INTRODUCTION

I am a white guy from a small town in Oklahoma who has lived for more than a

half of a century and who has often struggled academically. So why am I interested in the

success of African-American students who happen to be gifted and talented? I do not

particularly know for sure myself, but I do have some clues.

My mother once told me when my brother and I first saw a black person we ran

home frightened. As I aged from childhood to early adolescence I gave African-

Americans very little thought. Then about 1962 or so I became fascinated by the

television images of the civil rights movement. In particular, I was moved by the violence

at the University of Mississippi featured on a “CBS Reports” special. I kept asking

myself “Why?”

In college an active Black Student Union on campus organized some modest

protests against some policies long forgotten. However, I was more concerned about the

Vietnam War than about civil rights. With graduation and a wife I concerned myself with

working and eventually serving in the military.

It was probably living in Germany for three years as an American soldier that

finally opened me to cultural awareness. Not only was I a foreigner but I also began to

study and reflect on Christian social ethics. My study included a reading of one of the

biographies on Martin Luther King, Jr. My interest in ethics continued as a seminary

student and later as a religious educator serving on church staffs.

1

I received my “graduate seminar” in culture and ethics in 1993. I traveled to

Russia and spent a week with a teacher and her family. I walked the streets of a Russian

city alone. I thought much about how Russia was in the process of re-building itself from

communism. What is a nation? What are proper nationalistic values? How does a people

come to grips with the truth? I fully became aware that for the United States our unity is

found in democratic principles and not in religious, ethnic, racial, or class unity. I decided

to leave the fulltime ministry and enter public education partially to fulfill my desire to

help expand democratic values.

While pursuing teacher certification, I enrolled for a required course in special

education (Teaching Exceptional Children and Youth) through the University of

Missouri- Kansas City. I presented a class project on “Some Issues Regarding Gifted and

Talented African-American Students in Urban High Schools.” Of all the individual

projects presented, my presentation evoked the most passionate and longest discussion. It

whetted my intellectual appetite to continue to study in this area.

In the four schools I have been a teacher I have been a minority. The majority-

my African-American students- are a minority in this nation. But it is a nation for all of

us. Americans are a culturally rich people because we are a culturally diverse people. The

American character is built on initiative and work and is expressed through our freedoms-

primarily the freedom to worship, the freedom from fear, the freedom from want, and the

freedom of speech. This is our heritage as imperfect as we have fulfilled it, but it is a

heritage worth passing on to our succeeding generations.

African-Americans, as well as other Americans, have been historically denied

full access to the American Dream. As an educator I have a desire to assist young

2

African-Americans, particularly the best and the brightest, to find their places in the

American Dream not only as leaders of their fellow African-Americans but also as

leaders of all Americans.

To be successful one must overcome challenges. In this paper I will seek to

discover those challenges facing gifted and talented African-American students and

suggest ways in which they might transcend those challenges with the assistance of

concerned administrative leadership in the schools. Performance, not potential, is a key to

success.

3

THE BASIC PROBLEM OF UNDERREPRESENTATION

Challenges facing gifted and talented African-American students are very real.

The impact of gifted and talented programs on these students is questioned.

Implementing such programs and recruiting students into them raises some very pertinent

issues. These issues need to be identified not only in the context of public education, but

also in the situation of the continuing racial dilemma in our nation. As suggested by

Hamburg (1992, p. 15), if and how these issues are resolved will not only affect public

education, but also the economic vitality and democratic foundations of the United States.

African-American students to be recruited for gifted and talented programs are

not found in relatively ideal educational situations. While Gallagher (1975, p. 43) and

Clark (1983, p. 123) maintain that gifted students have the tendency to come from stable

families and environments, Lee, Winfield, and Wilson (1991) report that the majority of

high-achieving African-American students attend the typical urban schools whose student

bodies are composed of ethnic/racial minorities who are economically disadvantaged and

who demonstrate more discipline problems and less academic commitment.

Suskind (1998) highlights one such school in his chronicle of the academic

journey of Cedric Jennings. Frank W. Ballou Senior High School in Washington, DC-

Jennings’s school- has, to no one’s surprise, many problems. During the 1993-94 school

year there were axe and knife fights on school property and five fires set by arsonists.

Sporadic attendance, fifth-grade reading levels, 18-year-old sophomores, and only 80

students among 1350 enrollees averaging “B” or better are the least worse problems at

Ballou! (p.1-10)

4

Jennings, as reported by Suskind, graduates from Ballou and enters the elite Ivy

League Brown University and eventually graduates. But two of his classmates at Ballou,

Phillip “Blunt” Atkins and Delante “Head” Coleman are academic casualties. All three

are African-Americans and all three would have been probable candidates for a gifted

and talented program if one had existed. (p. 8-9)

Smith, LeRose, and Clasen (1991, p. 81) would not be surprised by the lack of

such a program at Ballou: “The underrepresentation of minority students in programs for

the gifted has been a source of concern for years.” Their research demonstrates that

minority students do benefit from gifted and talented programs and these programs

positively impact drop-out rates and college enrollment. The Hickman Mills C-1 School

District in Kansas City, where I teach, is an example. The district’s gifted and talented

program has a minority enrollment of forty percent of the total, the highest in years. Yet

the district is seventy percent minority enrollment.

Crenshaw High School, located in south central Los Angeles, is one school with a

gifted and talented program. Corwin (2001) chronicles the trials and triumphs of twelve

students in that program. Opened in 1968, Crenshaw has 2800 students mostly drawn

from impoverished neighborhoods. Like Ballou, Crenshaw has the gangs, fights,

shootings, and the general chaos usually associated with urban high schools. (p. 28-29)

Yet Crenshaw is also home to a successful gifted and talented magnet program put in

place by a school board making a political trade-off by also creating a similar program in

the more affluent San Fernando Valley suburbs. (p. 213-214)

Students must score at least 125 on an IQ test or in the top 20th percentile in the

nation on both the mathematics and verbal sections of a standardized exam to qualify for

5

Crenshaw’s program. Although qualifying scores are usually higher in suburban school

programs, the students in Crenshaw’s program have test scores considerably higher than

their peers. (p. 214)

As might be suspected, to be a gifted and talented student at Crenshaw High

School poses particular barriers to success. Among the challenges faced by one or more

students in Corwin’s study include:

• Living in foster homes

• Domestic violence

• Parents with alcohol, drug, and/or severe medical problems

• Working practically fulltime during evenings, weekends, and holidays

• Constant moving

• Peer pressure to join or re-join gangs or to stop acting “white”

• Pregnancies and the need for low-cost child care in order to attend school

• Lack of special tutoring such as SAT prep

• School violence

• Substitute teachers not briefed on student needs and progress

• Philosophical differences among teachers

• Personal self-image

• Criminal activity among the gifted and talented students themselves

Although Crenshaw’s program has been successful in preparing its students for

college, including selective schools, it is one of relatively few serving minority students.

In the absence of gifted and talented programs for African-American students, many

6

researchers focus on high-achievers. Lee, Winfield, and Wilson list cultural barriers for

high-achieving African-American students that could also negatively affect them being

identified as gifted and talented. By simultaneously belonging to three groups- the

mainstream, the African-rooted black culture, and a status-oppressed racial/ethnic group-

these students face membership expectations, identities, and values that are often in

conflict. “This conflict influences academic achievement/performance through higher

levels of stress, less effective study time, and reduced academic recall ability.” Suskind

(1998) adds that the teachers previously cited Ballou High School have labeled a barrier

at their school the “crab-bucket syndrome.” In effect, when one student tries to achieve

academically, the other students pull him/her back down through peer pressure or even

outright violence. (p. 1-4)

Lee, Winfield, and Wilson note that high-achievers differ from low-achievers in

three ways: they read more, complete more homework, and watch slightly less television.

