Challenges and Efforts of Achieving Equity Beyond Gifted Education: Implications From Mathematics Education

Underrepresentation Issues and Endeavors in Gifted Education

Issues of inequity have widely caught attention in the field of gifted education. As described in Peters’ (2021) article, scholars proposed diverse methods to solve this issue, such as deleting a verbal subtest from an intelligence measure (Naglieri & Ford, 2003) and investigating the measurement invariance across the groups when developing and checking validity evidence of the HOPE Scale (Peters & Gentry, 2010). However, nonverbal ability tests do not seem to be more effective at identifying underrepresented gifted students (Lee et al., 2021). Similarly, although HOPE Scale scores were invariant across different subgroups indicating no assessment item bias to specific groups, actual score differences were still found among students from diverse backgrounds (Peters & Gentry, 2010). Despite many efforts, the gap has continued; however, as Peters (2021) indicated, the equity issue has never been more explored in our field.

Peters (2021) explained why inequity has existed and why the efforts were unsuccessful, and he suggested possible actions to combat the perpetual issues. When presenting instances, he used many examples and findings related to “mathematics” achievement. Mathematics scores have traditionally played a vital role in evaluating students’ academic achievement. Similarly, in terms of the intelligence tests, the subtest of mathematical reasoning has never been questioned. In contrast, the concept of eliminating a verbal subtest to identify underserved populations equitably has been controversial among scholars (Lee et al., 2021). As mathematics curriculum is sequential with its hierarchical nature of concepts and learning trajectories, mathematics has been widely centered in gifted programs to develop students’ higher order thinking skills. Besides, mathematics itself is an essential fundament for students to pursue future STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) careers; therefore, it is necessary to provide equal access and input in K–12 public education. Similar to gifted education, the field of mathematics education evolves, and scholars have paid close attention to equity and social justice issues to assist the success of underserved populations. As Peters’ (2021) study broadly described the challenges and actions regarding equity issues in gifted education, we specifically focused on mathematics education in this article to understand how the agenda and practices of social justice have been changed, which may provide implications to develop our field.

Moves and Transitions Toward Equity in Mathematics Education

For the past two decades, equity issues have been centered in the research work in mathematics education. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) advocated resourcing and support to address equity issues within and beyond mathematics classrooms. For example, NCTM listed equity as the first principle for school mathematics. NCTM’s research committee released a commentary to increase the awareness about equity in the community of mathematics education research (Gutstein et al., 2005). As more equity issues arose in mathematics education, there were several theoretical perspectives to study them. For example, when departing from a view that learning as individuals’ cognitive activities, more mathematics education researchers adopt learning (e.g., thinking, reasoning) as social activities. Also, departing from the perspective that mathematics is a socially, politically neutral discipline, more researchers adopt the view that mathematics is sociopolitical (Gutiérrez, 2013). For example, Gutiérrez (2013) proposed a framework for conceptualizing equity issues by bringing in two new components—identity and power—in addition to traditional equity components: access and achievement.

For doing so, it challenges the static, traditional notions of equity (e.g., students’ resource access, the achievement gap between gender/race/socioeconomic status). More studies document the context of learning mathematics and the content of learning mathematics to address a variety of equity issues related to access, achievement, identity, and power. As such, scholars rethink the traditional notions of mathematics education (e.g., what counts as mathematics) and, more than ever, pursue a variety of inquiries related to (in)equity, including but not limited to critical mathematics education, social justice mathematics (Gutstein, 2006), or rehumanizing mathematics education (Yeh et al., 2020).

What Needs to Be Embraced

Aligned with Peters’ (2021) hierarchy of actions, we draw three implications from a body of equity works in mathematics education to mitigate issues of inequity in gifted education: reframing giftedness from a critical perspective, developing asset-based gifted curricula, and espousing sociopolitical turn in gifted education. First, although there is no single agreed definition, the concept of giftedness should qualify their critical agency in the identification process and be promoted during the programs beyond academic success. This critical agency includes understanding the world critically and developing positive social and cultural identities (Gutestein, 2006). For example, developing students’ identities as agentic thinkers in elementary mathematics instruction can be considered vital to advance equity (Louie, 2020).

Second, gifted curricula can be developed by drawing on linguistic and cultural resources from a student’s background and community as an asset-based approach (Celedón-Pattichis et al., 2018). Parents and community stakeholders can work collaboratively to develop culturally based instructions and culturally responsive community projects. For example, targeted mathematical knowledge and skills could be stemmed from everyday activities of nondominant communities and expand student linguistic-, cultural-, and community-based funds of knowledge (Civil, 2016). Honoring different means of problem-solving, gifted students can use what they learn for social changes with engagement in real-world problems.

Third, as a fundamental change, a sociopolitical turn can be espoused in gifted education, which considers not just access and achievement, but the political aspect (Gutiérrez, 2013). From this sociopolitical perspective, knowledge and power are interwoven and closely connected with social discourses. For example, in mathematics education, the construct of identity is often conceived as a group membership in a fixed manner (e.g., Black, Latinx). However, it is a complicated conception as a set of beliefs about oneself. Therefore, identity should be understood as dynamic and coconstructed ways in a situated perspective. In the same vein, educators can view gifted education as a tool to deconstruct power structures that continue to marginalize underrepresented groups by unveiling granted rules and ways of controlling privilege and exclusion. It could lead students to be aware of social justice issues and develop critical power with gifted programs.