Ethical Considerations for Gifted Assessment and Identification of Children who are Culturally and Linguistically Diverse

1
Ethical Considerations for Gifted Assessment
and Identification of Children who are Culturally
and Linguistically Diverse

• Nanda Mitra-Itle

2
Essential Questions

• What is the problem?
• What are the ethical considerations?
• What factors comprise the problem?
• What are the solutions?
• What is the role of school psychologists?

3
What is the Problem?
4
The Problem

• The percentage of students of diversity in gifted
  programs is not proportional to their percentage
  of representation in the school.
  Consequently-under-representation in gifted
  programs.
• Ethical violations in daily practice of educators
  that has perpetuated this problem.

5
The Problem Show me the numbers (Ford Whiting,
2007) (Pierce et al, 2007)
6
The Problem Show me the numbers (US Dept of
Educ, 2004)
7
The Problem Show me the numbers (US Dept of
Educ, 2004)
8
The Problem Show me the numbers (US Dept of
Educ, 2004)
9
The Problem Show me the numbers (Rose, 2001)
10
What are the ethical considerations?
11
What does Ethics have to do with it? (NASP Code
of Ethics) (Jacob-Trimm Harshorne, 1994)

• Formal principals that guide conduct of a
  professional school psychologist.
• Mandates school psychologists to protect the
  rights and welfare of the student while promoting
  improvement in the quality of their lives.

12
What does Ethics have to do with it cont (NASP
Code of Ethics) (Jacob-Trimm Harshorne, 1994)

• Based on assumptions that we will act as
  advocates for our students/client and at the
  least, do no harm.
• Welfare of psychological patrons and maintaining
  public trust

13
Ethical Considerations (NASP Code of Ethics)
(Jacob-Trimm Harshorne, 1994)

• Professionals Competence
• Professional Relationships and Responsibilities
  to client
• Client Advocacy
• Responsibilities in assessment/intervention
• School based research/evaluation

14
Professional Competence (Jacob-Trimm Harshorne,
1994)

• Being acquainted with ones own limitations and
  strengths in training and experience and engaging
  in activities consistent with ones competencies.
• Upon recognition of limitations, one should seek
  out continuing professional development and
  remain progressive in research, training,
  professional practice.

15
Professional Relationships and Responsibilities
to client (Jacob-Trimm Harshorne, 1994)

• Practice to encourage improvement in the quality
  of life for client while maintaining sensitivity
  to mental, emotional, political, economic,
  social, racial, ethnic, etc characteristics.
• Resolve conflicting interests in a method that
  protects rights of all individuals involved.

16
Client Advocacy (Jacob-Trimm Harshorne, 1994)

• Concerns for protecting the rights and welfare of
  students is communicated to school administration
  and staff and is the top priority in determining
  services.
• When acting as advocates school psychologists
  must take into account rights of each individual
  involved and the duties of the school personnel.

17
Responsibilities in assessment/intervention
(Jacob-Trimm et al, 1994)

• Obligation to understand the nuances of
  assessment/intervention and maintain
  dignity/integrity of clients while acting as
  advocates for their welfare.
• Must be conversant in various variables involved
  in place of employment and establish clear roles
• Promote change in work place/society that will
  benefit client/community

18
School based research/evaluation (Jacob-Trimm
et al, 1994)

• Take responsibility for all facets of their
  research from topic to reporting.
• Communicate findings in a manner that is easily
  understood by audience.

19
What factors comprise the problem?
20
Factors to ponder

• Definitional disagreements of intelligence
• Statistical disparities in school population
  (staff vs. students).
• Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors
• Break between Research and Practice

21
Definitional disagreements of intelligence
(Plucker, 2001) NAGC, 2007 p. 2)

• Spearman-Two factor theory and g
• Thurstone-7 Primary Mental abilities
• Cattell-Fluid vs. Crystallized
• Guildford-Divergent thinking and Structure of the
  Intellect Model
• Gardner-Multiple Intelligence
• Sternberg-Triarchic Theory

