Desegregation of Gifted Educational Programs: The Impact of Brown on Underachieving Children of Color

Abstract

In recent years, increasing attention has been paid and efforts devoted to the identification and placement of minority students in gifted education programs. This response reflects the unfortunate reality that minority children, particularly African American children, are severely underrepresented in gifted programs (Alamprese & Erlanger, 1988; Ford & Harris, 1991; Richert, 1987; U.S. Department of Education, 1990) and gravely overrepresented in Special Education programs for the learning disabled, behavioral disordered, and mentally retarded (Chinn & Selma, 1987; B. Ford, 1992; Kunjufu, 1993; Patton, 1992). This discrepancy reaches 50% nationally, but may be even higher in some school districts and states. Abundant data suggest that gifted programs are perhaps the most segregated educational programs in this nation, and that more concerted efforts must be undertaken to ensure that minority students, economically disadvantaged students, as well as underachievers receive the education to which they are ethically and legally entitled.This article has four major goals. First, it highlights the current state of gifted education relative the presence (or lack) of African American students in gifted programs. Second, possible explanations for the aforementioned discrepancy--that is, the underrepresentation of African American learners in programs for the gifted--are advanced. Third, suggestions are offered to redress this problem, to desegregate gifted programs and otherwise redress inequities. These suggestions range from new definitions and theories of giftedness to promising identification practices. Finally, the issue of not only identifying and recruiting African American students but also retaining them in gifted programs is discussed, along with recommendations.INDICES OF SEGREGATION IN GIFTED PROGRAMSThe year 1994 marks the 40th anniversary of the epochal decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954). No longer in its infancy, this ruling is rapidly approaching middle age. Still, African Americans continue to struggle with the basic issues of justice, equity, and equality the proponents of Brown sought to address. The long battle for political, economical, social, and educational parity has been fought in a milieu of contradictions (Sizemore, 1978). On the one hand, American democracy espouses equality and equity in all facets of life, particularly education. On the other hand, four decades after Brown, the nation holds steadfastly to practices that promise he persistence of inequity and inequality in educational opportunities and access to quality programs. African Americans are still fighting for justice in schools across the land.Brown represents the most significant ruling in the history of the Supreme Court on equal educational opportunity. It is the cornerstone of all subsequent legal developments ensuring the rights of disenfranchised groups (Ford, Russo, & Harris, 1993; Russo, Ford, & Harris, 1993). However, the absence of controlling Supreme Court precedent or mandatory federal legislation on gifted education requires reasoning by analogy regarding Brown's implications for gifted education.The most far-reaching legislation for gifted education is the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Act of 1988. This Act clearly marked the culmination of the efforts of proponents of gifted education. Not only does it provide financial assistance to state and local educational agencies, it also gives highest priority to students who are racial minorities, economically disadvantaged, limited English proficient, and disabled. However, despite the stellar efforts of this legislation, a disconcerting underrepresentation of nontraditional students in gifted programs persists. For example, the U.S. Department of Education's (1990) 12th annual report to Congress notes that African American males are disproportionately placed in Special Education programs compared to students of any other racial, ethnic, or gender group. …