers
monitor own and student growth
mindset for achievement and
motivational effort and learning
outcomes.
7b. Set aside weekly times for
1:1 conversations with African
American students.
7c. Set aside weekly times for
1:1 conversations with school
leadership and other teachers.

Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are Vitruvian Prep teachers. The first
critical behavior is that teachers must correctly apply equity-mindedness to disaggregated data on
gifted identification for African American students. The second critical behavior is that they
must correctly apply equity-mindedness to disaggregated data on standardized assessments for
African American students. The third critical behavior is that they must review motivational
theory to identify if student outcomes were based on a learning or performance problem and plan
to solve said problem. The specific metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome
behaviors appears in Table 22.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 151

Table 22
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Leaders and Teachers
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Correctly apply
equity-mindedness to
disaggregated data,
including CogAT7
profile data on gifted
identification for
African American
students.

The number of
statements made by
teachers and school
leader related to
school, leader, and
teacher responsibility
for student outcomes.
(Equity Cognitive
Frame)

1a. School leader and
teachers maintain a
gifted identification
checklist to connect
statements made to
reasons related to
school: manifestations
of institutional racism;
leader: awareness of
racialized practices;
teacher: color-
consciousness
1a. Review Fall
2017 gifted
assessment data
provided by March
2018 to prepare
implementation plan
for Fall 2018 gifted
assessment and
enrichment
instruction.

1b. School leader and
teachers add to
checklist resources
and other support
needed to address
equity cognitive
frame.
1b. Create a
timeline and plan
from gifted data
review (August) to
gifted assessment in
(October).
2. Correctly apply
equity-mindedness to
disaggregated data on
standardized
assessments and
CogAT7 profile data
for African American
students.
The number of
statements made by
teachers and school
leader related to
school, leader, and
teacher responsibility
for student outcomes.
(Equity Cognitive
Frame)
2a. 1a. School leader
and teachers maintain
a standardized
checklist to connect
statements made to
reasons related to
school: manifestations
of institutional racism;
leader: personal
responsibility for
student outcomes;
awareness of
racialized practices;
teacher: personal
responsibility for
student outcomes;
color-consciousness
2a. Backward map
planning (August
2019 to August
2018) to plan to
address
standardized and
gifted assessments
data of African
American students
using Equity
Cognitive Frames.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 152

Table 22, continued
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
2b. School leader and
teachers add to
checklist resources
and other support
needed to address
equity cognitive
frame.
2b. Teachers plan
bi-monthly
professional
development to
review progress of
African American
students related to
improved
standardized
assessment
component(s).
3. Teachers use
motivational theory to
identify if gifted and
standardized
assessment student
outcomes were based
on a learning or
performance problem
and plan to solve.
Teachers review
disaggregated SBAC
data to determine if
either a learning or
performance problem
caused African
American student
outcomes.

3a. Teachers use
gifted and
standardized checklist
to add learning or
performance
motivational problem.
3a. Teachers review
motivational
theories every other
PD month
connected with
learning or
performance
problems using
equity cognitive
frames.
3b. Teachers review
motivational theories
within cultural context
related to learning or
performance problems
for African American
students.

3b. Teachers review
and discuss on self-
directed bi-monthly
days and with grade
level team.
Teacher decide on
performance or
learning problem
affecting African
American students
after each district
trimester assessment
patterned after
standardized testing
using equity cognitive
frames.
3c. Teachers review
Expectancy-Value,
self-efficacy, growth
mindset, attribution,
interest, value, and
goal orientation
theories to connect to
African American
student learning
outcomes using equity
cognitive frames.
3c. Teachers review
and discuss on self-
directed bi-monthly
days and with grade
level team.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 153

Required drivers. Teachers require the support of school leaders and the organization to
reinforce what they learn in training and to encourage them to apply what they learned. Rewards
should be established for achievement of performance goals to enhance the organizational
support of new performance goals. Table 23 shows the recommended drivers to support critical
behaviors.
Table 23
Required Drivers to Support School Leader and Teachers Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Education about key definitions. Bi-monthly school leader
directed PD schedule
1, 2, 3
Providing visuals and models of
disaggregated data.
Bi-monthly teacher directed PD
schedule
1, 2, 3
Grade level meetings to review
disaggregated data and discuss
with equity cognitive frame.
Bi-monthly teacher directed PD
schedule
1, 2, 3
Job aid with motivation theories. Bi-monthly teacher directed PD
schedule
1, 2, 3
Job aid for disaggregated
checklist.
On-going; Bi-monthly teacher
directed PD schedule
1, 2, 3
Encouraging
School leader and coach
establish positive engagement
with grade level teams.
Bi-monthly school leader &
teacher directed PD schedule
1, 2, 3
Growth mindset feedback and
coaching from Grade Level
Team Leader.
On-going; Bi-monthly teacher
directed PD schedule
1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Performance incentive for both
progress toward goal, reaching
the goal, and going beyond the
goal.
August for gifted identification
goal; August for standardized
assessment goal; every three
months for trimester assessment
goals; bi-monthly for short-term
academic goals.
1, 2, 3
Public kudos by school leader
and grade level team leader with
mention in the weekly school
bulletin.
Monthly assemblies, bi-monthly
school leader and teacher
directed PD, and weekly (in
bulletin).
1, 2, 3

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 154

Table 23, continued
Monitoring
School leader reviews and
discusses disaggregated checklist
and resources needed.
Bi-monthly school leader
directed PD schedule.
1, 2, 3
Coach reviews and discusses
disaggregated checklist and
resources needed.
Monthly check-ins with teachers. 1, 2, 3
Grade level team leader
collaborates about disaggregated
checklist and resources needed.
Ongoing: Bi-monthly & teacher
directed PD schedule
1, 2, 3

Organizational support. The organization will support teachers with professional
development and specified time to review disaggregated data utilizing equity-mindedness.
Leaders will also encourage dialogue and self-reflection by teachers to allow solutions proposed
to meet the performance goal.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, the stakeholders
will be able to
1. Recognize the equity component of the 1993 Federal definition about giftedness, (D)
2. Apply equity-minded perspective to view and use checklist for disaggregated state
assessment data by race and ethnicity, (P)
3. Apply equity-minded perspective to view and use checklist for disaggregated district
gifted assessment results, (P)
4. Learn Rueda’s (2011) definition of motivation and several motivational theories to apply
to improved African American student engagement and learning outcomes. (D)
5. Grade level team discussions express value of disaggregated data and motivational
strategies (D, P, Value)
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 155