In particular regards to television, Diuguid (1995) maintains that television viewing is

detrimental to black students. African-Americans as a whole watch seventy hours of

television a week as compared to approximately fifty hours for all other households and

black children, ages 2-17, watch sixty-four percent more television than children of other

races. Furthermore, black men are often portrayed in television programming as skirt-

chasers or buffoons, police drams often show crime occurring in black neighborhoods,

and situation comedies are the “ghettos” for black actors. These media stereotypes

reportedly affect the employability of blacks because employers tend to accept the

stereotypes as reality.

7

If and when African-Americans enter gifted and talented programs and benefit

from them, what is expected of them? Five responsibilities, according to Harrington

(1991), are required of gifted-creative-talented teenagers: 1) seek one’s level of

frustration- expand one’s limits, 2) be willing to help others- share one’s knowledge, 3)

become involved- participate in activities, 4) assume leadership- use one’s organizational

ability and managerial skills, and 5) be a culture bearer- help determine societal values.

It is this fifth responsibility that is a major source of controversy for African-

Americans generally and especially black students identified as gifted and talented and

expected to be leaders in their chosen fields of endeavor. The question becomes which

culture shall these teenagers bear, now and in the future- the mainstream white culture or

their own particular black culture.

Both Gallagher (1975) and Clark (1983) ask pertinent questions regarding cultural

pluralism and cultural assimilation. Gallagher (p. 386) questions whether educators can

find the blend of common values of both the dominant culture and the minority cultures

so that gifted and talents students can be properly developed. Clark (p. 341) in the context

of democratic values more fundamentally questions whether we really want cultural

pluralism or will continue to push cultural assimilation.

The basic problem of underrepresentation as described above is created and

sustained by various interrelated factors and has no easy permanent solutions. As a result

of its profound importance, the debate has entered into the arena of national public policy

in which both logic and emotion interplay. The major factors involved will be examined

below.

8

UNDERACHIEVEMENT

Underachievement is a major challenge for gifted and talented African-American

students. According to Landgraff (2001) the achievement gap between school

performance and race/ethnicity does not appear to be closing. He cites data from the

National Assessment of Educational Progress that shows the gap between white and

black students has been widening over the past 10-15 years in mathematics and reading in

middle and high schools.

However, according to Ford and Thomas (1997), there is little consensus on how

to effectively define underachievement in gifted and talented students. There are two

related problems with this issue- defining giftedness and measuring giftedness. (See

Appendix A for a list of differences between bright and gifted students.)

School districts use various definitions of giftedness, but generally rely on teacher

recommendations and scores on intelligence or achievement tests to identify gifted and

talented students. Measuring is accomplished through different instruments and criteria.

Intelligence tests, achievement tests, aptitude tests, and grade point averages are generally

the more conventional means of measuring for giftedness. But schools will use these

means in differing mixes.

Underachievement in this context is described as the discrepancy between ability

and performance. Some common characteristics of underachievement have been

identified. They include:

• Very high IQ

• Poor work habits

• Seeming inability to concentrate

9

• Lack of effort in tasks

• Intense interest in one particular area

• Frequently unfinished work

• Low self-esteem

• Demonstration of emotional frustration

• Negative attitudes towards self and peers

• Skill deficit in at least one subject area

• Inattentiveness to task at hand

• Failure to respond to motivation by usual teacher techniques

Ford (1995) states that 46 percent of black students surveyed were

underachieving. There are three factors contributing to this phenomena according to Ford

and Thomas:

1. Sociopsychological: poor self-esteem, low academic and social self-concepts, racial

identity, choosing between need for achievement and need for affiliation

2. Family-related: parents who are less optimistic with expressed feelings of

helplessness and hopelessness, less assertive and involved in their children’s

education, unrealistic and unclear expectations for their children, less confident in

terms of their parenting skills

3. School-related: less positive teacher-student relations, having too little time to

understand the material, less supportive classroom climate, being unmotivated and

disinterested in school

10

In 1997 the College Board organized the National Task Force on Minority High

Achievement to study and address the issue of the chronic shortage of African-American,

Hispanic, and Native American students who achieve at very high academic levels. The

task force concluded that among the forces limiting high academic achievement among

minority students are

• Intense poverty

• Schools with inadequate resources

• Racial and ethnic prejudice

• Limited educational resources of many families and communities

• Cultural differences

Cultural differences seem to play an essential part in why gifted and talented

African-American students underachieve. Two major streams of thought have emerged

which approach this problem from different angles. They are the external threat from the

white culture and the internal problems generated from within the black community.

EXTERNAL THREAT FROM WHITE CULTURE

Steele (1992) maintains that the assimilation approach devalues African-

American students. In this approach they are only valued and rewarded in school and

later life as they give up their particular black styles of speech and appearance, value

priorities, and preferences to mainstream white culture. While Steele concedes this

approach may be fine for immigrant minority groups, African-Americans (and Native

Americans) have been here long enough for them to help whites define the cultural

images used in school. By uncritically accepting assimilation into the white culture, black

11

students are being asked to join something that has historically oppressed them into the

cultural margins.

The direct result of this process according to Steele, is a 70 percent dropout rate

for African-American students from four-year colleges as compared with 45 percent for

white students. Also, black students average a half letter below the grades of white

classmates, need more time to earn their degrees, and a fewer number are studying for

advanced degrees.

Rejecting poverty, social isolation, and poor preparation as reasons for this

dilemma, Steele writes that American schooling fails to treat African-American students

as valued persons with good prospects for success. Thus, they are stigmatized to the point

where white society is preconditioned to see the worst in them and where they must win

acceptance from teachers and fellow students at each level of schooling. Many black

students, including the gifted and talented, therefore feel hopeless in the face of public

school and higher education systems that underappreciate them through negative

stereotypes.

Steele (1999) is delighted that a major study (Bowen and Bok, 1998) shows that

black students who attend selective liberal arts colleges and research universities do well

in graduate programs and subsequent professional advancement. But he laments the

underperformance of black undergraduates- lower standardized test scores, lower grades,

and lower graduation rates.

He rhetorically asks whether the problem comes from poor motivation, distracting

peer pressure, lack of family values, or genes. Or whether underperformance stems from

social and economic deprivation, low expectations, and diminishing stereotypes. Steele

12

opts for the latter and terms the phenomenon “stereotype threat.” This is the process “…

of being viewed through the lens of a negative stereotype, or the fear of doing something

that would inadvertedly confirm that stereotype.”

Parenthetically, this process was commented upon by a writer (Robinson, 2001)

reflecting upon a picture of a Naval Academy midshipman who graduated last in his

class. He is smiling and he is black. Robinson is concerned that the graduate is

celebrating and comments that this is an inopportune time for an African-American

(emphasis mine) to do so. Although I agree with his concern as fully expressed in the

article, I do also see how stereotype threat can operate. The midshipman in question is

not singled out as an individual, but as a representative of a race.

Although Steele points out that everyone- white males, Methodists, women, the

elderly, etc.- experiences stereotype threat, he maintains African-American students in

particular generally negative stereotypes in many situations, both public and private. As a

result, the fundamental questions becomes for them whether race will be a boundary for

them in their overall experiences, emotions, and relationships.

