Originally Posted By: raphael
An interesting case of intersectionality I hadn't thought about before.

Originally Posted By: indigo
the quality of gifted programs in meeting student needs varies greatly.
To clarify my statement, many/most gifted programs simply present curriculum which is one year advanced. This would not meet the needs of a pupil who is 2, 3, 4 or more years advanced. I advocate for placing pupils at their challenge level or zone of proximal development (ZPD) in each subject, rather than grouping pupils primarily by chronological age.

Originally Posted By: raphael
... one will also want to keep an eye on inequities faced by gifted students from minority populations depending on the location of the school & prevailing political opinions. e.g. a school director with more negative attitudes towards minorities might care less about making sure that pupils from all backgrounds have equal chances of accessing gifted programs.
Many/most schools are run based on a set of policies established by a board, the board also hires/oversees/evaluates the director, and the board must also adhere to local, State, and Federal laws. The board's policies typically specify that programs are run by the numbers, for example: test scores. The system is built for fairness and equal opportunity. Entities are held accountable for compliance to the policies and laws. Therefore the conjecture appears unwarranted.

Originally Posted By: raphael
Not counting occurrences of pupils internalizing experiences of discrimination at an early age and thus possibly experiencing more trouble at expressing their giftedness in the first place.
Unfortunately, many gifted pupils learn to hide their intelligence from early on, and this has been reported to be most pronounced in relation to girls and math ability.
Identification: Typically, students who demonstrate advanced knowledge/thinking are said to have a need for advanced academics (gifted programming).
1- The main demonstration of advanced knowledge/thinking would typically be a pupil obtaining a score above a pre-determined cut-score on an IQ test and/or "universal screener" at a school.
2- A secondary means of demonstrating advanced knowledge/thinking would be teacher observation/recommendation. Best practices indicate that teacher observation/recommendation be used to cast a wider net and ADD a child to advanced academics (gifted programming), when that child's score on an IQ test or "universal screening" was not above the cut-score and therefore did not indicate advanced knowledge/thinking. Having a secondary means of identification has been considered best practice because some students do NOT test well, for example a twice-exceptional student and/or a student dumbing themselves down in order to fit in socially. A few behavior "tells" which may be observed:
- https://www.davidsongifted.org/gifted-blog/types-of-problems-gifted-children-face/
- https://www.nagc.org/resources-publicati...ted-individuals

Originally Posted By: raphael
In general - if the implementation of gifted programs exposes societal issues...
A societal issue which has been well-documented is the difference in various families' approach to their child's language acquisition from infancy through toddlerhood to preschool and kindergarten. It is my understanding that the neural stimulation from conversing with and reading to young children has been found to impact a child's brain development. The solution can be implemented with no cost. See the work of Hart & Risley, and other studies which have challenged and/or built on the work of Hart & Risley, in the decades since the 1960s. A few links -
1- https://www.npr.org/2011/01/10/132740565/closing-the-achievement-gap-with-baby-talk
2- https://childrenofthecode.org/interviews/risley.htm
3- http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/B...html#Post188173

Originally Posted By: raphael
If by trying to solve a certain problem, you stumble upon a second one, you should probably go all the way through and solve both instead of backpedaling.
Unfortunately, very few entities may have a keen interest in championing a solution which does not present the entity with an opportunity to make money, gain power, and/or exert influence and control. Some have observed this to be the case with the solution proposed by the work of Hart & Risley. The solution consists of simple actions for parents and care-givers, such as:
- Read to children.
- Have 2-way conversation with children (don't just give directives).
- Talk with children about their day.
- Speak with children about what they observe, from moment to moment (like a sports announcer describes a game to the fans).