6. Create an appropriate timeline that backward maps the Fall 2017 gifted assessment date
with the August 2017 equity minded review of SBAC, and prior year third Trimester, and
gifted assessment (P, M)
7. Relate the organization’s cultural setting beliefs about growth mindset to discussions
about the need to increase identification for African Americans students in gifted
programs. (D, M)
8. Express appreciation for the results of the August SBAC, and prior year third trimester,
and gifted assessment results as a baseline moving forward for improvement. (P, Value)
9. Teachers express an equity minded commitment to plan instructional lessons that engage
African American students in improved learning outcomes for increased identification in
gifted programs. (M, Value)
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved with
professional development on the need to improve identification of African American students for
GATE programs. Teachers and school leadership will learn definitions of equity-mindedness and
giftedness to apply to disaggregated state, district, and gifted assessment data. Professional
development will include five sessions, each with a specific objective and design for
collaborative interaction and discussion. The total time for completion of the five leadership-
driven “A” Monday professional development sessions is 25 minutes with additional minutes for
the use of disaggregated checklists and student observations determined by teachers and
leadership staff.
During the “A” Monday sessions, teachers will be provided the definition of equity-
mindedness in order to view disaggregated data for state, prior year’s third district trimester
scores, and prior year’s GATE assessment scores (“I do”). Implications of the data will be
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 156

discussed (“we do”) and performance goals will be developed utilizing the equity index.
Teachers will create timelines (“you do”) to backward map from the date of each assessment
with immediate attention for the gifted assessment that will occur in October 2018.
Subsequent sessions will focus on teachers’ learning the equity definition of giftedness,
given examples of characteristics of gifted students with the TOGCF form provided (“I do”), and
review gifted assessment practice materials to lead to a discussion of the construct of the
assessment (“we do”). During each session, teachers will be provided specific time to
collaboratively discuss what they learned and how they think it could lead to meeting the
performance goal (“you do”). After each session, teachers will also receive a job aid, template, or
chart to reflect and apply learning until the next session (“you do”). Between sessions, the
professional development facilitator will monitor how teacher understanding is applied to
African American students’ improved motivational and learning outcomes (“I do, we do, you
do”).
Components of learning. Definitions as declarative knowledge are necessary to learn as
common language to prepare to develop and reach performance goals. Procedural knowledge
supports the steps needed to apply the meaning of declarative knowledge to solve gaps in
performance. Both types of knowledge need to be monitored for learning and development of the
attitudes required to successfully prepare to achieve the stated goals. In addition, positive
attitudes lead to the commitment to learn more to improve job skills for the benefit of personal
growth and student learning outcomes. Professional development that is relevant and addresses
an equitable need creates confidence and commitment to reach the performance goal. As such,
Table 24 lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of learning.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 157

Table 24
Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(is) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using formative
activities/assessments such as observations.
During the professional development
discussion sessions.
Knowledge checks through discussions,
“appointment clock” and other
individual/group activities.
During the “You do” phase of the learning
session.

Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
During highlighting of the equity related words
in definitions and disaggregated data.
During the “We do” part of the session.
Demonstration in groups and individually of
using the charts, templates, and job aids to
successfully relate the definitions,
characteristics, and gifted assessment
construct.
During the sessions and in between sessions.
Quality of the feedback and questions from
peers during voluntary share outs.
During the sessions.
Application of the skills to use disaggregated
data of race, ethnicity with all assessments to
promote improved equity outcomes for
students.
In between sessions.
Reflective self-assessment by teachers. At the beginning of each session.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Facilitator’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating
agreement with the 1993 federal definition of
equity in giftedness.
During the session and in between sessions.
Discussions of the why of what they are being
asked to do to increase gifted identification for
African American students in gifted programs.
During and in between sessions.
Discussions about their commitment to reach
the performance goal.
During, in between, and after the sessions are
completed before the gifted assessment.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 158

Table 24, continued
Method(s) or Activity(is) Timing
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Collaborative teacher discussions about “best
practices.”
During, in between, and after the sessions end.
Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the session.
Teacher assessment about attitude toward
African American students gifted potential.
During and after the fifth session.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Create a class chart of disaggregated data and
discuss with colleagues, leadership how the
information will be used to improved gifted
identification for African American students.
During the session.
Create a backward map timeline for the gifted
assessment and discuss with colleagues,
leadership how African American students will
be engaged with the instructional preparation
needed for the gifted identification assessment.

During the session.
Teachers apply growth mindset to the
achievement of the performance goal to
improve gifted identification for African
American students.
During, in between, and beyond the end of the
formal sessions.

Level 1: Reaction
Immediately following the program implementation. During the five-session
professional development training, facilitation will include a brief introduction to the objective
with an activity related to the objective and teacher time for discussion. Data will be collected
from observations of teacher engagement with the activity and listening to discussions between
colleagues (Table 25 and Appendix Unit 11A). A pulse-check will occur during or after the
activity to gauge understanding and ask for comments about relevancy to own work using an
open-ended question. At the end of the session, a rating agreement scale survey will be provided
to participants and used to ask about their engagement with the activity and whether they
received useful information to address the performance goal.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 159

During the Reaction Phase, the facilitator conducts periodic brief pulse-checks by asking
the participants about the relevance of the session content to their work and the organization’s
performance goal. The Learning Phase includes checks for understanding using interactive
activities and discussions among groups in responding to questions and scenarios drawn from the
content.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately three weeks
after the implementation of the training (Appendix B), and then again at nine weeks, the
facilitator and school leadership will administer a survey containing open and scaled items using
the blended evaluation approach to measure, from the participant’s perspective, satisfaction and
relevance of the training (Level 1), confidence and value of applying their training (Level 2), and
application of the training to the performance goal utilizing instructional and motivational
strategies they are receiving (Level 3) with the intent to increase gifted identification for this
racial group from 0% to 5% (Level 4).
Table 25
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Active participation in collaborative
discussions.
During the “You do” portion of the session.
Attendance at all sessions. Ongoing at each of the five sessions.
Observation by facilitator During the sessions.
Course evaluation After the last session as a reflection of what
was learned.
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants during
discussion (ongoing)
During any part of each session.

Session evaluation Two weeks after the session.
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via
discussion (ongoing)
During or after every session.

Session evaluation Two weeks after the session.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 160

Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goal of improved gifted identification for African American students is
measured by the percentage of said students identified for potential giftedness, as an increase in
African American students identified for gifted programs from 0% to 5% is the performance
goal. Results from Fall 2017 indicated no students were identified gifted at Vitruvian Prep
though four students scored in the proficient range. Specialized instructional support and
monitoring can aid these students to continue to grow academically, if not in gifted programs,
then in closing the achievement gap. Table 26 provides actual profile data from the Fall 2017
CogAT7 gifted assessment for second graders at Vitruvian Prep.
Table 26
CogAT7 Student Profile(All student names are pseudonyms)
Student’s Name Profile Excerpt of Profile Explanation (3 pages per student)
Benny
African
American
7A Have well-developed networks of verbal and quantitative knowledge.
Their memories are good, and their learning strategies are effective.
Their reasoning skills can be improved, however, by encouraging them
to find ways of communicating that precisely describe the relationships
among concepts or the rules that sequence them. For example, in
writing, encourage students to find words that express their ideas
exactly, rather than.
Guided discovery methods work better than structured teaching methods
with frequent feedback and pairing with older or experienced students
and adults. These students have the greatest capacity for gifted
identification with focused support for their strengths and areas to
improve.
Maria
Hispanic
6B (V+) Encourage these students to use their verbal reasoning abilities to learn
more successfully in other domains, particularly in mathematics
problem-solving. Pair these students with students with above average
scores on quantitative and nonverbal assessment components.
Leslie
African
American
6A Have adequate cognitive resources for learning. Need help with learning
objectives requiring transfer such as high-level reading comprehension
skills, problem-solving and critical thinking.
Ana
Hispanic
6A Have adequate cognitive resources for learning. Need help with learning
objectives requiring transfer such as high-level reading comprehension
skills, problem-solving and critical thinking.
Source: Harcourt (n.d.) https://www.hmhco.com/cogat/cogatprofile
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 161