22
Definitional disagreements of giftedness(NAGC,
2007 p. 2)

• Gagne-uses untrained/spontaneous natural ability
  in at least one domain thats in top 10 for
  his/her age.
• Renzulli-interaction among AA general and/or
  specific abilities, high levels of task
  commitment and high levels of creativity.
• Sternberg Wagner- mental management of life in
  a constructive, purposeful way using adaptation
  to ones environment, selection of new environment
  and shaping of an environment

23
Definitional disagreements of giftedness by
state/political

• PA-A child with an outstanding intellectual or
  creative ability that requires specially designed
  programs and/or support services not ordinarily
  provided in the regular education program (22 Pa.
  Code16.1)
• MA-no gifted definition(NAGC, 2007 p. 2)

24
Definitional disagreements of giftedness by
state/political cont..

• Identified by professionally qualified persons
  who by virtue of outstanding abilities are
  capable of high performance (Former U.S.
  commissioner of Education Sidney Marland) (NAGC,
  2007 p. 2)
• Outstanding talent perform/shows potential for
  performing at remarkably high levels when
  compared to same age, experience, envirexhibit
  high performance in intellect, creative,
  artistic.. Gubbins, 2005)

25
Definitional disagreements of giftedness by
culture (Sternberg, 2007)

• Taiwanese Chinese-add inter/intra personal
  skills.
• Africa-emphasize on skills that maintain harmony
  of intergroup relations
• Chewa in Zamiba-emphasize social
  responsibilities, cooperativeness and obedience
• Zimbabwe-word intelligence means prudent/cautious

26
Statistical disparities in school population
(National Center for Education and Statistics,
2004)
27
Statistical disparities in school population
(National Center for Education and Statistics,
2004)
28
Statistical disparities in school population
(Lopez)
29
Implications of this population disparity

• Most districts rely on educator referrals before
  formally assessing for gifted program (McBee,
  2006)
• Educators who make referrals find it difficult to
  determine minority students potential since they
  are of a different ethnic group. (Matthews
  Matthews, 2006)
• Deficit Thinking-having negative and stereotypic
  views about students who are culturally
  diverse(Ford et al, 2003)

30
Implications of this population disparity cont

• In fact, a study concluded that teacher referral
  was a poor manner for gifted screening. (Matthews
  Matthews, 2006)
• A study found that teacher judgment was only 27
  efficient in identifying gifted students. (McBee,
  2006)
• A study found that teachers rated Hispanic
  students lower. (McBee, 2006)

31
Implications of this population disparity cont

• A study found that 2nd grade teachers were still
  hesitant, in some cases, to refer even after they
  had all answer correct on a CBM. (Pierce et al,,
  2006)
• A study found that teachers in Alaska thought
  Eskimo children to not be as bright(Sternberg,
  2007)
• Few teachers exposed to a multicultural
  curriculum or have experience with students of
  diversity in their training so they are ignorant
  of cultural nuances regarding learning styles,
  communication patterns, behavioral approaches,
  etc Sternberg, 2007)

32
Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors

• The body is the hardware and culture is the
  software. (Ford et al, 2005)
• Manifestations of giftedness reflect the
  interaction of culture, language, world-view,
  conceptual style, values, personality (Harris et
  al, 1991)

33
Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors(Knutson et
al, 2005)

• Native Americans
• Interdependence
• Community
• Slower/delayed responses
• Nonverbal communication/direct verbal comm.
• Present orientation
• Participate after observation

• European Americans
• Independence
• Competition
• Faster/immediate responses
• Verbal Communication/indirect verbal comm
• Future orientation
• Initiative

34
Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors(Knutson et
al, 2005)

• Keresan Pueblo
• Giftedness-global quality that shows by
  contributing to society
• Inter-relationships
• cooperation

• European Americans
• Giftedness-Superior abilities
• Competition
• Self-promotion

35
Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors(Cohen,
p2)(Sue Sue, 2003)

• Hispanic Americans
• Work together with family to solve problem
• Speak after spoken to
• Collateral (extended family)
• Obedience to authority
• Harmony with nature
• Direct verbal comm.

