EQUITY IN TALENT DEVELOPMENT/ENRICHMENT/GIFTED PROGRAMMING
Penfield PACE, Parents Advocating for Challenge in Education
PACE supports exploration of the larger issues connected to equity in talent development, enrichment and gifted education/advanced learning opportunities, as well as exploration of the issues specific to Penfield Schools.
Foundational premises:
Advanced learners and thinkers are present in every community. Talent and giftedness exist in every community.
Such students can have atypical needs, including emotional, academic, intellectual and social needs.
Gifted Education is an educational specialty devoted to addressing the atypical needs of advanced learners and thinkers.
Historically, much gifted ed research and practice has been adapted to benefit general education, support strengths and interests, and enrich learning for all students.
Sources of information:
The latest research on the topic of equity, prioritizing work by scholars of color, especially those whose work covers Twice Exceptionality (2e), that is, high learning ability accompanied by learning difficulties
2021-2024 annual National Symposium on Equity for Black and Brown Gifted Students (NAGC)
Webinars, presentations, academic books, chapters, journal articles, podcasts by prominent practitioners/researchers in educational equity
See the "Resources for Equity" page of this website
Feel free to email PenfieldPACE@yahoo.com with any questions about sources of the information presented
We hope the following summary can give you helpful information about equity, both in general, and also specifically here in Penfield Schools.
Part 1: Equity in Talent Development, Enrichment and Advanced Learning Opportunities Decades of research exist on the topic of equity in gifted education, enrichment and other advanced learning opportunities K-12. Here are some findings from extensive research and practice.
The communities most commonly referenced in research as being underrepresented in advanced learning opportunities around the country are:
Black
Latinx/Hispanic
2e (Twice Exceptional: high ability AND learning, cognitive, behavioral challenges)
Low income
English language learners
Factors commonly cited for equity gaps in advanced opportunities:
The most common factor cited across research studies is under representation of underserved communities among all educational staff.
Lack of staff training to recognize how advanced competencies are manifested differently across underrepresented groups. Educators’ perception of and expectations for students often impact selection for services.
Inequitable identification procedures, i.e., assessments or processes that advantage any group, or put any group at a disadvantage
Failure to adhere to best practice in gifted education and enrichment
Money and effort. Eliminating equity gaps in programming can take more money, time and work.
Single-criteria admissions, discriminatory counseling and narrow recruitment
Poor retention of diverse learners who do gain access to advanced learning opportunities, due to lack of essential supports and effective home-school connections
If an overall system lacks equity, any program within that system likely will, too.
The good news:
Districts and schools that are faithful to best practice in gifted education, follow the equity research, and adequately invest in those efforts, have successfully reduced and eliminated equity gaps in their advanced learning opportunities.
Such successes demonstrate that programs for advanced learners and thinkers are not inherently inequitable.
Improving the overall environment for diversity, equity and inclusion throughout education can help.
Guidance for equitable practice is well-researched and readily available.
The bad news:
There is a growing trend around the nation to conclude that opportunities for advanced learners are inherently inequitable. Schools are doing away with advanced learning opportunities in the name of equity.
Too many schools are following that lead.
It is easier, and less expensive, to discontinue a program, or honors classes, or whatever, than it is to fix the problems and expand access. It is easier to under serve all advanced learners and thinkers, than to do the work required to support all advanced learners and thinkers.
Part 2: The Outlook in Penfield
Since research findings are nationally aggregate and do not represent any single school, district, or system, it’s important to specifically assess the local situation to identify any equity gaps.
Penfield Enrollment by Ethnicity: Source: https://data.nysed.gov 2022-23
American Indian or Alaska Native – 3, 0%
Black or African American – 208, 5%
Hispanic or Latino – 287, 6%
Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander – 149, 3%
White – 3,729, 81%
Multiracial – 243, 5%
Penfield Enrollment, Other Groups: Source: https://data.nysed.gov 2022-23
English Language Learners – 98, 2%
Students with Disabilities – 483, 10%
Economically Disadvantaged – 1,056, 23%
Migrant – 0
Homeless – 25, 1%
Foster Care – 11, 0%
Parent in Armed Forces – 14, 0%
Context: Specific Model Employed in Penfield
There are many frameworks for delivering enrichment/gifted education. K-8, Penfield uses the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM). At Penfield High School, advanced classroom opportunities include Honors sections, AP courses, and Dual Credit (courses taken in high school that earn college credit) plus extracurricular activities for experiential growth.
The SEM is specifically designed to be very different from most other frameworks for delivering gifted education and enrichment:
Inclusionary vs. exclusionary (has features for all students)
Flexible
Doesn’t track students
Embedded (not a separate school-within-a-school)
Works with classroom teachers
Interfaces/dovetails with numerous school resources/supports
Strengths-based
Continuously evolving
Addressing issues of under representation for more than 35 years
While other models of enrichment/gifted education might require seismic overhauls to address equity gaps, the basic structure of the SEM positions its users favorably to avoid equity gaps and to correct them when identified.
While we are hopeful, use of the SEM doesn’t guarantee that Penfield’s equity-related outcomes outperform the national statistics.
Part 3: Conclusions
Giftedness knows no boundaries: We strongly advocate for preservation of Penfield’s commitment to advanced learners and thinkers as an integral part of our efforts to insure diversity, equity and inclusion across all aspects of a Penfield education. Without a formal program rooted in expertise and best practice, advanced learners and thinkers in underrepresented communities are even more likely to be underserved.
The system Penfield uses for K-8 enrichment is intended to be different from many other programs for gifted education. The objective, by design, is to support the strengths-based aspects of school culture for all students, as well as serve advanced learners and thinkers. At PHS, advanced opportunities play an important role in preparation for post-secondary endeavors.
Whenever consultants and outside partners participate in improvement processes (audits, training, etc.) we urge all involved to:
become intimately familiar with the SEM
refrain from automatically generalizing national outcomes to Penfield
avoid operating from the stereotypical concept of what gifted education is
resist the trend of dismantling supports in the name of equity
understand that the field of advanced learning/teaching is a sub-specialty within general education
Programs for talent development, enrichment and advanced learning are not inherently inequitable. They can, however, reflect equity gaps of the system in which they operate. If that is the case here in Penfield, it is critical that we invest the time, effort and resources to correct both the entire system, and programs within the system.
PACE wants to do all we can to make sure our programs are doing what they’re supposed to do, for all students. The objective is, as the PACE Vision says, to encourage all and hinder none.