Through the five-part training series, teachers will acquire knowledge and motivational
strategies to reach the performance goal. Before, during, and after these trainings, teachers will
self-reflect and provide evaluations from Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) evaluation model
to determine the relevance, value, commitment, and confidence they derive from the training to
work toward the goal. The focus on teachers and staff review of the CogAT7 student profiles
with instructional suggestions will inform the application of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s
training and evaluation process as a monitoring and accountability tool. Appendix C also depicts
Levels 1, 2 and 3 as a guide to school leadership and teachers of the consistent checks that the
evaluation model provides.
On the CogAT7, students received a composite score for verbal, quantitative, and
nonverbal answers. The composite score was translated into a stanine or profile score from 3A to
9A and students with 8 or 9 profiles often eligible for gifted programs. Students with 7 profiles
have the capacity for high-ability learning and with specific instructional rigor for both their
strengths and areas to improve and have a strong inclination toward gifted identification.
Students with 5 or 6 profiles are good learners who have the skills needed to score proficient on
state assessments. The significance of this was students with five and six profiles have developed
skills with the better than average capacity to score proficiently on state assessments, effectively
closing the achievement gap. Profiles below five indicate students need some additional
instructional strategies to achieve proficiency. With the suggestions recommended in each
student profile, the possibility exists for the student to reach the next profile with practice.
As shown in Table 26, the letters next to the profile with a plus indicate a strength. For
example, V+ means advanced verbal skills. A letter with a minus sign indicates a student had
lower-than-expected scores in that component of the assessment. With the disaggregated gifted
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 162

assessment profile data now available online and with the Kirkpatrick (2016) training and
evaluation model, teachers and staff have an important opportunity to provide rigorous
instruction and monitor student progress throughout the year.

Figure 3. Recommendation for school leader.

Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was used to
contribute to meaningful training to produce the organization’s performance goal. A blended
evaluation utilizing the four levels of reaction, learning, behavior, and results includes the
components to plan, implement, and evaluate the recommendations needed to reach the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 163

stakeholder and organization’s performance goal. Expectations for using the framework are to
address the three key questions Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) indicated are necessary to
make data-based decisions. These questions relate to implementation and evaluation of the plan
to reach the organization's performance goal. The questions include whether the plan meets the
expectations for the results desired, and if not, why not, and, if it does, then why does it do so.
Key to the implementation and evaluation of training programs is ongoing monitoring at each
level of evaluation to allow for improvement of the competencies necessary to support the goal.
Level One evaluation of teachers as the stakeholder group for the study shows that all
seven teacher participants reacted positively to the purpose of the study to improve gifted
identification for African American students. Level Two evaluation found that all seven teachers
were motivated to engage with the learning activities designed to increase teacher knowledge
and motivational strategies to support the goal. Level Three evaluations found that five of the
seven teachers demonstrated behaviors that indicated transfer of knowledge to the classroom.
The performance goal, though not achieved from the Fall 2017 CogAT7 results, was
thoughtfully reflected upon by the seven teachers interviewed and observed. The CogAT7
student online profile discovered by the investigator months after the assessment holds promise
for the two African American students who scored the highest, one within reach of gifted
identification and observed for giftedness by his teacher. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016)
Level Four evaluation, when utilized by the coordinator of an initiative and teachers as a village
of educators, holds great promise to fulfill the performance goal.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 164

Strengths and Weaknesses of Approach
Clark and Estes’ (2008) and Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2012) improvement and
evaluation models are useful as an organizational design when implemented and monitored and
engaged with by all stakeholders. As with all changes, these authors’ books need to be read, re-
read, and kept as a ready reference because there are procedures for when gaps are closed and
when they are not, and leaders need to know where to start again. With Clark and Estes’ (2008)
model, there is a danger of trying a model and, if it does not work, try another one. With
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2012) model, there is a tendency to skip levels when all
necessary. Awareness of these weaknesses are, in a way, a strength of the approaches as one is
alerted that the weaknesses are there.
Limitations
For a fuller analysis, enabling and providing knowledge and motivation to parents, school
staff, school leaders, and district staff most connected to the proposed goal would be necessary.
Research found teachers were the greatest influence, and although they understood this
intellectually, they reflected on the need for support. In order to achieve the goal, a team or
village was needed because, during interviews, observations, and in documentation, there was a
group needed to assist African American students to achieve the goal.
Recommendations for Future Research
There were many facets to the problem of improving gifted identification of African
American students, particularly at lower-performing schools in urban school districts. These
students are neglected for gifted, creative, enriched, and high-ability learning opportunities. Two
areas should be explored. One is the excellence gap, which is the gap between identified gifted
African American students and White students. Though the gap is not as wide as the
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 165

achievement gap, it is significant enough to warrant attention. Once African American students
are identified gifted, what is next to support their continued development both in their areas of
strength and areas in need of growth? Also, does being identified enable access to other
specialized programs? Underachievement among the gifted is a problem in general and is
exacerbated for African American students due to similar challenges of under-identification.
The second recommendation is twice exceptionality, which means students identified
with both a disability and giftedness. However, African American students are over-represented
in special education and under-represented in gifted programs. Therefore, it is likely more
African American students are identified for a disability and then for giftedness depriving these
students of access to the resources of both programs. Additionally, African American students
may have been misidentified due to teachers’ lack of knowledge of gifted characteristics
exhibited by students of color.
Conclusion
Ford (2010) said there was no magic bullet to solving the persistent problem of African
American students’ under-representation and, by extension, under-identification in gifted
programs. Through the literature on the topic for this study, the consistent theme was importance
of the goal because giftedness can be found in all races, cultures, and ethnicities. Instructional
frameworks and motivational theories are powerful tools to open up the greater potential in
African American students. Leadership’s ability and courage are important in leading and
coordinating organizational changes to transform the cultural setting and coordinate the
resources, manpower, and time to monitor the progress of improved identification for African
American students in gifted programs. Also important are the teachers’ motivation, knowledge,
organization, and, most of all, their advocacy.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 166

References
Allen, J. K., Robbins, M. A., Payne, Y. D., & Brown, K. B. (2016). Using enrichment clusters to
address the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse learners. Gifted Child
Today, 39(2), 84-97. 10.1177/1076217516628568.
Allport, G. W., Clark, K., & Pettigrew, T. (1954). The nature of prejudice.

