“被剥夺和处于不利地位”:1967-1987年美国联邦政府对天才青年的支持

IF 0.3 4区 教育学 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA Pub Date : 2023-06-26 DOI:10.1080/00309230.2023.2225424
Sevan G. Terzian, Hannah Williams
{"title":"“被剥夺和处于不利地位”:1967-1987年美国联邦政府对天才青年的支持","authors":"Sevan G. Terzian, Hannah Williams","doi":"10.1080/00309230.2023.2225424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1972, the United States Office of Education (USOE) released a lengthy and unprecedented report about gifted education in response to a Congressional mandate. Both Congress and the USOE lamented the inadequate state of gifted programmes in American schools and urged that gifted education should become a greater national priority. In this essay, we argue that the federal government revived human capital and national security concerns in claiming that the unfulfilled potential of gifted and talented Americans had made the United States vulnerable. Better accommodating students with high abilities therefore became a paramount political agenda item. At the same time, amid efforts to eliminate poverty and facilitate greater equality of educational opportunity, both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government strategically portrayed the gifted and talented as a neglected and historically disadvantaged group in need of assistance. In establishing a broader and multi-faceted definition of giftedness, moreover, the USOE paid particular attention to racial minorities who were also gifted as a way of making its case. Such arguments fit within the political climate of the Great Society in directing public resources to historically marginalized groups. Deviating from longstanding characterizations of the gifted as inherently white and privileged, the U.S. government in the late 1960s and early 1970s portrayed them as racially diverse, “deprived,” “disadvantaged,” and warranting special educational opportunities. This example of federal advocacy thus marked a notable shift in the image of the gifted student in the United States.","PeriodicalId":46283,"journal":{"name":"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Deprived and disadvantaged”: federal advocacy for gifted youth in the United States, 1967–1987\",\"authors\":\"Sevan G. Terzian, Hannah Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00309230.2023.2225424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1972, the United States Office of Education (USOE) released a lengthy and unprecedented report about gifted education in response to a Congressional mandate. Both Congress and the USOE lamented the inadequate state of gifted programmes in American schools and urged that gifted education should become a greater national priority. In this essay, we argue that the federal government revived human capital and national security concerns in claiming that the unfulfilled potential of gifted and talented Americans had made the United States vulnerable. Better accommodating students with high abilities therefore became a paramount political agenda item. At the same time, amid efforts to eliminate poverty and facilitate greater equality of educational opportunity, both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government strategically portrayed the gifted and talented as a neglected and historically disadvantaged group in need of assistance. In establishing a broader and multi-faceted definition of giftedness, moreover, the USOE paid particular attention to racial minorities who were also gifted as a way of making its case. Such arguments fit within the political climate of the Great Society in directing public resources to historically marginalized groups. Deviating from longstanding characterizations of the gifted as inherently white and privileged, the U.S. government in the late 1960s and early 1970s portrayed them as racially diverse, “deprived,” “disadvantaged,” and warranting special educational opportunities. This example of federal advocacy thus marked a notable shift in the image of the gifted student in the United States.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2023.2225424\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2023.2225424","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1972年,美国教育办公室(USOE)响应国会的要求,发布了一份关于资优教育的长篇报告。美国国会和美国教育局都对美国学校的资优项目不足表示遗憾,并敦促资优教育应成为国家更大的优先事项。在这篇文章中,我们认为联邦政府重新唤起了对人力资本和国家安全的关注,声称有天赋和有才能的美国人的潜力未得到充分发挥,使美国变得脆弱。因此,更好地容纳高能力学生成为一个重要的政治议程项目。与此同时,在努力消除贫困和促进教育机会更加平等的过程中,联邦政府的立法和行政部门战略性地将有天赋和有才能的人描绘成一个被忽视的、历史上处于不利地位的群体,需要帮助。此外,在确定天赋的更广泛和多方面的定义时,USOE特别注意少数民族,他们也是天赋的,以此来证明其观点。这种观点符合“伟大社会”的政治气候,即把公共资源投向历史上被边缘化的群体。美国政府在20世纪60年代末和70年代初将天才儿童描绘成种族多样化的、“被剥夺的”、“弱势的”,并保证有特殊的教育机会,这与长期以来对天才儿童的描述不同。因此,这个联邦倡导的例子标志着美国天才学生形象的显著转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“Deprived and disadvantaged”: federal advocacy for gifted youth in the United States, 1967–1987
In 1972, the United States Office of Education (USOE) released a lengthy and unprecedented report about gifted education in response to a Congressional mandate. Both Congress and the USOE lamented the inadequate state of gifted programmes in American schools and urged that gifted education should become a greater national priority. In this essay, we argue that the federal government revived human capital and national security concerns in claiming that the unfulfilled potential of gifted and talented Americans had made the United States vulnerable. Better accommodating students with high abilities therefore became a paramount political agenda item. At the same time, amid efforts to eliminate poverty and facilitate greater equality of educational opportunity, both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government strategically portrayed the gifted and talented as a neglected and historically disadvantaged group in need of assistance. In establishing a broader and multi-faceted definition of giftedness, moreover, the USOE paid particular attention to racial minorities who were also gifted as a way of making its case. Such arguments fit within the political climate of the Great Society in directing public resources to historically marginalized groups. Deviating from longstanding characterizations of the gifted as inherently white and privileged, the U.S. government in the late 1960s and early 1970s portrayed them as racially diverse, “deprived,” “disadvantaged,” and warranting special educational opportunities. This example of federal advocacy thus marked a notable shift in the image of the gifted student in the United States.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
40.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: "Paedagogica Historica is undoubtedly the leading journal in the field. In contrast to a series of national journals for the history of education, Paedagogica Historica is the most international one." A trilingual journal with European roots, Paedagogica Historica discusses global education issues from an historical perspective. Topics include: •Childhood and Youth •Comparative and International Education •Cultural and social policy •Curriculum •Education reform •Historiography •Schooling •Teachers •Textbooks •Theory and Methodology •The urban and rural school environment •Women and gender issues in Education
期刊最新文献
Big administration reforms against Catholic reformist traditions: fusion of state and church mid-level school administrations in early nineteenth-century Prussian Silesia The transnational entanglements of James Liberty Tadd’s drawing curriculum: a curious chapter in the history of human potential Practices of reading and writing. Jean Daniel Revel and 19th-century Waldensian immigration in Uruguay Transnational knowledge circulation and the Commission on Manual and Practical Instruction in Ireland, 1896–98 Examens, grades et diplômes. La validation des compétences par les universités du XIIe siècle à nos jours
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1