According to Steele, stereotype threat is external rather than merely “self-

fulfilling prophecy.” It is a situational experience based upon the risk of being negatively

stereotyped. While conventional wisdom says that stereotype threat poses problems

primarily for weaker students, Steele and his associates found it actually more impairs the

more achieving students- the most skilled, motivated, and confident. These students have

invested much in academic performance and thus they worry excessively about the

popular perceptions and treatment of themselves and their group if they fail to produce

what is expected based upon their talents and records of past achievements.

13

Steele’s research also reveals how stereotype threat can be reduced. By

strengthening their trust that they are not being evaluated on the basis of stereotypes,

black students will perform “…at the same high level as whites even if their self-

confidence had been weakened by a prior failure.”

In their confidence that an academic activity is racially fair, black students will

perform well. They will welcome constructive criticism of their performances in order to

improve. However, without the perception of racial fairness, African-American students,

even with “nice and sensitive” criticism, will deem academic criticism not only as an

evaluation of their work but also of the worthiness of their group.

High standards and critical feedback, according to Steele, need to be made

explicit to students laboring under stereotype threat. Black students need to be assured

that they are being academically evaluated on the basis of their individual strengths and

weaknesses, not their entire race. The key to success for black students, Steele asserts, is

the degree to which they trust that stereotypes will not be applied to them.

PROBLEMS FROM WITHIN BLACK CULTURE

Countering Steele, McWhorter (2000) feels that the challenges faced by African-

American students come not from white society, but are generated from within the black

community. The cults of victimology, separatism, and anti-intellectualism are self-

generated barriers to academic success, even for black students at elite prep schools and

colleges. McWhorter states, “It is much easier on the soul to return always to racism to

explain black underperformance…that black students want to learn but are thwarted from

doing so, is not the usual case.”

14

The cult of victimology calls attention to victimization where it barely exists at

all. And as McWhorter explains, “…all too often this is not done with a view toward

forging solutions, but to foster and nurture an unfocused brand of resentment and sense of

alienation from the mainstream.” (p. 2) The adherents to this worldview are both blacks

and sympathetic whites.

Victimology is founded on the belief that African-Americans have not

substantially bettered their social, economic, and political conditions in the four decades

since the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. In contrast, McWhorter states that the

poverty rate among blacks has been halved since 1960, that the professional and

managerial ranks among blacks are growing, and that college graduation rates have

nearly tripled. He does not doubt that pockets of racism still exist in the United States, but

amid such progress, McWhorter questions victimology as a realistic worldview.

Victimology has a real presence in public policy. “Most black public statements

are filtered through it, almost all race-related policy is founded upon it, and almost all

evaluations by blacks of one another are colored by it.” (p. 3) McWhorter (p. 8-25) lists

and counters seven “articles of faith” upon which victomology is mistakenly founded:

1. Most blacks are poor. (“Most blacks are neither poor nor close to it.”)

2. Black people get paid less than whites for the same job. (“The black median income

is dragged down…by the extenuating factor of the low income of unwed mothers on

welfare, a larger proportion of the black population than the white.”)

3. There is an epidemic of racist arson of black churches. (“From 1990 to 1996, about

eighty black churches were burned. During the same period, however, over seven

times that many white churches were burned every year.)

15

4. The U.S. government funneled crack into south central Los Angeles. (“…no one has

ever proven the CIA funneled crack into South Central or anywhere else…not even a

reporter who spent months searching for such proof, whose reputation hung on the

case, and who could resuscitate his reputation by at least finding the smoking gun.”)

5. The number of black men in prison is due to a racist justice system. (“…contrary to

the idea that blacks are arrested disproportionately, their proportion of the prison

population of the prison population neatly reflects the rate at which they commit

crimes.”)

6. The police stop-and-frisk more black people than whites because of racism. (“Even a

police force devoid of racism, and never abusive or discourteous in stop-and-frisk

encounters, would in some areas have to stop more black people than white to prevent

crime effectively.)

7. Police brutality against black people reveals the eternity of racism. (“…police

brutality is exactly where one would expect the last major type of racism to be, and as

such, is one more demonstration that racism is on its way out, not holding firm.”)

McWhorter (p. 31-33) further states that there are two misconceptions about

victimology. First, it is an inner-city pathology. Since only twenty percent of blacks live

in ghettos, victimology is also popular among educated American-Americans with ample

social, economic, and political opportunities. Second, victimology is a conscious political

ploy to gain and hold power. Rather, it is a subconscious influence, a foundational

paradigm, that impacts how one conceives of race issues.

16

There are several problems with victimology for African-Americans. (p. 43-49)

First, it condones weakness and failure. Second, it hampers any performance. Third, and

finally, victimology is an affront to the legancies of the civil rights heroes.

The cult of separation, in McWhorter’s view, is a direct product of victimology.

This cult encourages African-Americans to view themselves as a sovereign entity since

white Americans are overtly racist and eternally hostile towards blacks. “In practice

(separatism) narrows horizons, holding blacks back from being the best they can be.” (p.

51)

Separatism is manifested primarily in three ways. (p. 51-61) First, mainstream

culture is considered “white” and therefore the mainstream cultural expressions of art,

music, and literature are not deemed worthy of serious reflection by many blacks. Works

by black authors and artists are elevated to an artificial platform of excellence instead of

being seen as an integral part of the entire cultural mosaic.

Second, academic work is “ghettoized” by black scholars focusing primarily on

Afrocentric history and issues. “In this vein, a considerable amount of black academic

work downplays logical argument and factual evidence in the service of fulfilling an

idealized vision of the black past and present, which is founded not upon intellectual

curiosity but upon raising in-group self-esteem.” (p. 54) Chronicling past and present

black victimhood takes priority over scholarly inquiry about black people.

Third, Hollywood’s depiction of black people is denounced by the cult of

separatism. Complaints range from denying blacks their individuality on the screen to

“neutering” black entertainers in the name of white racist domination. McWhorter does

indeed criticize Hollywood for past abuses, but declares that television and film now

17

regularly portray blacks as normal people, not typecasting them as Toms, Coons,

Mulattoes, Mammies, and Bucks.

According to McWhorter (p. 61), the major problem of separatism is that because

of victimhood African-Americans cannot be held responsible for any immoral or

destructive acts. First public in the Black Power rhetoric of the 1960s and 1970s, this

thought reached its zenith in the trial of O.J. Simpson. A majority of blacks supported

Simpson, either believing in a white police conspiracy against him or that even if he had

committed two murders, they desired that he be let off because of the past racism against

blacks.

McWhorter (p. 76-81) also addresses three other problems with separatism. It

reinforces the dumb black myth by promoting tribalism over logic. It hinders hiring and

career advancement through impressions of hostility towards white employers. And it

makes blacks inferior by equating black culture with the pardoning and glorifying of

immoral behavior.

Finally, there is the cult of anti-intellectualism. (p. 82-163) This is expressed

through the feeling that school and learning are “white” things. As a result, many

African-American students prefer inference to innovation; they resist new ways of

thinking. They are also leery of precision. Although these traits are also present found in

other ethnic groups, McWhorter feels these are major barriers to learning for blacks. Not

only is anti-intellectualism present in the inner city, it is also found among black students

in the suburbs and at elite prep schools and colleges.

18

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Affirmative action was created out of the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Corwin (p. 355-356) reports that Vice President Lyndon Johnson asked Hobart Taylor,

Jr., a black attorney, to help write an executive order barring federal contractors from

racial discrimination in hiring practices. Taylor coined the term “affirmative action” to

give a positive sense to the executive order. President John Kennedy signed Executive

Order 10924 in March 1961 banning hiring based on race, creed, color, or national origin.