Anderman, L. H., & Anderman, E. M. (2009). Oriented towards mastery: Promoting positive
motivational goals for students.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Arizona Department of Education. (2018). Project Bright Horizon. United States Department of
Education. (n.a.). Office of Innovation and Development. Jacob K. Javits Gifted and
Talented Education Grant Program. Retrieved from www.azed.gov/gifted-
education/project-bright-horizon/
Baldwin, A. Y. (2002). Culturally diverse students who are gifted. Exceptionality, 10(2), 139-
147. 10.1207/S15327035EX1002_7 Retrieved
from http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327035EX1002_7
Beasley, J. G., Briggs, C., & Pennington, L. (2017). Bridging the gap 10 years later: A tool and
technique to analyze and evaluate advanced academic curricular units. Gifted Child
Today, 40(1), 48-58. 10.1177/1076217516675902 Retrieved
from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076217516675902
Bensimon, E. M. (2004). The diversity scorecard: A learning approach to institutional
change. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 36(1), 44-52.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 167

Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99-111.
Bensimon, E. M. (2006). Learning equity-mindedness: Equality in educational outcomes. The
Academic Workplace, 1(17), 2-21.
Bensimon, E. M., & Malcom, L. (Eds.). (2012). Confronting equity issues on campus
: implementing the equity scorecard in theory and practice. Retrieved from
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Bensimon, E. M., Rueda, R., Dowd, A. C., & Harris III, F. (2007). Accountability, equity, and
practitioner learning and change. Metropolitan Universities, 18(3), 28-45.
Besnoy, Kevin D., Dantzler, John, Besnoy, Lisa R., & Byrne, Caitlin. (2016). Using exploratory
and confirmatory factor analysis to measure construct validity of the Traits, Aptitudes,
and Behaviors Scale (TABS). Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(1), 3-22.
Bondy, E., & Ross, D. D. (2008). The teacher as warm demander.(teaching in high-poverty
schools). Educational Leadership, 66(1), 54-58.
Bondy, E., Ross, D. D., Hambacher, E., & Acosta, M. (2013). Becoming warm demanders:
Perspectives and practices of first year teachers. Urban Education, 48(3), 420-450.
Bonner, F. A., II., Lewis, C. W., Bowman-Perrott, L., Hill-Jackson, V., & James, M. (2009).
Definition, identification, identity, and culture: A unique alchemy impacting the success
of gifted African American millennial males in school. Journal for the Education of the
Gifted, 33(2), 176-202.
Borland, J. (2004). Issues and practices in the identification and education of gifted students
from under-represented groups. US Department of Education.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 168

Boykin, A. W., & Noguera, P. (2011). Creating the opportunity to learn: Moving from research
to practice to close the achievement gap. Ascd.
Boucher, M. L., & Helfenbein, R. J. (2015). The push and the pull: Deficit models, Ruby Payne,
and becoming a “Warm Demander”. The Urban Review, 47(4), 742-758.
Briggs, C. J., Reis, S. M., & Sullivan, E. E. (2008). A national view of promising programs and
practices for culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse gifted and talented
students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(2), 131-145.
Brown, C. N. (1997). Gifted identification as a constitutional issue. Roeper Review: A Journal on
Gifted Education, 19(3), 157-167. //dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783199709553813
Brown, D. F. (2004). Urban teachers' professed classroom management strategies: Reflections of
culturally responsive teaching. Urban Education, 39(3), 266-289.
Brown, K. (2017). Buzzwords explained: Opportunity gap vs. achievement gap. Retrieved from
https://readingpartners.org/blog/buzzwords-explained-opportunity-gap-vs-achievement-
gap/
Capper, C. A. (2015). The 20th-year anniversary of critical race theory in education:
Implications for leading to eliminate racism. Educational Administration Quarterly,
51(5), 791-833. 10.1177/0013161X15607616
California Department of Education. (2016). Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved
from https://www.cde.ca.gov/RE/cc//
California Department of Education. (2017). Equity. Retrieved from
https://www.cde.ca.gov/qs/ea/
California Department of Education. (n.a.). Glossary of Terms. Retrieved from
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/glossary.asp#gate
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 169

California Department of Education. (2005). Resource Guide-Gifted and Talented Education.
Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/gt/gt/documents/guidebook.doc
California Department of Education. (2016). School Accountability Report Card (SARC).
Retrieved from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/
Carter, R., Williams, S., & Silverman, W. K. (2008). Cognitive and emotional facets of test
anxiety in African American school children. Cognition & Emotion, 22(3), 539-551.
10.1080/02699930801886722
Castania, K. (2003). The evolving language of diversity. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Charleston, L. J., Charleston, S. A., & Jackson, J. F. (2014). Using culturally responsive
practices to broaden participation in the educational pipeline: Addressing the unfinished
business of Brown in the field of computing sciences. The Journal of Negro Education,
83(3), 400-419.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions IAP.
CogAT profile. Retrieved from https://www.hmhco.com/cogat/cogatprofile
Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A
social-psychological intervention. Science, 313(5791), 1307-1310.
Cokley, K. (2003). What do we know about the motivation of African American students?
challenging the" anti-intellectual" myth. Harvard Educational Review, 73(4), 524-558.
Connor, D. J., & Baglieri, S. (2009). Tipping the scales: Disability studies asks, “How much
diversity can you take?”. Diversity and Multiculturalism: A Reader, , 341-362.
Cooke, J. K. (n.d.). What is the excellence gap? Retrieved from
http://www.excellencegap.org/what-is-the-excellence-gap
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 170

Cornell, S., & Hartmann, D. (2007). A constructionist approach. ch. 4. Ethnicity and Race:
Making Identities in a Changing World,
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Czubaj, C. A. (1996). Maintaining teacher motivation. Education, 116(3), 372.
da Silva, C. D., Hughley, J. P., Kakli, Z., & Rao, R. (2007). The opportunity gap achievement
and inequality in education. harvard educational review reprint series Harvard
Education Press.
Dai, D. Y. (2013). Excellence at the cost of social justice? negotiating and balancing priorities in
gifted education. Roeper Review, 35(2), 93-101. 10.1080/02783193.2013.766961
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2013.766961
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 8, 1.
Darling ‐Hammond, L. (2007a). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of
‘No child left behind’. Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245-260.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007b). Third annual brown lecture in education research—The flat earth
and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our
future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education : How america's commitment to
equity will determine our future. New York: New York : Teachers College Press.
Davis, J. L. (2010). Bright, talented, and Black: A guide for families of African American gifted
learners Great Potential Press.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 171

