Providing access for culturally diverse gifted students: from deficit to dynamic thinking

Theory Into Practice, Summer, 2003 by Donna Y. Ford, Tarek C. Grantham

Gardner (1983) distinguished among seven types of intelligences--linguistics, logical-mathematical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, bodily kinesthetics, spatial, and musical--each of which entails distinct forms of perception, memory, and other psychological processes. In his Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Gardner defined intelligence as the ability to solve problems of to fashion products valued in one or more cultural settings. Students whose intelligence is in the linguistics and logical-mathematical areas are more likely than the remaining students to be recruited and retained in gifted programs.

These two inclusive theories contend that giftedness is a social construct that manifests itself in many ways and means different things for different cultural groups. The theorists acknowledge the multifaceted, complex nature of intelligence and how current tests (which are too simplistic and static) fail to do justice to this construct. In addition, the USDE's (1993) most recent definition of gifted also broadens the notion:

   Children and youth with outstanding talent perform
   or show the potential for performing at remarkably
   high levels of accomplishment when compared with
   others of their age, experience, or environment. These
   children and youth exhibit high performance capacity
   in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, and
   unusual leadership capacity, or excel in specific academic
   fields. They require services of activities not
   ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents
   are present in children and youth from all cultural
   groups, across all economic strata, and in all
   areas of human endeavor. (p. 19, emphases added)

The italicized passages should appeal to school personnel responsible for recruiting culturally diverse students into gifted education. First, the notion of talent development is a major focus of the definition. It recognizes that many students are diamonds in the rough who have had inadequate opportunities to develop and perform at high academic levels. For example, some gifted Black students, especially those who live in poverty, may lack exposure to books and other literature, they may not visit libraries or bookstores, and they miss out on other meaningful educational experiences. (3) The definition also recognizes that some students/groups face more barriers in life than others, namely discrimination.

The inclusion of the word potential in the federal definition acknowledges our obligation to serve those students who have social, cultural, or psychological problems, yet to manifest their abilities and interests. These students may include underachievers, minority students, economically disadvantaged students, and students with special education needs. Finally, the definition reminds educators that giftedness exists among all sociodemographic groups.

Deficit Thinking 2: Testing and Assessment

The use of tests to identify and assess gifted students is pervasive in education. More than 90% of school districts use test scores for placement decisions (Colangelo & Davis, 1997; Davis & Rimm, 1997). This nearly exclusive reliance on test scores keeps the demographics of gifted programs resolutely White and middle class. While traditional intelligence tests more or less effectively identify and assess White students, they have been less effective with culturally diverse students. This reality raises the question, why do we continue to use these tests so exclusively and extensively? Educators can choose from at least three explanations for the poor test performance of diverse students: (a) the fault rests within the test (e.g., test bias); (b) the fault rests with the educational environment at home and school (e.g., poor instruction and lack of access to high quality education); or (c) the fault rests with (or within) the student (e.g., he/she is cognitively inferior, genetically inferior, or culturally deprived).