As it happens, there is already a fair amount of research on this topic for GT programs in general. The simplest and most equitable solutions generally employ multiple standardized data sources, and universal screening. The main points at which inequity enter are in the nomination process, and in environmental differences in opportunities for cognitive, EF, and academic development outside of school. Previous posters have referenced some of the effects, pro and con, of relying on teacher nominations. To clarify, the abuse is already present in systems which rely on any form of teacher nomination as a gating item (and the list of such systems includes a significantly large fraction of those obtaining in our current educational establishments); it is simply a question of the direction and extent to which it occurs.

Of course, there is a limit to the impact the institutional school can have on out-of-school factors, so the factors that can be affected then contract to the design of universal screening. And, of course, any efforts to reduce inequity in instruction from one building to another.

In the case of the programs referenced earlier in the thread, my understanding is that universal screening with multiple standardized data sources has not historically been the practice.


Edited by aeh (09/02/19 01:11 PM)
_________________________
...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...