Davis, J. L. (2014). Families and gifted learners: Developing talent and advocating for their
own. Advances in Special Education, 26, 223-237. 10.1108/S0270-
4013(2014)0000026011
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Schutz, P. A. (2016). Race and ethnicity in the study of motivation in
education Routledge.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory an introduction
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory (third edition): An introduction NYU
Press.
Delgado, R., Stefancic, J., & Liendo, E. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction (2nd ed).
Albany: New York University.
Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Data Collection
(as cited in U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data
Collection: Data Snapshot (College and Career Readiness) March 21, 2014, p 3.
Department of Labor. (2017). Bureau of Vital Statistics. Occupational Handbook Outlook.
Fastest Growing Occupations. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/ooh/fastest-
growing.htm
De Gaetano, Y., & España, C. (2010). Cultural competence in education. Center for Puerto
Rican Studies.
Dweck, C. (2015). Carol Dweck revisits the ‘growth mindset'. Education Week, 35(5), 20-24.
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset : The new psychology of success (Ballantine Books trade pbk. ed.
ed.). New York: New York : Ballantine Books.
Eccles, J. (2009). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 172

Ed Gov. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdc-college-and-career-readiness-
snapshot.pdf.
EdTrust West. (n.a.a). Black minds matter: Supporting the educational success of Black children
in western united states. Retrieved from https://west.edtrust.org/resource/black-minds-
matter-supporting-the-educational-success-of-black-children-in-westernunitedstates
EdTrust West. (n.a.b). REPORT: At a crossroads: A comprehensive picture of how African
American youth fare in County schools. Retrieved from
https://west.edtrust.org/resource/at-a-crossroads-a-comprehensive-picture-of-how-
African-American-youth-fare-in-county-schools/
Elhoweris, H., Mutua, K., Alsheikh, N., & Holloway, P. (2005). Effect of children's ethnicity on
teachers' referral and recommendation decisions in gifted and talented
programs. Remedial and Special Education, 26(1), 25-31.
//dx.doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260010401
Erwin, J. O., & Worrell, F. C. (2012). Assessment practices and the under-representation of
minority students in gifted and talented education. Journal of Psychoeducational
Assessment, 30(1), 74-87.
Ford, D. (2010). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students, 2nd
ed. Sourcebooks, Inc.
Ford, D. Y. (2014). Segregation and the under-representation of blacks and hispanics in gifted
education: Social inequality and deficit paradigms. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted
Education, 36(3), 143-154. //dx.doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2014.919563
Ford, D. Y., & Grantham, T. C. (2003). Providing access for culturally diverse gifted students:
From deficit to dynamic thinking. Theory into Practice, 42(3), 217-225.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 173

Ford, D. Y., Coleman, M. R., & Davis, J. L. (2014). Racially, ethnically, and linguistically
different gifted and talented students10.1177/1076217514533277
Ford, D. Y., Howard, T. C., Harris, J. J., & Tyson, C. A. (2000). Creating culturally responsive
classrooms for gifted minority students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23(4),
397-427. 10.1177/016235320002300405
Ford, D. Y., Moore, J. L., III., & Scott, M. T. (2011). Key theories and frameworks for
improving the recruitment and retention of African American students in gifted
education. Journal of Negro Education, 80(3), 239-253.
Ford, D. Y., Scott, M. T., Moore, J. L., & Amos, S. O. (2013). Gifted education and culturally
different students: Examining prejudice and discrimination via microaggressions. Gifted
Child Today, 36(3), 205-208. 10.1177/1076217513487069 Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217513487069
Ford, D. Y., Wright, B. L., Washington, A., & Henfield, M. S. (2016). Access and equity denied:
Key theories for school psychologists to consider when assessing Black and Hispanic
students for gifted education. Paper presented at the School Psychology Forum, , 10(3)
Ford, Donna Y. (1995). Desegregating Gifted Education: A Need Unmet. Journal of Negro
Education, 64(1), 52-62.
Frye, B. J., & Vogt, H. A. (2010). The causes of under-representation of African American
children in gifted programs and the need to address this problem through more culturally
responsive teaching practices in teacher education programs. Black History
Bulletin, 73(1), 11.
Dalia, N., & Agnė, B. (2013). The empirical validation of cognitive domain characteristics in the
gifted screening checklist. Gifted Education International, 29(2), 199-210.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 174

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences Basic Books.
Gagné, M., Reeve, J., & Su, Y. (n.d.). Teacher Motivation. The Oxford Handbook of Work
Engagement, Motivation, and Self-Determination Theory. Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199794911.013.004
Gershenson, S., Hart, C., Lindsay, C., & Papageorge, N. W. (2017). The long-run impacts of
same-race teachers.
Ghavami, N., Fingerhut, A., Peplau, L. A., Grant, S. K., & Wittig, M. A. (2011). Testing a model
of minority identity achievement, identity affirmation, and psychological well-being
among ethnic minority and sexual minority individuals. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic
Minority Psychology, 17(1), 79.
Gibbons, M. M., Pelchar, T. K., & Cochran, J. L. (2012). Gifted students from low-education
backgrounds. Roeper Review, 34(2), 114-122.
Glesne, C. (2015). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction Pearson.
Glossary of Education Reform. (n.a.). Access. Retrieved from https://www.edglossary.org/
Gorski, P. (2008). Peddling Poverty for Profit: Elements of Oppression in Ruby Payne's
Framework. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41(1), 130-148.
Graham, E. (2017). Authority or democracy? Integrating Two perspectives on equitable
classroom management in urban schools. The Urban Review, 1-23.
Grantham, T. C. (2013). Creativity and equity: The legacy of E. Paul Torrance as an upstander
for gifted Black males. The Urban Review, 45(4), 518-538. //dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11256-
013-0257-2
Grantham, T. C., & Ford, D. Y. (2003). Beyond self-concept and self-esteem: Racial identity and
gifted African American students. The High School Journal, 87(1), 18-29.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 175

Grantham, T. C., Frasier, M. M., Roberts, A. C., & Bridges, E. M. (2005). Parent advocacy for
culturally diverse gifted students. Theory into Practice, 44(2), 138.
10.1207/s15430421tip4402_8
Graves, S., & Mitchell, A. (2011). Is the moratorium over? African American psychology
professionals’ views on intelligence testing in response to changes to federal
policy. Journal of Black Psychology, 37(4), 407-425.
Green, S. (2010). Afterthought: Gifted education: The civil rights issue of our generation? Black
History Bulletin, 73, 31.
Grissom, J. A., & Redding, C. (2015). Discretion and disproportionality: Explaining the under-
representation of high-achieving students of color in gifted programs. Aera Open, 2(1),
2332858415622175.
Grubb, R. (2011). Gifted learners in an urban setting: Challenges and opportunities. Gifted Child
Today, 34(1), 60-62.
Han, J., & Yin, H. (n.d.). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and implications
for teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1), . doi:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1217819
Hargrove, B. H., & Seay, S. E. (2011). School teacher perceptions of barriers that limit the
participation of African American males in public school gifted programs. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 34(3), 434-467. //dx.doi.org/10.1177/016235321103400304
Harper, S. R. (2015). Black male college achievers and resistant responses to racist stereotypes at
predominantly White colleges and universities. Harvard Educational Review, 85(4), 646-
674.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 176