• European Americans
• Competition, self-direction,
• Initiative in speaking first
• Individual (nuclear family-bio necessity)
• Independence and questions
• Subjection of Nature
• Indirect verbal comm.

36
Conflicts of cultural values/behaviors(Sue Sue,
2003)

• African Americans
• Present orientation
• Collateral (extended family)
• Collective orientation
• Harmony with nature

• European Americans
• Future orientation
• Individual (nuclear family-bio necessity)
• Individualistic orientation
• Master of nature

37
Other Conflicts Involved (Morris, 2002)

• Some schools African Americans experience
  second-generation discrimination
• In order to succeed may African Americans feel
  pressure to acculturate into European culture
  instead maintaining both.
• Self sabotage success b/c friends not in gifted
  program.
• Language minority students are disadvantaged b/c
  of background.

38
Break between Research and Practice (Cohen p2)

• Divergence in intellectual assessment
  practices(Cohen p2)
• Practice often reflects misconceptions, budget,
  habit, etc instead of research based theories.
• Cognitive expression often tempered by context
  (Sternberg, 2007).
• Minorities do better on performance based
  assessments (Ascher, 1990)

39
Break between Research and Practice cont

• Identification process varies even within the
  same district.
• Identification often consists of only a
  standardized test or weights it heavily.
• Context and SES affect expression of
  intelligence. (Sternberg, 2007)

40
What are the solutions?
41
Solutions to Consider

• Adopting a pluralistic perspective (Harris et al,
  1991)
• Educating all staff members and seeking
  professional development on diversity issues
  related to gifted identification(Romero, 1994)
• Using a multiple-criteria method

42
Adopting a pluralistic perspective (Harris et al,
1991)

• Means assimilating the definitional disagreements
  into one cohesive perspective that uses a
  multimodal/multidimensional view that accounts
  for the variability in gifted expression.
• This allows for definition based on strengths and
  research instead of relative to European American
  middle class students.
• Allows for more flexibility
• This perspective forces us to see both the
  individual and environmental factors of each
  student.

43
Adopting a pluralistic perspective- Example
(Romero, 1994)

• Characteristics of giftedness
• Breath of information
• Strong Memory
• High Verbal Proficiency
• High Abstract thinking
• Creativity
• Diverse interests, abilities

• Cultural Expression in Keresan People
• Geographic knowledge about environment, cultural
  history, storytelling
• Remembering songs, speeches, traditions, legends
• Native speech, song composition, etc

44
Educating all staff members and ourselves
(Romero, 1994)

• Educating staff members/yourself so they/you are
  sensitive to a variety of gifted characteristics
  related to culture, race, etc
• School staff members should encourage attitudes,
  practices and polices in school consistent with a
  multicultural classroom.
• All students profit from an integrated culturally
  responsive setting not just diverse learners.
• Attend minority events and collaborate with
  diverse communities(Grantham et al--)

45
Being Supportive

• Encourage students to balance b/w both cultures
  via education and sensitivity (Romero, 1994)
• Acknowledge value of being competent in both
  cultures (Romero, 1994)
• Understand nature and needs of diverse learners
  in your school (Romero, 1994)
• Clarify educational goals and practices Romero,
  1994)
• Re-examine educational paradigms (Grantham et
  al--)

46
Being Supportive cont.

• Encourage diverse learners and their families to
  collaborate with their school in educating staff
  members about cultural considerations. (Daniels,
  1998)
• Encourage parents to advocate for their right and
  for a multicultural curricula and policy(Daniels,
  1998)
• Encourage diverse learners parents to volunteer

47
Being Supportive cont.

• Encourage communication b/w home and school
  regarding diverse issues(Grantham et al--)
• Let parents know of the gifted program

48
Using a multiple-criteria method (Flanagan et
al,--)

• Student interview
• Permanent products
• GATES (Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales)
• Sociometric questionnaire
• Parent Interview
• Teacher interview
• Observations
• Performance based assessments

