Likenesses and Differences of Gifted Special Populations
The purpose of this section is to identify core attributes associated with giftedness in order to provide a better base of understanding in recognizing, identifying, and planning programs for gifted students from minority and economically disadvantaged families and areas.
Several studies have been conducted in an effort to identify the characteristics of giftedness common to gifted students regardless of cultural and economic differences. The themes of these studies and reports are concerned with personality variables, motivation to achieve, cognitive attributes, and other behavioral descriptions.
The ultimate goal of gifted education is to recognize, as early as possible, those students who show potential for exceptional performance as adults, and to provide them with the specialized instruction necessary to develop that potential. A common belief throughout these studies is that students who possess this potential for exceptional performance are present in every segment of our society. Yet, gifted and talented students from minority populations who are English Language Learners (ELL) or who come from economically disadvantaged families and areas are underrepresented in gifted programs.
Why are these students underrepresented in programs? Some researchers have theorized that it’s:
- The inability of educators to recognize their display of “gifted behaviors” (Bermudez & Rakow, 1990; Howley & Howley, 1990).
- An attitude by parents and teachers alike, that giftedness could not exist in this population (Clark, 1992).
- The emphasis placed on remediation rather than development of talent (Callahan & McIntire, 1994).
Race, ethnicity, culture, minority group status, low socioeconomic status (SES), handicapped status, preschool and primary age, and gender have all been used to label students who are underrepresented or underserved in gifted programs. However, because students from low socioeconomic families, African American, Native American, and Hispanic cultures have been, and continue to be, the most prominent subjects when underrepresentation in gifted programs is discussed, these are the students addressed first when looking to compare and contrast their gifted characteristics to those of majority, middle/upper class gifted students. It’s important to note that labels such as minority, culturally different, and economically disadvantaged are frequently used interchangeably in the literature and in practice to refer to students who are the target population of this section.
Low Socioeconomic Families
In Frierson’s study (1965) comparing upper and lower SES gifted he found that:
| Upper SES Gifted | Lower SES Gifted |
|---|---|
| Showed more self-control | Showed more preference for adventure hero-type comics |
| Showed more ambition to do well | Showed more preference for competitive sports |
| Demonstrated better control of emotions | |
| Liked school better |
Davidson and Greenberg (1967) compared high and low achievers from lower SES backgrounds. The findings showed similar differences as was found between middle SES achievers and underachievers. For example, high achievers were found to have higher ego strength, better developed controls and self-confidence, greater maturity and seriousness of interest, a need to seek adult approval, and a willingness to postpone immediate pleasures.
Arnold (1974) compared the classroom behaviors of disadvantaged gifted learners with those of regularly identified gifted learners and found the disadvantaged learners to exhibit greater dependence on the teacher for directions, to reason in a more sequential manner, and to be more patient in dealing with tasks.
In looking at cognitive functioning traits of advantaged and disadvantaged gifted students, Sisk (1973) described differences in vocabulary, use of standard grammar, ability to observe and state sequence of events, ability to perceive cause and effect relationships, and ability to categorize. Some have seen these differences as deficiencies that underlie the low test and classroom performance of certain groups of students. Others have viewed the difference as strengths that are expressed in distinct ways due to differences in information processing preferences and difference in information analysis and organization.
Baldwin (1978) found common attributes that included language rich in imagery and is persuasive; a sensitivity and alertness to movement; an intuitive grasp of situations; and adeptness at logical reasoning, planning, and pragmatic problem solving. Students have a high tolerance for ambiguities, an ability to produce inventive and revolutionary ideas, and are flexible and fluent thinkers.
Ethnicity and cultural group membership have always been assumed to have an affect on the pattern of abilities or traits unique to a specific group. Therefore, some researchers have focused on identifying the distinctiveness of profiles of strengths displayed by the different ethnic and cultural groups in American society.