Harradine, C. C., Coleman, M. R. B., & Winn, D. C. (2014). Recognizing academic potential in
students of color: Findings of U-STARS~PLUS. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 24-34.
//dx.doi.org/10.1177/0016986213506040
Heggert, Keith. (2015). Developing a growth mindset in teachers and staff. Retrieved
from https://www.edutopia.org/discussion/developing-growth-mindset-teachers-and-staff
Hertzog, N. B. (2005). Equity and access: Creating general education classrooms responsive to
potential giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29(2), 213-257.
Hines, D. (2008). Education Programs: Implications for Sustainability in Gifted
Classes. Perspectives.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above IQ 180. World book company.
Holme, J. J. (2002). Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social construction of
school quality. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 177-206.
10.17763/haer.72.2.u6272x676823788r Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.2.u6272x676823788r
Hopkins, A., & Garrett, K. (2010). Separate and unequal: The under-representation of African
American students in gifted and talented programs.(report). Black History Bulletin, 73(1),
24.
Huff, R. E., Houskamp, B. M., Watkins, A. V., Stanton, M., & Tavegia, B. (2005). The
experiences of parents of gifted African American children: A phenomenological
study. Roeper Review, 27(4), 215-221.
Javits, J. K. (1988). Gifted and talented students education act. Title N, Pat B of PL-Р, 100-297.
Javits, J. K. (2001). Gifted and talented students education act. PL 107-110, the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 177

Johnson, K. J., & Williams, L. (2015). When treating all the kids the same is the real problem :
The 21st century dilemma of difference. Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin.
Kaplan, S. N. (2012). Depth and complexity. Fundamentals of Gifted Education: Considering
Multiple Perspectives, , 277.
Kaufman, S. B., & Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Giftedness in the euro-american culture. Conceptions
of Giftedness: Socio-Cultural Perspectives, , 377-413.
Kezar, A. (2000). Pluralistic leadership: Incorporating diverse voices. The Journal of Higher
Education, 71(6), 722-743.
Kim, J., & Sunderman, G. L. (2004). Does NCLB Provide Good Choices for Students in Low-
Performing Schools? Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation. Performance
Improvement, 45(7), 5-8.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training
evaluation Association for Talent Development.
Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the
design of learning.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dream keepers: Successful teachers of African American
children. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84. 10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751 Retrieved
from http://www.hepgjournals.org/doi/abs/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 178

Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate W. F., IV. (2016). Toward a critical race theory of
education. Critical race theory in education (pp. 21-41) Routledge.
Lazowski, R. A., & Hulleman, C. S. (2016). Motivation interventions in education: A meta-
analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 602-640.
Lewis, J. D., DeCamp-Fritson, S. S., Ramage, J. C., McFarland, M. A., & Archwamety, T.
(2007). Selecting for ethnically diverse children who may be gifted using Raven's
standard progressive matrices and Naglieri nonverbal abilities test. Multicultural
Education, 15(1), 38.
Lohman, D. F. (2011, August). Introducing CogAT Form 7. Cognitively Speaking, 7(1).
Retrieved from https://www.hmhco.com/~/media/sites/home/hmh-
assessments/assessments/cogat/pdf/cogat-cognitively-speaking-v7-aug-2011.pdf?la=en
Lohman, D. F. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in identifying academically gifted
students: An aptitude perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(2), 111-138.
Marland Jr, S. P. (1971). Education of the Gifted and Talented-Volume 1: Report to the
Congress of the United States by the US Commissioner of Education.
Mazzoli Smith, L., & Campbell, R. J. (2016). So-called giftedness and teacher education: Issues
of equity and inclusion. Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 255-267.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
McClain, M., & Pfeiffer, S. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the united states today: A
look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School
Psychology, 28(1), 59-88. 10.1080/15377903.2012.643757
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 179

McFarland, J., Hussar, B., de Brey, C., Snyder, T., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S.,... Barmer,
A. (2017). The condition of education 2017. NCES 2017-144. Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics.
McIntosh, P. (2012). Reflections and future directions for privilege studies. Journal of Social
Issues, 68(1), 194-206.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research : A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.) Wiley.
Michael-Chadwell, S. (2010). Examining the under-representation of underserved students in
gifted programs from a transformational leadership vantage point. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 34(1), 99-130.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Miller, L., & Lee, J. (2014). Policy barriers to school improvement: What’s real and what’s
imagined? CRPE Center on Reinventing Public Education, 1–16.
Moore III, J. L., Ford, D. Y., & Milner, H. R. (2005). Recruitment is not enough: Retaining
African American students in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(1), 51-67.
Minority students in special and gifted education (2002). In National Research Council Staff
(Ed.),. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press. Retrieved
from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uscisd/docDetail.action?docID=10032383&ppg=62
Moon, T. R., & Brighton, C. M. (2008). Primary teachers' conceptions of giftedness. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted, 31(4), 447-480.
Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods / clark moustakas. Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Sage, c1994.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 180

Naglieri, J. A., & Ford, D. Y. (2005). Increasing minority children's participation in gifted
classes using the NNAT: A response to lohman. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49(1), 29-36.
//dx.doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900104
National Association for Gifted Education. (n.a.). A Brief History of Gifted Education. Retrieved
from https://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/gifted-education-us/brief-
history-gifted-and-talented-education
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The Condition of Education.
NVivo (version11.4.2) [Computer software]. Available
from http://www.qsrinternational.com/default.aspx
Noble, T. (2004). Integrating the revised bloom's taxonomy with multiple intelligences: A
planning tool for curriculum differentiation. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 193-211.
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Odom, A. L., & Kelly, P. V. (1998). Making learning meaningful. The Science Teacher, 65(4),
33.
Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI). (1993). National excellence: A case
for developing America's talent.
Okonofua, J. A., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2015). Two strikes: Race and the disciplining of young
students. Psychological Science, 26(5), 617-624.
Orfield, G. J., Frankenberg, E., & Siegel-Hawley, G. (2016). Brown at 62: School Segregation
by Race, Poverty and State.
Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. C. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich, Conn.:
Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 181

Palmer, D. (2010). Race, power, and equity in a multiethnic urban elementary school with a
Dual ‐Language “Strand” program. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41(1), 94-114.
10.1111/j.1548-1492.2010.01069.x Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-
1492.2010.01069.x
Papageorge, N. W., Gershenson, S., & Kang, K. (2016). Teacher expectations matter.
Pearson Education, Inc. (2017). Review360 web-based behavior management system. Retrieved
from http://www.pearsonclinical.com/feature/R360/index.html?orgref=http://www.ani.co
m/REVIEW360&utm_medium=vanity&cmpid=701d0000002VnQwAAK
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2002). Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising
solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19(1), 31-50.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Pitre, C. C. (2014). Improving African American student outcomes: Understanding educational
achievement and strategies to close opportunity gaps. The Western Journal of Black
Studies, 38(4), 209.
Plucker, J. A., & Callahan, C. M. (2014). Research on giftedness and gifted education: Status of
the field and considerations for the future. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 390-406.
Retrieved from http://usc.summon.serialssolutions.com
Plucker, J. A., Burroughs, N., & Song, R. (2010). Mind the (other) gap! the growing excellence
gap in K-12 education. Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University,
Prejudice. (n.d.). n Merriam-Webster dictionary online. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/prejudice
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 182

