{"title":"Underrepresentation in Gifted Education Revisited: The Promise of Single-Group Summaries and Meta-Analytic QuantCrit","authors":"Jemimah Young, J. Young","doi":"10.1177/00169862211039731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many statistical measures are commonly used to document the persistence of inequity within gifted education (Young, Young, & Ford, 2017; Ford, 2013; Hodges et al., 2018; Yoon & Gentry, 2009). Thus, in response to the challenges presented by Peters (2021), we contend that an approach that considers critical race theory as a lens for the design, analysis, and interpretation of representation data in gifted education is necessary but remains elusive. In this commentary, we present an example of an alternative analysis (i.e., single-group summary). Borrowing from the work of Ford (2013) and Lamb et al. (2019), we examined Black student representation in gifted education meta-analytically using data from the Office of Civil Rights Data Collection to provide an example of the utility of single-group summaries. A single-group summary is described as the estimation of population parameters for a single group on a particular outcome. We aim to present a novel application of QuantCrit and meta-analytic thinking to support more informed and equitable decisions in gifted education. Using data from the Office of Civil Rights Data Collection database, we computed the relative difference in composition index (RDCI), the Equity Index (EI), and the Inequity Score (IS) in the current single-group summary.","PeriodicalId":47514,"journal":{"name":"Gifted Child Quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":"136 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gifted Child Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211039731","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Many statistical measures are commonly used to document the persistence of inequity within gifted education (Young, Young, & Ford, 2017; Ford, 2013; Hodges et al., 2018; Yoon & Gentry, 2009). Thus, in response to the challenges presented by Peters (2021), we contend that an approach that considers critical race theory as a lens for the design, analysis, and interpretation of representation data in gifted education is necessary but remains elusive. In this commentary, we present an example of an alternative analysis (i.e., single-group summary). Borrowing from the work of Ford (2013) and Lamb et al. (2019), we examined Black student representation in gifted education meta-analytically using data from the Office of Civil Rights Data Collection to provide an example of the utility of single-group summaries. A single-group summary is described as the estimation of population parameters for a single group on a particular outcome. We aim to present a novel application of QuantCrit and meta-analytic thinking to support more informed and equitable decisions in gifted education. Using data from the Office of Civil Rights Data Collection database, we computed the relative difference in composition index (RDCI), the Equity Index (EI), and the Inequity Score (IS) in the current single-group summary.
期刊介绍:
Gifted Child Quarterly (GCQ) is the official journal of the National Association for Gifted Children. As a leading journal in the field, GCQ publishes original scholarly reviews of the literature and quantitative or qualitative research studies. GCQ welcomes manuscripts offering new or creative insights about giftedness and talent development in the context of the school, the home, and the wider society. Manuscripts that explore policy and policy implications are also welcome. Additionally, GCQ reviews selected books relevant to the field, with an emphasis on scholarly texts or text with policy implications, and publishes reviews, essay reviews, and critiques.