In 1965 President Johnson delivered a commencement speech at Howard

University which shifted affirmative action from simple nondiscrimination to “equality as

a result.” Moving from the protective to the proactive, affirmative action now called for

minorities and women to be given special consideration in employment, education, and

contracts. Recruitment, set-asides, and preference are the usual ways of achieving

affirmative action goals. However, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits racial quotas.

And unqualified candidates are not covered by affirmative action policies.

Affirmative action has become a heated political controversy. Many Americans

now feel it is reverse discrimination against otherwise qualified persons, especially white

males, while others feel it is helping to “level the playing field” of economic and

educational opportunities for all persons.

The “playing field” in education has been leveled somewhat. Corwin (p. 356-357)

reports that in 1965 less than five percent of all college students were black, only one

percent attended law schools, and only two percent attended medical schools. Overall,

black participation in higher and professional education has at least tripled since the

1960s. As previously stated, the study by Bowen and Bok (1998, p. 1-14) of affirmative

19

action at 28 selective liberal arts colleges and research universities shows that black

college graduates, many admitted under affirmative action, do well in graduate school

and subsequent professional advancement.

The chief outcry against educational affirmative action appears to be that very

qualified white students are not admitted to many selective colleges and universities

because their places are taken by less qualified black students. Another concern centers

on the students themselves admitted under affirmative action. The general perception is

that their success is unearned; therefore they will never be “good enough.”

McWhorter shares that he himself was helped by affirmative action, but now

opposes the policy. (p. 247- 254) He believes that black students do not have an incentive

to achieve at their highest levels if they utilize affirmative action. And he also points out

that affirmative action students will always know that they are where they are because of

lower standards.

Suskind reports Cedric Jennings certainly had feelings of doubt after he left

Ballou High School for Brown University. A mealtime discussion in a dorm dining hall

turned to Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT) scores as a son of a British mining

millionaire casually mentioned that he had probably received the lowest score in the

present group. So they all shared their scores that ranged from a high of 1430 to a low of

970. Then Cedric shared his- 960. He confessed to no one in particular, “I am not

ashamed of it or anything” as he realized SAT scores had become identity numbers for

the students. (p. 169-170)

In the next several days panic and bewilderment set in on Cedric. (p. 170-190) He

began to feel that he lacked the prerequisite knowledge and acquired poise to be at

20

Brown. For example, he did not know who Freud was during a lunchtime discussion. In

the campus bookstore he failed to recognize either a picture of Jerry Garcia on the cover

of Rolling Stone or a picture of Winston Churchill on the book jacket of a new biography.

He did not know about Ellis Island or its significance during a class lecture. Affirmative

action may have gained Cedric entry into Brown but it did not prepare him for Brown.

Although many national political candidates have campaigned against affirmative

action, it was not until 1996 when California passed Proposition 209 that the tide against

affirmative action began in earnest. California now prohibits public universities and

colleges, as well as other state and local agencies, to discriminate against or give

preferential treatment to any individual or group in local employment, public education,

or public contracting on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. Except

where prohibited by federal law, affirmative action is dead in California. (Texas has

followed suit to some degree.) As a result, black admissions have plummeted on the

University of California campuses, especially Berkeley and Los Angeles.

While many current supporters of affirmative action are in the “mend it, don’t end

it” stage, affirmative action appears to have reached its peak.. While certainly needed in

the 1960s as worthwhile public policy it is now, as in the reflection of Goodwin (1988)

on President Johnson’s Great Society program as a whole, needs adjustment:

…the country has the capacities- resources, skill, freedom-which it had in the sixties. And perhaps the energizingessentials of will and belief are not dead at all, but merelydormant. Maybe if we open Lyndon Johnson’s closet wefind not a corpse, but a sleeping princess ready to be restored. Of course she will need a new wardrobe. Styleshave changed in twenty-five years. But not beauty. Not theideal of beauty. (p. 427)

21

Since McWhorter is correct that most black students are middle class socially and

economically and since Steele maintains that black students desire to be evaluated as

individuals, gifted and talented African-American students would do well to focus on

academic achievement and not affirmative action to help insure they are successful in

their futures.

STANDARDIZED TESTING

Standardized testing is another particular challenge for gifted and talented

African-American students. As discovered by Jencks and Phillips (1988, p. 1-51), black

students score lower than white students on standardized tests including vocabulary,

reading, mathematics, scholastic aptitude, and intelligence tests. This black-white test

score gap exists from pre-kindergarten through adulthood. Although this gap has

narrowed since 1970, the typical black student still scores below 75-85 percent of white

students.

This gap appears to be entrenched. Jencks and Phillips claim the gap only shrinks

slightly when black and white students attend the same schools and when black and white

families have similar schooling, income, and wealth. But if we can reduce the test score

gap very profound and positive results could be obtained to benefit all Americans.

Reducing the gap in test performance could reduce racial differences in educational

attainment and earnings as well as allow schools and businesses to eliminate affirmative

action policies.

Of particular concern to gifted and talent African-American students is the

Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT). The SAT is preferred by private schools and schools

22

on the east and west coasts. So doing well on the SAT is an entry into selective liberal

arts colleges and research universities (like the ones in the Bowen and Bok study). It is in

these schools that the nation’s future leadership in many endeavors is educated and

nourished. The networks available for graduates of these schools are invaluable for

professional advancement and personal fulfillment. If African-Americans are to be

leaders in an increasingly multicultural United States along with Asian-Americans and

Hispanic-Americans, the gifted and talented ones must score well in order to gain entry

and ultimately graduate from these schools. Yet the SAT is controversial and under attack

for racial and cultural biases.

The history of SAT begins with the dawn of the 20th century. In 1900, twelve

northeastern universities set up the College Entrance Examination Board to administer

admissions tests. These tests were essay-oriented in specific subjects graded by

professional readers. The effect of these tests was to force the prep schools that supplied

students to these universities to adopt a uniform curriculum so students would arrive at

college well prepared.

During World War I, the United States Army used a primitive intelligence test on

its draftees as the military grew from a small home defense force to a massive

expeditionary force sent to Europe. There were two versions of this objective mental test-

the Alpha and the Beta. After the war the military test, particularly the Alpha version,

was adapted for civilian uses.

The late 19th century and early 20th century was an era of standardization- standard

gauge on the railroad tracks, federal bureaucracy, big corporations and trusts, and a

national media. A similar push in education as Lemann (1995) notes was for “…a

23

uniform means of comparing students from all across the highly localized American

education system…”

Eventually the SAT evolved, being first used in 1926 and administered to 8,000

high school students. The emphasis initially was on vocabulary, especially antonyms and

analogies. But the early SAT was founded more on educational preparedness rather than

aptitude. The use of the SAT spread. Lemann describes this evolution as using “…a

brand new means- multiple-choice mental testing- being applied to an old goal- choosing

a society’s elite on the basis of merit.”

Thus “meritocracy” entered the cultural lexicon. As opposed to an “artificial

aristocracy” based on wealth and birth, meritocracy is a “natural aristocracy” based on

virtue and talents. This concept is as old as Plato and was endorsed by Thomas Jefferson.

Fallows (1980) lists three unspoken principles of American meritocracy:

• There is “intelligence” or “ability,” and it can be measured.

• Intelligence matters.

• Education is the engine of social progress and intelligence is its fuel.

In the United States, meritocracy is related to the idea of universal individual opportunity.

The American character is marked by the desire to get ahead, to escape one’s original

social condition.

But the issue of standardized testing for college selection was not initially to “get

ahead.” The traditional road to financial opportunity was in the marketplace, not in higher

education. In fact, most American teenagers did not graduate from high school until 1940

much less attend college. With the coming of the GI Bill following World War II,

expanding higher education opportunities received wide support from Americans.