Racism. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster dictionary online. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/racism
Raven, J. (2000). The raven's progressive matrices: Change and stability over culture and
time. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 1-48.
Rebora, A. (2008). Making a difference - education week. Teacher, Retrieved
from https://www.edweek.org/tsb/articles/2008/09/10/01tomlinson.h02.html?print=1
Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2009). Myth 1: The gifted and talented constitute one single
homogeneous group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time
and experiences10.1177/0016986209346824
Reis, S. M., Kaplan, S. N., Tomlinson, C. A., Westberg, K. L., Callahan, C. M., & Cooper, C. R.
(1998). Equal does not mean identical. Educational Leadership, 56(3), 74-77.
Renzulli, J. S. (2011). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan
Magazine, 92(8), 81-88. 10.1177/003172171109200821 Retrieved
from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/003172171109200821
Renzulli, J. S. (2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the
21st century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(3), 150-159. 10.1177/0016986212444901
Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0016986212444901
Rhoder, C. (2002). Mindful reading: Strategy training that facilitates transfer. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 498-512.
Rich, M. (2014). School data finds pattern of inequality along racial lines. New York Times, 21
Robertson, S. G., Pfeiffer, S. I., & Taylor, N. (2011). Serving the gifted: A national survey of
school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools, 48(8), 786-799. 10.1002/pits.20590
Retrieved
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 183

from http://usc.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LSwMxEA7V
kxf
Robinson, S. (2016). Triple identity theory: A theoretical framework for understanding gifted
Black males with dyslexia. 2179793453, 4(1)
Rojas, L., & Liou, D. (2017). Social Justice Teaching Through the Sympathetic Touch of Caring
and High Expectations for Students of Color. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 28-40.
Romanoff, B. S., Algozzine, B., & Nielson, A. B. (2009). Achievement of African American and
White students referred and placed or not placed in gifted programs. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 33(2), 156-175.
Ross, D., Bondy, E., & Hambacher, E. (2008). Promoting Academic Engagement through
Insistence: Being a Warm Demander. Childhood Education, 84(3), 142-146.
Ross, P. O., Callahan, C. M., & United States Office of Educational Research and Improvement
Programs for the Improvement of Practice. (1994). National excellence: A case for
developing America’s talent : An anthology of readings. Washington, DC: Office of
Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Dept. of Education, 1994.
Rotatori, A. F., Bakken, J. P., & Obiakor, F. E. (2014). Gifted education: Current perspectives
and issues Emerald Group Publishing.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. ERIC.
Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers / johnny saldana (2nd ed. ed.).
Los Angeles: Los Angeles : SAGE, 2013.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership John Wiley & Sons.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 184

Schneider, B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Creating a climate and culture for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7-19.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from http://
www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory
Scott, L. M. (2016). Culturally affirming literacy practices for urban elementary students.
Lanham: Lanham, US: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Shetterly, M. L. (2016). Hidden figures : The American dream and the untold story of the Black
women mathematicians who helped win the space race New York, NY: William Morrow.
Siegle, D., Gubbins, E. J., O'Rourke, P., Langley, S. D., Mun, R. U., Luria, S. R., &... Plucker, J
A. (2016). Barriers to underserved students' participation in gifted programs and possible
solutions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39, 131.
Singleton, Dorothy, M., Livingston, Jonathan, Hines, Dorothy, Jones, Helen (2005). Under-
representation of African American Students in Gifted Education Programs: Implications
for Sustainability in Gifted Classes. Perspective. 1-6.
Sleeter, C. E. (2017). Critical race theory and the whiteness of teacher education. Urban
Education, 52(2), 155-169.
Stangor, C. (2014). Principles of social psychology (1st international edition). Retrieved from
https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/part/chapter-12-stereotypes-prejudice-and-
discrimination
Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (2005). Conceptions of giftedness Cambridge University
Press.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 185

Sternberg, R. J., & Subotnik, R. F. (2000). A multidimensional framework for synthesizing
disparate issues in identifying, selecting, and serving gifted children. International
handbook of giftedness and talent, 831-838.
Stevens, F. G., Plaut, V. C., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2008). Unlocking the benefits of diversity:
All-inclusive multiculturalism and positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 44(1), 116-133.
Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and
gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological
science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54.
10.1177/1529100611418056 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life : Race, gender, and sexual orientation.
Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated. Retrieved
from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/socal/detail.action?docID=487711
Sue, D. W., Lin, A. I., Torino, G. C., Capodilupo, C. M., & Rivera, D. P. (2009). Racial
microaggressions and difficult dialogues on race in the classroom. Cultural Diversity &
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(2), 183. 10.1037/a0014191
Terman, L. M., & Merrill, M. A. (1937). Measuring intelligence: A guide to the administration
of the new revised Stanford-Binet tests of intelligence.
Thoonen, E., Sleegers, P., Oort, F., Peetsma, T., & Geijsel, F. (n.d.). How to Improve Teaching
Practices: The Role of Teacher Motivation, Organizational Factors, and Leadership
Practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536.
doi:10.1177/0013161X11400185
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 186

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Toshalis, E., & Nakkula, M. J. (2012). Motivation, engagement, and student voice. Education
Digest,78(1), 29-35.
Turner, B. G., Beidel, D. C., Hughes, S., & Turner, M. W. (1993). Test anxiety in African
American school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 8(2), 140-52.
Valencia, R. R. (2002). Chicano school failure and success : Past, present, and future / edited
by] richard R. valencia (2nd ed. ed.). London; New York: London; New York :
Routledge/Falmer, 2002.
Vega, C. (2017, October 27). Do parents' views on gifted education vary by ethnicity? The
Atlantic, Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/10/do-
parents-views-on-gifted-education-vary-by-ethnicity/544182/
Walker, K. L. (2011). Deficit thinking and the effective teacher. Education and Urban
Society, 43(5), 576-597. 10.1177/0013124510380721 Retrieved
from http://eus.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/43/5/576
Warne, R. T. (2009). Comparing tests used to identify ethnically diverse gifted children: A
critical response to lewis, DeCamp-fritson, ramage, McFarland, &
archwamety. Multicultural Education, 17(1), 48.
Wasserberg, M. J. (2014). Stereotype threat effects on African American children in an urban
elementary school. The Journal of Experimental Education, , 1-16.
10.1080/00220973.2013.876224
Watt, H., & Richardson, P. (2015). Teacher Motivation. International Encyclopedia of the Social
& Behavioral Sciences (pp. 64–71). doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26082-0
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 187

Wechsler, D. (1949). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. San Antonio, TX, US:
Psychological Corporation.
Wheelan, C. (2010). Naked economics: Undressing the dismal science. New York: Norton, W.
W. & Company.
Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and
interest: Definitions, development, and relations to achievement
outcomes. Developmental Review, 30(1), 1-35.
Wong, A. (2016, January 19). Why are there so few Black children in gifted programs? The
Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/why-
are-there-so-few-black-children-in-gifted-and-talented-programs/424707/
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-orientation-theory/