49
Using a multiple-criteria method (Thomas
Grimes, 2002)

• Cognitive Assessments
• CHC cross battery approach
• Dynamic assessment (pretest-intervention-posttest
  for acquisition of skills) (Lidz Macrine, 2001)
• DISCOVER (Discovering Intellectual Strengths and
  Capabilities through Observation while allowing
  for Varied Ethnic Responses) (Sarouphim, 2004)
• Project CLUE (Clustering Learners Unlocks Equity)
  (Pierce et al, 2007)

50
Before using a cognitive assessment remember

• Administration of intelligence tests in English
  are appropriate when used with students who are
  English dominant (Bainter et al, 2003)
• Bilingual-Assessment should measure task
  performance across two languages (Ascher, 1990)
• Minorities perform better on performance based
  assessment than on standardized assessments.
  (Sarouphim, 2004)

51
Before using a cognitive assessment remember

• Scientific theory in test development is
  mitigated by cultural values, societal beliefs,
  sociopolitical climate (Thomas Grimes, 2002)
• Lack of support for profile analysis (Thomas
  Grimes, 2002)
• Cognition and language are so interrelated that
  it can be difficult to distinguish the two
  (Thomas Grimes, 2002)

52
Before using a cognitive assessment remember

• Cognition is a continuum with abilities related
  to formal education and learning on one end and
  less related to formal education on the other
  end. (Thomas Grimes, 2002)
• Decision to use an assessment should be based on
  purpose, case history, psychometrics, etc.
  (Thomas Grimes, 2002)
• Always present test scores in ranges (Thomas
  Grimes, 2002)

53
Cognitive Assessments

• Kauffman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC)
  Mental Processing Composite (Lidz et al, 2001)
• Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT/DA) (Lidz
  et al, 2001)
• Ravens progressive Matrix (Castellano, 1998))
• System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment
  (SOMPA) (Harris et l, 1991)
• Cattell Culture-Fair Intelligence Series(Harris
  et l, 1991)
• Guldford Structure of Intellect Test(Harris et l,
  1991)

54
Cognitive Assessments (Tomas et al, 1995)

• Escla de Inteligencia Wechsler para Ninos-R
  (WISC-1982)
• Differential Ability Scales for Children-5th Ed.
• Test of Non-Verbal Intelligence2 (TONI)
• Language Assessment Scales-Oral-Spanish and
  English.

55
What is the role of school psychologists?
56
What is the role of school psychologists? (Thomas
Grimes, 1995 p.1084)

• Consultation with teachers, parents,
  administrations, etc to assistant with
  identification and interpretation of gifted
• Advocating for Best Practice using research.
• Using effective models of systematic problem
  solving
• Productive member of the gifted identification
  team

57
What is the role of school psychologists? (Thomas
Grimes, 1995 p.342)

• Help teachers and administers to reframe their
  own perspectives and biases.
• Understand relationships b/w culture, ethnicity,
  SES and acculturation.

58
References

• Ascher, C. (1990). Assessing bilingual students
  for placement and instruction (Report No. 65) New
  York, NY ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.
  (ERIC Document Reproduction Services ED322273).
• Bainter, T.R., Tollefson, N. (2003).
  Intellectual assessment of language minority
  students what do school psychologists believe
  are acceptable practices. Psychology in the
  Schools, 40(6), 599-603.
• Cantu, L. (1998) Intercultural Development
  Center. http//www.idra.org/IDRA_Newsletter/June_-
  _July_1998_Gifted_and_Talented_Students
• Castellano, J.A. (1998). Identifying and
  assessing gifted and talented bilingual hispanic
  students. Davidson Institute for Talent
  Development. http//www.gt-cybersource.org/Article
  Printable.aspx?rid14056
• Cohen, L.M (1990). Meeting the needs of gifted
  and talented minority language learnersNew York,
  NY ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC
  Document Reproduction Services ED321485).
• http//www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content/gifted_
  and_minority_lang.html.
• Daniels, V.I. (1998). Minority students in gifted
  and special education prorams a case for
  educational equity. The Journal of Special
  Education, 32(1), 41-43.
• Education Commission of the States. State Gifted
  and Talented Definitions 2004. http//www.ecs.org/
  clearinghouse.
• Fagan, T.K,, Wise, P.S. (2000). School
  Psychology Past, Present and Future. Bethesda,
  MD NASP publications.
• Ford, D.Y., Gilman, W.W. (2007). Another
  perspective on cultural competence preparing
  students for an increasingly diverse society.
  Gifted Child Today, 30(2), 52-55.
• 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.

59
References cont

• Ford, D.Y., Moore, J.L III., Milner, H.R.
  (2005). Beyond culturalblindness a model of
  culture with implications for gifted education.
  The Roeper School. http//www.accessmylibrary.com
• 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) 138-147
• Gubbins, E.J. (2005). Snapshot of intelligence.
  National Research Center on the Gifted and
  Talented. http//www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsle
  tter/winter05/wintero51.html
• Harris, J.J., Ford, D.Y. (1991). Identifying
  and Nurturing the Promise of Gifted Black
  American Children. Journal of Negro Education
  60(1), 3-18.
• Jacob-Trimm, S., Hartshorne, T. (1994). Ethics
  and Law for School Psychologists. Brandon, VT
  Clinical Psychology Publishing Co., Inc.
• Knutson, K.A., McCarthy-Tucker, S.N. (1993).
  Gifted education for native american students, a
  state of affairs. Arizona State University
  Roundtable Presentation Atlanta, GA American
  Educational Research Association.
• Lidz, C.S., Macrine, S.A. (2001). An
  alternative approach to the identification of
  gifted culturally and linguistically diverse
  learners. School Psychology International, 22(1)
  74-96.
• Lohman, D. The Role of Nonverbal Ability Tests in
  Identifying Academically Gifted
  Students.http//faculty.education.uiowa.edu/dolman
  
• Lopez. E.C. Practicing the Three Cs
  cross-cultural competence in school psychological
  services. www.nasponline.org/resources/culturalcom
  petence

60
References cont

• Matthews, P.H., Matthews, M.S. (2004). Heritage
  language instruction and giftedness in language
  minority students pathways toward success.
  Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(2),
  50-55.
• McBee, M.T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of
  referral sources for gifted identification
  screening by race and socioeconomic status. The
  Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(2),
  103-111.
• Morris, J.E. (2002). African american students
  and gifted education the politics of race and
  culture. Roeper Review, 24(2), 59-62.
• National Association for Gifted Children. What is
  Gifted? http//www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id574
• National Center for Education and Statistics.
  http//nces.edu.gov/pubsearch
• Pierce, R.L., Adams, C.M., Speirs, K .L.,
  Casseady, J.C., Dixon, F.A., Cross, T.L.
  (2007). Development of an identification
  procedure for a large urban school corporation
  identifying culturally diverse and academically
  gifted elementary students. Roeper Review, 29(2),
  113-118.
• Plucker, J. (2001). Intelligence theory and
  gifted education. Roeper Review,
• Romero, M.E. (1994). Identifying giftedness among
  keresa pueblo indian, the keres study. Journal of
  American Indian Education, 34(1).
  http//jaie.asu.edu/v34/V34Slide.htm.
• Rose, E.A. (2001). A longitudinal study of the
  course of academic achievement of urban and
  minority gifted and general eduation students.
  Seattle,WA Paper presented at the 82nd annual
  meeting of the American educational research
  association.

61
References cont

• Sarouphim, K.M. (2004). DISCOVER in middle
  school identifying gifted minority students.
  Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(2),
  61-69.
• Sternberg, R.J. (2007). Cultural concepts of
  giftedness. Roeper Review, 29(3), 160-165.
• Sue, D. W., Sue, D. (2003).Counseling the
  Culturally Diverse Theory and Practice 4th
  Edition. New York Wiley Sons, inc.
• Thomas, A Grimes, T, (1995). Best Practices in
  School Psychology III. Washington, DC NASP
  Publications.
• Thomas, A Grimes, T, (2002). Best Practices in
  School Psychology IV. Washington, DC NASP
  Publications.
• U.S. Department of Education. Office for Civil
  Rights. The Mid-Atlantic Equity Center.
  http//www.nswagtc.org

62
Good Bye and Thanks for your patience.