24

Proponents of the SAT struggled to raise it to prominence. The chief target for its use was

the University of California, then the largest national university. When the university

fully adopted its use by requiring SAT scores from all applicants, the SAT took off. In the

year 2000 44 percent of high school students took it for a total of more than two million

students.

The SAT has its critics. Even as the University of California system was adopting

the SAT as an admissions requirement in 1967, Bowdoin College began questioning its

validity and made the test optional for applying students in 1969. Mount Holyoke

College, among others, have also recently taken the optional route on an experimental

basis. Now the president of the University of California system has called for the end of

the SAT as an admissions requirement.

Critics of the SAT question its ability to predict success in college. Among the

points the critics list are:

• The SAT does not measure the “heart” or motivation of students. Highly motivated

students from dysfunctional schools and/or families can be successful in college

without high SAT scores provided they have access to special support such as

tutoring and counseling programs.

• The SAT does not measure the “whole” student. Mount Holyoke College, for

example, in its optional experiment requires three essays and a graded writing sample

or an interview in its admissions process to ascertain academic strengths in students.

Instead of vocabulary potency, many colleges are looking for more “well rounded”

students like the ones who edit the school newspaper or act in the school play.

25

• The SAT can be detrimental to students’ self-esteem. Relatively low scores could

hinder professional aspirations as well as a personal sense of competence. Cloud

(2001) reports that ability, class, and pride intersect at the SAT. He quotes the

television comic Conan O’Brien, “It has taken 20 years to forget that damn test, and

looking up my scores would be like going back to Vietnam.”

• SAT preparation is expensive. While the College Board insists that the average

student spends only eleven hours preparing for the test (with minimal results),

Princeton Review’s SAT prep has become big business. Six-week classes with

homework can cost $799 to $899. Other tutoring is even more expensive, ranging

from $5,000 to $8,000 annually and even up to $25,000 each year.

• The SAT is racially biased. Blacks and Hispanics typically score lower than whites.

The test writers are primarily white and the questions on the SAT reflect a

mainstream cultural experience. Even black students from affluent families score

worse on average than white students.

Proponents of the SAT counter-claim that the test is thoroughly researched. Also,

large samples of test takers preview SAT questions. SAT has six sections, one of which

contains the preview questions. This section does not count in each student’s total score.

The black-white test score gap is attributed to inferior educational preparation. Test

advocates point to the fact that Asians and immigrants from the Caribbean also score well

on the SAT.

Promoters also stress that the SAT does indeed reasonably predict college

success, particularly in the first year. But they also admit that the test is simply a measure

of a student’s ability to answer questions at a given time. In fact, while the “aptitude”

26

part of the title has been changed to “achievement,” the test is now regularly just called

the “SAT.” Many confess that while the SAT is imperfect, it is probably the best we

have. (See Appendix B for sample SAT questions.)

Alternatives to the SAT have been proposed, including the Bial-Dale College

Adaptability Index. This test includes a ten-minute section in which small groups of

students reproduce a Lego robot. Grinnell College makes limited use of the index for

minority student admissions.

But, overall, the alternatives have so far proved to be inadequate. For example,

Lafayette College became SAT-optional in 1995. But admissions officials found inflated

grades and unranked classes in high schools to be confusing. When the school returned to

the SAT as an admissions requirement in 2000, applications rose fourteen percent. A

growing economy, campus improvements, and a perception of quality attached to the

SAT are credited for the rise.

But what does this controversy over the SAT mean for gifted and talented

African-American students? White (2001) declares that success on the SAT is a matter of

racial pride. Embarrassment by the results is no excuse to end the SAT. White further

explains that some theories behind the black achievement gap are either racist or hint at

racism.

White is perhaps alluding to the theory of eugenics. Advocates of eugenics

believe that humans would advance more quickly if we would discourage reproduction

among groups we would deem unfit for life. Under an eugenic umbrella policy, for

example, those groups like African-Americans who score poorly on aptitude tests could

be candidates for eventual elimination.

27

While eugenics appears to be Nazi-like in its philosophy, the designer of the SAT

was a leading member of the eugenics movement until he denounced it later in life.

Lemann (1995) reports that Carl Brigham, the designer, like many of the contemporary

psychometricians was an enthusiastic member of the eugenics movement. He accepted

the eugenic that the Alpine and Mediterranean races were hurting American immigration.

With A Study of American Intelligence, published in 1923, Brigham declared that

American intelligence is declining with the continuation of the mixture of inferior races.

By 1933 he was distancing himself from his published remarks.

While White acknowledges the gains of the civil rights movement, he urges

African-Americans to erase every doubt about black intellectual ability. He praises

Howard University for keeping the SAT and raising academic standards. He insists that

tougher classes with better teachers be available for black students and that they take

them. He calls for a change in students’ study habits and for a new burst of self-

confidence.

Taylor (2001) echoes White in that he maintains the SAT is not the problem for

African-Americans. The problem is the inferior education many black students receive as

well as their own self-destructive attitudes and habits regarding school. What Taylor and

White say corresponds to McWhorter’s “cult of anti-intellectualism.” Yet White

dismisses McWhorter’s primary assertion; he insists the problem is political and

psychological, not cultural.

Taylor also declares that once the SAT is dropped as an admissions requirement,

only subjective standards will be used to evaluate student applications. As a result, racial

preferences could be introduced through the back door via covert discrimination. In

28

addition, a student’s qualifications could be judged on the basis of family background,

talent for interviews, certain career aspirations, enthusiasm for multiculturalism, religious

affiliation, and/or political beliefs.

Life is not fair. Our world is imperfect. The SAT, as does any standardized test,

has flaws. But if gifted and talented African-American students are to become the leaders

of the nation’s future, they must methodically prepare for the SAT, eagerly take the SAT,

and let the SAT be a vehicle for fulfilling their dreams and visions.

THE LEADERSHIP DIFFERENCE

The Superintendent’s Advisory Committee for the Education of the Gifted and

Talented in Maryland’s Montgomery County Public Schools researched the

underrepresentation of African-American and Hispanic students in Gifted/Talented,

Honors, and Advanced Placement classes. As a result of their research the committee

members identified five factors that impacted the participation and achievement of

minority students in such programs. The number one factor they identified was effective

school leadership.

Leaders make things happen; they are change agents. If so-called leaders do not

lead, they are not leaders regardless of position or title. They are simply managers of the

status quo. Educational leaders- superintendents and principals- must lead by insuring

that gifted and talented African-American students have opportunities to be educated as

far as their gifts and talents will take them. This is no easy task. But anything of value

rarely is.

How can educational leaders assist gifted and talented African-American

students? There are a wide variety of leadership theories and practices espoused by

29

various experts in the field. Many are helpful; some are not. For my purposes I will use

the five C’s of leadership-character, courage, competence, composure, and caring-

adapted by Sergiovanni (2001, p. 157)) for educational leaders.

The character of a leader is defined by his honesty, trust, and integrity. An

effective leader is realistic and honest with his followers. Idealistic and simplistic

answers to complex problems will not do. Educational leaders must be honest with

themselves, parents, and students about the impact of race and related issues on

education. Leaders will lead first through their character.

A leader’s courage is demonstrated by his willingness to change and to stand up

for his beliefs. An effective leader must examine his own heart about his feelings and

beliefs regarding race and educating for leadership. Educational leaders must challenge,

as needed, the community power structures and entrenched bureaucracies to assist gifted

and talented African-American students to be educated in the fullest possible way.

Leadership competence is vital. An effective leader cannot just be a dreamer; he

must also be a doer. He must know how effective gifted and talented programs are

created and delivered to students. He must understand the dynamics of race and

multiculturalism. An educational leader must also possess the political skills to be a

crusading champion for the African-American students and parents needing these

programs.

The leader’s composure will be severely tested. Critics will aim for alleged

elitism, for not being politically correct, for being a tool of a racist establishment, or for

any number of reasons. Educational leaders will graceful under the pressure from the

critics and will be appropriate with their emotions.

30

A leader is caring. He will be concerned about the welfare of students, parents,

and teachers as well as the gifted and talented program itself. His caring will radiate

through all his actions.

Leadership is essential to any enterprise. With leaders, followers are mobilized

and resources are discovered, crafted, and utilized for the mission. Educational leaders

living through the five C’s above will be essential to a successful gifted and talented

program for African-American students. Effective leaders will discover, design, and

implement practical solutions.

PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS

Describing the problem and explaining the factors that contribute to the problem

are important. However, that is only part of the task. The job is incomplete without some

concrete suggestions for solving the problem. Offering suggestions is like walking a

tightrope in a circus. Some suggestions are so global in nature that they do not have any

specificity. Other suggestions are so minute in scope that they fail to view the big picture.

To go one way or the other, one falls off the tightrope and fails to reach the other side.

Then the one on the rope has the crowd looking on in suspense. Some want the acrobat to

succeed and others want him to fall. Excitement rises with the mixed motives of the

spectators.

With these thoughts in mind I will offer some practical suggestions gleaned from

my readings. Hopefully they will prove useful to the reader. First, in order to help gifted

and talented African-American students, one must start with all students. All students

have the capacity to learn (but all students do not want to learn or learn at a rate that

31

pushes their intellectual limits). Haycock (2001) has some recommendations in this

regard.

First, schools must have high standards. National learning standards are mere

suggestions due to the Tenth Amendment, and state and local standards vary. Therefore,

there is no recognized general standard for any grade level or academic subject in the

United States. While some standards may be quite clear in suburban public schools and

private schools, that is often not the case in urban schools. It is in these schools that have

the highest number of African-Americans who are potential candidates for gifted and

talented programs. These students deserve high academic standards at least generated

from within their schools whether or not they are in such programs.

Second, schools must offer a challenging curriculum to all students. “Dumbing

down” the curriculum may help in the short term by enabling more students to pass, but

in the long term the process helps to create high school graduates who are functionally

illiterate be unprepared for work or for college. Haycock declares that a challenging

curriculum is a more determinant of success in college than class rank or scores on

college admissions tests.

Third, students will need extra help when faced with high standards and

challenging curricula. High school students with elementary-school literacy will not

achieve. Extra resources must be provided to schools that have a high number of these

students.

Fourth, good teachers are needed. If students are to achieve with high standards

and challenging curricula, teachers are needed who know their subjects and how to teach

their subjects. (I would also add teachers need to know how to reasonably manage a

32

classroom.) Too many teachers in urban schools are teaching out of their academic fields,

either as regular or long-term substitutes. There are also many students who are “taught”

by a series of short-term substitutes.

When all students have the opportunity for high standards, challenging curricula,

extra help, and good teachers, gifted and talented students are assisted. But they also

special help in order to achieve. Ford (Achievement, 1995) recommends:

1. Schools should focus on both talent development and the nurturance of abilities.

2. Use multiple instruments and procedures to identify African-American students as

gifted.

3. Examine the impact of racial identity and test anxiety on students’ performance,

achievement, and motivation.

4. Integrate multiculturalism into the curriculum to promote self-understanding and self-

appreciation.

5. Recruit and retain minority teachers who can serve as mentors, role models, and

advocates.

6. Counseling may be needed to close the gap between potential and performance.

7. Home-student-school partnerships are essential.

As gifted and talented African-American students are identified, recruited, and

placed in special programs, Ford (Counseling, 1995) further recommends:

1. Focus on and acknowledge the strengths of gifted African-American students.

2. Help gifted African-American students to build positive social and peer relations.

3. Promote social competence and encourage biculturality among African-American

students.

33

4. Teach African-American students how to cope with social injustices.

5. Adopt broader and more comprehensive definitions of underachievement.

6. Involve families, African-American professionals, and community leaders in the

learning and counseling process.

7. Explore the quality and quantity of support systems and resources available to

African-American students.

8. Integrate multiculturalism throughout the learning and helping process.

9. Counsel African-American students using their preferred learning styles.

By reviewing the four other factors identified by the previously cited

Montgomery County Public Schools research on factors that impact participation and

achievement of minority students in gifted and talented programs, one can gain a holistic

approach to solving the problem. The other factors are school climate, teacher

expectations, challenging curriculum, and parent involvement.

Regarding school climate, efforts must be made by educational leaders to raise the

academic “temperature” within the schools. Too often the focus has been on our

weakness- the failing students- rather than on our strength- the achieving students.

Focusing on raising floors must shift to a more productive approach of raising ceilings.

Focusing on strength, rather than on weakness, releases positive energy and purpose that

benefits both achieving and failing students.

Schools could award letters to students for academics as well as for athletics and

make it a major school event. As a coach, I know the value of organized school-

sponsored sports for students. But as a teacher I also know that academics serve students

long after their athletic playing days are over.

34

In addition to forming support groups for at-risk students schools would also do

well for school climate to create support groups for academically achieving students.

Groups of this kind help to dilute the effects of the “crab-bucket” syndrome described

earlier. At Ruskin High School, for example, I was co-sponsor of RAMS- Ruskin

Academic Males for Success. Male students with a grade point average of 2.5 or above

were eligible to be RAMs.

Schools and districts could also develop a systematic identification and

recruitment system for potential gifted and talented African-American students. One such

program is Talents Unlimited used by the Fort Worth (Texas) Independent School

District as one component to identify and serve gifted students in all populations. Talents

Unlimited can be used by teachers immediately; is not hindered by barriers of ethnicity,

language, or socioeconomic status; enables students to demonstrate their thinking and

learning ability in more than one mode; and student response can be used as viable

information when screening students to receive gifted services. (Haskew, 2001)

Educational leaders can assist teachers to expand their expectations. Especially in

regards to African-American children, many teachers do not view them as gifted and

talented candidates. First of all, teachers must demand the best from each student

regardless of previous academic progress. It is too easy to compromise classroom

standards in order to pacify student behavior.

Teachers can easily fall into the stereotype trap of viewing all children of ethnic

groups and races in the same way. Instead, teachers need to see people as individuals.

This is essentially essential in light of Steele’s research on stereotype threat. Gifted and

35

talented African-American students do not represent African-Americans as a whole just

as gifted and talented white students do not represent European-Americans as a whole.

Diversity training for teachers has been very helpful in leading educators to

appreciate multiculturalism in the United States. But we need to use staff development

and other training opportunities to lead teachers to recognize individuals with groups with

their own personal strengths, weaknesses, hopes, fears, and preferred learning styles

within the broader context of ethnic diversity.

Strongly related to teacher expectations is the curriculum. The curriculum must

challenge students’ thinking and learning. Too often the curriculum is “dumbed down” to

keep the number of failing students to an minimal “acceptable” level. But educational

leaders say that the curriculum must be challenging while at the same time counsel

teachers to keep the number of “Fs” down. Leaders must monitor their overt and covert

messages to teachers in this regard.

This is not an apology for poor teaching. Teachers who do not teach must be dealt

with in a swift manner. To accomplish this, educational leaders must be effective

instructional leaders monitoring classroom instruction, offering supportive and corrective

recommendations as needed, and taking steps as needed to relocate or terminate teachers

who cannot or will not teach.

Alternate assessments are helpful with the curriculum. Standard pencil-and-paper

tests should not be discarded. Rather, they should be supplemented by assignments that

help students to demonstrate their learning in creative and fresh ways. Teachers can be

helped by administrators to plan for alternate assessments with encouragement,

monitoring, and constructive evaluations.

36

Teachers are in many cases “the” curriculum rather than the textbooks and related

materials. Through planned learning opportunities teachers can offer their students a

wider vision not only of the subject matter being taught but also of the students’ lives and

their worldviews. Educational leaders must assist teachers to insure that this occurs. As a

result, many more African-American students will truly begin or continue a joyous

journey of learning. We just might find that more of them are gifted and talented than we

previously supposed.

Finally, parental involvement is essential for educational leaders. Montgomery

County Public Schools in Maryland has taken a proactive stance in this regard by

distributing 30,000 copies of the booklet Aim High! What Parents of African American

Children Should Know About Challenging Learning Opportunities. The school district

worked with the local chapter of the NAACP, Montgomery College, and the African-

American Festival of Academic Excellence in preparing the booklet.

Montgomery County Schools see the minority achievement gap as an opportunity

to raise achievement levels for all students, but especially African-American and

Hispanic students. The booklet has tips to parents on ensuring challenging and rigorous

instruction for their children and explanations of all special achievement programs

offered.

Public awareness of the issue is the first step. Then educational leaders must

insure that parents and other community members become involved. If traditional

methods do not accomplish the objective of identifying and recruiting African-American

students into gifted and talented programs, then fresh and creative outreach must be

accomplished.

37

CONCLUSION:

A PLEA FOR DEMOCRATIC VALUES IN A MULTICULTURAL NATION

On January 6, 1941, on the eve of America’s entry into World War II, President

Franklin Roosevelt in his annual address to Congress defended why the then-neutral

United States was aiding Great Britain in its fight against Nazi aggression. In his speech

FDR described four essential human freedoms which he stressed separated Western

civilization from the forces of tyranny and moral darkness- freedom of religion, freedom

of speech, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

In the light of the international terrorist attacks on the United States on September

11, 2001 we are once again prompted to reflect upon the essential differences that

separate people of freedom from people of tyranny. For better of worse, the United States

as the sole global superpower is the beacon which inspires freedom-loving people

everywhere on our planet. Although we Americans have often been bad and ugly in our

history we have also been good and noble in our actions. America is a continuous journey

where freedom evolves; America is not a final destination where the need for change is

frozen in time.

In the 1830’s French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville observed first-hand the

American experiment in democracy. Tocqueville (1835/1966, p. 9-20) observed that

democracy in the United States was a natural outgrown of development. He also

advocated that democracy be guided so that its actions would guide its beliefs and that

government be adapted to the needs of time and place.

It is perhaps in the arena of multiculturalism that the United States faces its

greatest challenge. America has always been multicultural. The blend of Natives,

38

Europeans, and Africans, soon to be followed by Asians, has always been a dynamic in

American history and will continue to be so. But traditionally it has been the European-

Americans who established the rules. During World War II while fighting for freedom,

the United States in contradiction of its professed beliefs sent African-American and

Japanese-American soldiers into combat while at the same time maintained Jim Crow

segregationist laws for one group and sent others to forced internment camps.

But it is the genius of American democracy, as Tocqueville noted, to evolve and

develop so our beliefs and actions are congruent and that our government serves the

needs of our people at specific places in our historical context. While was perhaps

appropriate race relations in 1835 was not appropriate in 1964 with the passage of the

Civil Rights Act. And what was appropriate in the 1960s with affirmative action may not

be the solution in the 21st century.

All men (and women) are created equal. Except for fringe extremists, there is no

debate there. But how that equality is achieved and maintained continues to be open for

spirited and lively debate among Americans of good will particularly now that the rules

are changing. Anglo-Americans now compose about three-fourths of our nation’s

population. In fifty short years half of Americans will be non-Anglo- Hispanic-

Americans, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, and others. The second half of the 21st

century will be a vast multicultural mosaic for the United States. Kaplan (1998, p. 18)

suggests that the United States may become the first international nation in which

decentralized authority, a pluralistic society, and mobile citizens will continue our

national vibrancy.

39

Boynton (1995) reports on the thoughts of Cornel West. West rejects overt black

nationalism and looks for deeply rooted common interests that would bring groups,

particularly marginal groups, together. He criticizes anyone who would label black

people as problem people, rather fellow Americans with problems. West warns that if we

go down, we go down together because of the basic humanness and Americanness in all

of us.

Paralleling West, Loury (96-97) states “…that fundamental challenges any person

faces in life arise not from individual racial condition, but from our common human

condition.” Because we Americans are essentially identical and differ only in details,

democracy is only truly attained when whites see blacks as people created with them in

God’s image and who are essentially the same as them. However, we Americans are a

long way from that goal. Loury further states that we have arrived at the ultimate racial

paradox: the self-development of African-Americans is in tension with this moral

requirement for Americans to achieve a humanism that transcends race.

Therefore our national effort to create a community that nurtures genuine ethnic

and racial diversity coupled with a strong core of common cultural values held by all

Americans continues to be a major challenge to our democratic experience. If indeed this

challenge is to be overcome, it may well come from valued gifted and talented African-

American students who grow up to lead us in this new millennium to affirm, strengthen,

and expand the democratic foundations for all Americans.

40

APPENDIX ADifferences between Bright Child and Gifted Child

Organized by Janice Szabos, 1988

Bright ChildKnows the answersIs interestedIs attentiveHas good ideasWorks hardAnswers the questionsTop groupListens with interestLearns with ease6-8 repetitions for masteryUnderstands ideasEnjoys peersGrasps the meaningCompletes assignmentsIs receptiveCopies accuratelyEnjoys schoolAbsorbs informationTechnicianGood memorizerEnjoys straightforward, sequential presentationIs alertIs pleased with own learning

Gifted ChildAsks the questionIs highly curiousIs mentally & physically involvedHas wild, silly ideasPlays around, yet tests wellDiscusses in detail, elaboratesBeyond the groupShows strong feelings & opinionsAlready knows1-2 repetitions for masteryConstructs abstractionsPrefers adultsDraws inferencesInitiates projectsIs intenseCreates a new designEnjoys learningManipulates informationInventorGood guesserThrives on complexity

Is keenly observantIs highly self-critical

41

APPENDIX BSample SAT Questions

VERBAL

Analogies

Torpid : Sluggish ::• wrong : apologetic• refracted : direct• comic : funny• sad : empathetic• merry : morose

Doggerel : Verse ::• animation : cinema• scroll : document• burlesque : drama• chisel : sculptor• headline : article

Sentence Completion

Some critics described the photographer’s as ---, citing his obvious ---of the work of his renowned predecessors.

• distinctive..assimilation• sycophantic..dismissal• derivative..adaptation• controversial..veneration• pedantic..ignorance

The essay was both---and---; although concise, it was profoundly moving.• meandering..denigrating• compact..enervating• fictional..touching• argumentative..rationalistic• terse..poignant

MATH

42

On a number line, point A has coordinate –3 and point B has coordinate 12. Point P is 2/3

of the way from A to B. What is the coordinate of point P?

• -1• 2• 6• 7• 10

Chairs ready for shipment at the Northern Chair factory come down a ramp in single file. Inspector A checks every third chair, beginning with the third. Inspector B checks every fifth chair, beginning with the fifth. If 98 chairs came down the ramp while both inspectors were working on Monday, how many of these chairs were not checked by either of these two inspectors?

• 32• 45• 47• 53

43

REFERENCES CITED

Bowen, William G. and Derek Bok. (1998). The Shape of the River: Long-

Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University

Admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Boynton, Robert S. “The New Intellectuals.” The Atlantic Monthly March 1995,

53-70.

Clark, Barbara. (1983). Growing Up Gifted, second edition. Columbus, OH: Charles

E. Merrill Publishing.

Cloud, John. “Should SATs Matter?” 20 October 2001 <http://www.time.com>.

College Board. “Reaching the Top: A Report of the National Task Force on Minority

High Achievement- Executive Summary.” 10 October 2001 <http://www.

collegeboard.org>.

Corwin, Miles. (2001). And Still We Rise: The Trials and Triumphs of Twelve Inner-

City High School Students. New York: Harper.

De Tocqueville, Alexis. (1835/1966). Translated by George Lawrence. Edited by J.P

Mayer. Democracy in America. New York: Harper & Row.

Diuguid, Lewis W. “Blacks Hungry for a TV Identity are Being Fed Stereotypes.”

The Kansas City Star, C-2, June 14, 1995.

Fallows, James. “The Tests and the ‘Brightest’: How Fair are the College Boards.”

The Atlantic Monthly February 1980: 37-48.

Ford, Donna Y. “Counseling Gifted African American Students: Promoting

Achievement, Identify, and Social and Emotional Well-Being.” 21 September

2001 <http://www.gifted.uconn.edu>.

44

---. “Reversing Underachievement among Gifted Black Students: Promising Practices

and Programs.” 3 October 2001 <http://www.gse.harvard.edu>.

---. “A Study of Achievement and Underachievement Among Gifted, Potentially

Gifted, and Average African-American Students.” 3 October 2001. <http://

www.gifted.uconn.edu>.

Ford, Donna Y. and Antoinette Thomas. “Underachievement among Gifted Minority

Students: Problems and Promises. ERIC Digest E544.” 21 September 2001.

<http://www.ed.gov>.

Gallagher, James J. (1975). Teaching the Gifted Child, second edition. Boston: Allyn

and Bacon.

Goodwin, Richard N. (1988). Remembering America: A Voice from the Sixties.

New York: Harper & Row.

Harrington, J. “The Responsibilities of Being a Gifted-Creative-Talented Teenager.”

The Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, XVI (4), 209-210: 1991.

Hamburg, David A. (1992). Today’s Children: Creating a Future for a Generation

in Crisis. New York: Random House.

Haskew, Brenda J. “The Talents Dovetail: Initiative to Identify Gifted and Talented

Minority Students.” 3 October 2001 <http://www.asms.state.k12.al.us>.

Haycock, Kati. “Closing the Achievement Gap.” 25 July 2001 <http://www.asced.org>.

Jencks, Christopher and Meredith Phillips. (1998). “Introduction.” In Christopher

Jencks and Meredith Phillips, ed., The Black-White Test Score Gap.

Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

45

Kaplan, Robert D. (1998). An Empire Wilderness: Travels into America’s Future.

New York: Random House.

Landgraff, Kurt M. “Using Assessments and Accountability to Raise Student

Achievement.” Testimony before the Education Reform Subcommittee

of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on Measuring

Success. 8 March 2001 <http://www.ets.org>.

Lee, V.E., L.F. Winfield, and T.C. Wilson. “Academic Behaviors among High-

Achieving African-American Students.” Education and Urban Society

24 (1), 65-86: 1991.

Lemann, Nicholas. “The Structure of Success in America.” The Atlantic Monthly

August 1995: 41-60.

Loury, Glenn C. “The Divided Society and the Democratic Idea.” Bostonia Winter

96-97: 17-20.

Montgomery County Public Schools. Aim High! What Parents of African-American

Children Should Know About Challenging Learning Opportunities. June 2000.

McWhorter, John H. (2000). Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage in Black America. New

York: The Free Press.

Sergiovanni, Thomas J. (2001). The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Approach.

Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Robinson, B.B. “The Media Proves McWhorter Right: Some African-American

Youth Believe Academic Excellence is Not ‘Cool.’” 9 October 2001

<http://www.nationalcenter.org>.

46

Smith, J., B. LeRose, and R.E. Clasen. “Underrepresentation of Minority Students

in Gifted Programs: Yes! It Matters!” Gifted Child Quarterly 35 (2), 81-83: 1991.

Steele, Claude. “Race and the Schooling of Black Americans.” 21 September 2001

<http://www.theatlantic.com>.

---. “Thin Ice: ‘Stereotype Threat’ and Black College Students.” 21 September 2001

<http://www.theatlantic.com>.

Suskind, Ron. (1998). A Hope in the Unseen: An American Odyssey from the Inner City

to the Ivy League. New York: Broadway Books.

White, Jack E. “Why Dropping the SAT is Bad for Blacks.” 20 October 2001

<http://www.time>.

47

OTHER RESOURCES

Bacon, Katie. “Meritocracy.” 13 October 2001 <http://www.theatlantic.com>.

Belluck, Pam. “Reason Is Sought for Lag by Blacks in School Effort.” 7 October

2001 <http://www.shearonforschools.com>.

Dorbis, Chris and Suzanne Vasilevska. “Cultural Gifts in the 90’s and Beyond.” 3

October 2001 <http://www.nexus.edu>.

Dryfoos, Joy G.(1998). Safe Passage: Making It Through Adolescence In A Risky

Society. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ford, Donna Y. “Study Skills, Thinking Skills, and Test Taking Skills: Resources.”

21 September 2001 <http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu>.

Gibson, Jane. “Efforts to Close Achievement Gap Need to Focus On Top Achievers.”

3 October 2001 <http://www.aasa.org>.

Gibson, Kay L. “Recognising Gifted Minority Students: A Research-Based

Identification Approach.” 3 October 2001 <http://www.nexus.edu>.

Goldstein, Andrew. “Is This the End for the SAT?” 20 October 2001 <http://www.

time.com>.

Hickman Mills C-1 School District. “CODE-PEP-ACE 2001-2002.”

Holmes, Natalie Carter. “Aim High! Urges Booklet for Parents of African Americans.”

3 October 2001 <http://www.aasa.org>.

Kaplan, Robert D. (2000). The Coming Anarchy. New York: Random House.

Lemann, Nicholas. (1999). The Big Test: The Secret History of the American

Meritocracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

---. “The Great Sorting.” The Atlantic Monthly September 1995: 84-100.

48

McWhorter, John H. “What’s Holding Blacks Back?” 21 September 2001

<http://www.city-journal.org>.

Morse, Jodie. “Flying Without the Test.” 20 October 2001 <http://www.time.com>.

Schneider, Suzanne. “Underachievement: Developing Student Potential. 21

September 2001 <http://www.penngifted.org>.

Singal, Daniel J. “The Other Crisis in American Education.” The Atlantic Monthly

November 1991: 59-74.

Stephenson, Wes. “The Measure of Merit: Nicholas Lemann on Testing and

Meritocracy.” 22 August 1995 <http://www.theatlantic.com>.

Taylor, Stuart, Jr. “Bashing the SAT Won’t Make Life More Fair.” 13 October 2001

<http://www.theatlantic.com>.

Viadero, Debra. “Gap Persists in Minority Achievement.” Education Week 20 October

1999.

Winters, Rebecca. “Here Comes the Lego Test.” 20 October 2000 <http://www.time.

com>.

49