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 188

APPENDIX A
Action Unified School District
Teacher Observation of GATE Characteristics Form
Required for ALL students tested
Date Student Name
Grade Student ID
School Home Language
Teacher Language Fluency
Race Hispanic (Yes/No)

Directions to Teacher: For each characteristic listed, place a check (√) next to the criteria that
matches your observation of the characteristic in the student. Each check (√) is worth the
number of points listed at the top of the column.
CRITERIA FOR SCORING
4 = Consistently observed in the student.
3 = Frequently observed in the student.
2 = Occasionally observed in the student.
1 = Rarely observed in the student.
0 = Never observed in the student
CHARACTERISTICS OF GIFTED LEARNERS 4 3 2 1 0
1. Is inquisitive and curious - asks lots of questions
2. Ability to remember and recall large amounts of information.
3. Acquires language readily, applies language correctly in varied contexts.
4. Demonstrates strong interest or expertise in a particular area of study.
5. Has a strong moral compass and sense of justice.
6. Understands and recognizes patterns quickly.
7. Demonstrates advanced reasoning and problem-solving skills.
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 189

8. Sees generalizations and relationships readily.
9. Displays creativity and originality, a sense of playfulness with ideas and
objects.

10. Has a natural drive to explore ideas.
11. Reasons abstractly…making connections, transfers knowledge across
domains.

12. Has a tendency to lose awareness of time/intensity towards a task or
problem.

13. Learns easily, requires less practice on skill to get to mastery.
14. Displays spatial abilities.
15. Enjoys academic and/or social risk-taking.
16. Has highly developed sense of humor, understands sarcasm.
17. Is independent, demonstrates independent thinking.
18. Seeks out older friends or playmates, enjoys the company of adults.
19. Challenges conventional thought.
20. Displays leadership.
21. High degree of resourcefulness.
22. Enjoys role playing, storytelling, making up games
23. Is sensitive to themselves and the environment.
24. Has an extreme need for precision or perfection.
25. Demonstrates exceptional ability in art, dance, music, theatre.
Add the total number of points for each column.
Write the sum of all totals
AUSD, 2017 GATE site representative meeting. Sources: NAGC, 2015.

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 190

APPENDIX B
Individual L1 and L2 Evaluation Tools
Appendix Unit 11 A: Individual L1 and L2 Evaluation Tools
Tool
Declarative Knowledge (I know it)

Item

Knowledge checks through discussion about
the difference between the 1993 federal
definition of giftedness with and without the
sentence related to equity.
Open-ended question: Can teachers repeat
the keywords that relate to equity in the 1993
federal definition of giftedness?
Procedural Knowledge (I can do it)
Highlight the disaggregated assessment data
by race, ethnicity to promote improved equity
outcomes for students.
Open-ended question: Explain how
disaggregation of data by race and ethnicity
helps instructional planning?
Attitude (I believe this is worthwhile)

Facilitator’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating
agreement or disagreement with the 1993
federal definition that includes equity in
giftedness.

Rating Scale: I believe that giftedness can be
found in all cultures and ethnicities.
Agreement:
Strongly Disagree – Disagree – Agree –
Strongly Agree
Confidence (I think I can do it)
Teacher self-assessment about attitude toward
identifying potentially gifted African
American students for the gifted program.

Open-ended question: What is the first thing
that you plan to apply from what you have
learned today to improved gifted
identification for African American students?
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 191

Commitment (I will do it on the job)
Teachers apply growth mindset strategies to
develop a plan to improve gifted identification
for African American students.

Open-ended question: What is the first thing
that you plan to apply from what you have
learned today to improved gifted
identification for African American students?
Engagement
Active participation in collaborative
discussions.

Rating Scale: My participation was
encouraged by the facilitator
Agreement:
Strongly Disagree – Disagree – Agree –
Strongly Agree
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants during
discussion

Open-ended question: What material did
you find to be the most relevant to your job?
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via
discussion

Rating Scale: I received useful information
during this session.
Agreement:
Strongly Disagree – Disagree – Agree –
Strongly Agree

EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 192

APPENDIX C
Blended Evaluation Tools
Level 1, 2, 3, and 4 Delayed for a period after the program implementation
Evaluation Item
Open-Ended Questions (Interviews, Paper Surveys)
Survey 3 and 9 weeks after the Five-Session Professional Development

L1: Reaction What information from this course has been
the most relevant to your job?
L1 Engagement Did this training hold your interest?
L1 Relevance Is there anything you learned from this
training that you used in instructional
planning for your students?
L1 Customer Satisfaction From your perspective what could have
improved this training’s usefulness?
L2: Learning What did you learn about the 1993 federal
definition of giftedness and its relationship to
equity?
L2 Value Would you recommend this training to other
colleagues?
EQUITY AND ACCESS: UNDER-IDENTIFICATION 193

L2 Confidence Are there any resources you need to support
you reaching the performance goal?
L3: Behavior Describe any challenges you are experiencing
in applying what you learned about improving
gifted identification for African American
students to your work?
L4: Results How many African American students have
you identified for potential giftedness for the
next gifted assessment?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Lack of support for gifted students in the United States

PDF

The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation study of... What do teachers know about gifted students?

PDF

Factors that influence the identification of elementary African American students as potentially gifted learners

PDF

Closing the access gap to gifted and talented education for Black K-12 students

PDF

Closing the completion gap for African American students at California community colleges: a research study

PDF

The plight of African American males in urban schools: a case study

PDF

An in‐depth look at leadership in creating a diverse and inclusive culture for African‐American employees

PDF

Factors related to transfer and graduation in Latinx community college students

PDF

The African American male achievement gap: teachers as change agents

PDF

The Bridge Program and underrepresented Latino students: an evaluation study

PDF

Spiritual persistence of high school alumni: an evaluation model

PDF

PBIS and equity for African American students with and without disabilities: a gap analysis

PDF

To be young, global, and Black: an evaluation of African-American college students’ participation in study abroad programs

PDF

The opportunity gap: culturally relevant pedagogy in high school English classes

PDF

Implementing standards-based grading in the era of common standards: an evaluation study

PDF

Expectancy value theory and African American student motivation

PDF

Representation in the teaching force: recruitment of teachers of color

PDF

Reframing school reform with effective tactics: institutionalizing culturally responsive pedagogy in alignment with policy-based accountability to ensure the achievement of African aAmerican stud...

Asset Metadata

Creator Tully, Dawna M. (author)

Core Title Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 10/18/2018

Defense Date 08/24/2018

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

Tag achievement gap,African American student engagement,African American student expectancy-value,enrichment gap,equity,equity index,equity-mindedness,Gate,gifted and talented education,giftedness,OAI-PMH Harvest,phenomenological research

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Maddox, Anthony B. (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email dtully@usc.edu,historymover11@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-85251

Unique identifier UC11675637

Identifier etd-TullyDawna-6883.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-85251 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TullyDawna-6883.pdf

Dmrecord 85251

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Tully, Dawna M.

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 a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA