The Gifted and Talented Program and the Spanish Bilingual Student

 

     It has become more and more evident in many school districts that the servicing of the gifted and talented children who are learning English in a bilingual program needs to be addressed.  This is very difficult for some school districts as a result of the lack of qualified bilingual teachers, the lack of properly designed bilingual programs and the improper assessment and placement of some Spanish bilingual students who are deemed gifted and talented.  The latest census data further illustrates the necessity to try to address the needs of these students in a bilingual, gifted and talented program or both.  The latest data shows that 26,771,035 children from ages 5-17 speak Spanish in the home. This represents a 54.3% increase in Spanish use at home from the 1990 census.  (Crawford, 2001)  Even when compared to the 1980 census, the number of Spanish speakers ages 5-17 has been growing at a phenomenally rapid pace.  School districts are struggling to meet the demand.  However, through the Javits program and Title VII funds, the monies are available to develop such programs. Recently, though, the Bush administration has proposed giving funds to states in the form of block grants.  This would let the states distribute funds as they see fit.  If the state is not interested in bilingual gifted programs, a district will not receive funds for such a program.  This is an enormous problem that hopefully will not be.  At any rate, why is there little development in the this area?  I believe as a result of ignorance and misconception, many districts fail to see the need for such programs and usually wait until bilingual students have transitioned before beginning to serve them if they are ever served at all. 

     To understand the need for appropriate bilingual gifted programs, one needs to understand the second language acquisition process and what properly designed bilingual programs look like.  Much of the research on which methods in bilingual education are more efficient at teaching an English language learner English while still maintaining high literacy rates is quite clear.  Research points to the fact that developmental, additive, bilingual programs that allow the student the necessary amount of time to acquire not only conversational English but academic English as well, develop more successful students who are able to work comfortably in either language.  Dr. Stephen Krashen has become a champion of the idea that reading is the key component in making bilingual students successful.  His Reading Hypothesis states that reading instruction in the native language develops those literacy skills that will eventually transfer to the second language. (Krashen, 1996) In the case of Spanish bilinguals, these students learn to become proficient readers in Spanish.  English reading does not need to be taught to these children.  They already know how to read.  It is now just a question of practicing reading in the new language and developing vocabulary through the use of comprehensible input in the target language usually through ESL techniques used by the bilingual teacher.  The Input Hypothesis of Dr. Krashen (1996) holds that information provided in the second

language that is not modified in some way to make it more understandable to the child is just gibberish and does not advance the child’s learning of the academic language.

     Dr. Jim Cummins provided bilingual education theory with the idea of Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills, BICS and the idea of Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency Skills, CALPS.  His BICS vs. CALPS theory shows that bilingual programs must provide the student enough time to learn the required academic skills in the second language in order to be successful later in classes held only in the target language.  (Cummins, 1999)  Research also has shown

that to develop these CALPS skills, the average student needs five to seven years in a bilingual program.  (Ramírez, Yuen, & Ramey, 1991)  Currently in Texas, excluding pre-kindergarten and kindergarten, the allowable time that a child can spend in a bilingual program is five years, possibly six years in some districts.

     Yet, even when a district is armed with the reasons for bilingual education, it is clear that school districts seldom offer the English language learner a chance to learn in a gifted environment even if the child may be gifted.  All too often, the idea of what and how a gifted child should be is based on an Anglo, middle class gifted student without consideration of cultural or linguistic needs. (Irby, Lara-Alecio, 1996)  In fact, some argue that there is a systematic bias in the standardization process, as instruments follow this middle-class mainstream basis of measurement. (Bermúdez, Márquez, 1998) Speaking of systematic bias, two states have currently banned bilingual education.  This ban has occasioned the near complete lack of identification of bilingual students who are gifted.  In California, where under rare circumstances and because of loop-holes in the law banning bilingual education, a precious few bilingual programs are allowed.  As a result some bilinguals are identified.   Nonetheless, the end result is that the child is expected to learn in only English.  (Dr. Anaida Colón Muniz, personal email, November 3, 2001)  Is California really meeting the need of that student?  I doubt it.  Most counselors and psychologists involved in the identification of gifted students are not bilingual in California so even if a non-verbal aptitude test were given to these children, how well would they do if they did not understand the instructions?  (Peter Farrugio, personal email, November 3, 2001)  The situation in Arizona is even worse.  After speaking with several educators and parents in Arizona, it would seem that there are only two or three bilingual gifted programs in the whole state and those are concentrated in one district.  Still, as a result of the strict rules placed upon the program by the law banning bilingual education in Arizona, only those bilingual students that have a good command of English according to oral test results can enter the bilingual gifted program.  (Mary Carol Combs, personal email, (November 3, 2001)  So in a sense, bilingual gifted children are withheld services because of a lack of English.  That is seriously flawed.  It harks back to the idea that to be gifted is to follow the middle class, Anglo conceptual frame. 

     Too, cultural differences play a large role in the under representation of bilingual students for the gifted classroom.  The lack of cultural awareness and sensitivity on the part of teachers and appraisers exacerbates the problem. (Bermúdez, Márquez, 1998)  For example, many Mexican-American children who value what an adult has to say, respect the law and authority receive little attention as potentially gifted children because the American school system values individual competition, initiative and self-direction. (Cohen, 1990) Similarly, some Puerto Rican children will hesitate to act independently as they prefer to consult with family members first. (Cohen, 1990) The National

Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS) not surprisingly found that gifted and talented programs tend to serve more one racial or ethnic group than others.  Asian and white students were served most often; whereas, only 6.7% of the students served in gifted programs were Hispanic. (Cantu, 1998)    More disturbing is that this does disaggregate the data further to show how many of those Hispanics were actually in bilingual programs.  The number for those students would be even lower. Cantu (1998) went on to state that in Texas, as of 1998, limited English proficient (LEP) students only accounted for 3.4% of the gifted population served even though they represented 12% of the total student population.  Again, this data does not show what percentage was actually from a bilingual program.  That number would be even lower. 

     Another factor that contributes to the low numbers of language minority children in the gifted classroom is the reliance on standardized tests and IQ tests as sole measures for giftedness. (Bermúdez, Márquez, 1998)  A district must provide multiple measures of assessment so that the bilingual child has the opportunity to show his or her talents.  (Cohen, 1990) This should include measures in the native language and English, non-verbal culturally appropriate tests, behavioral checklists, nominations, portfolio assessments, teacher observation, samples of creativity, art or writing, and input from the cultural group with which the student most identifies. (Cohen, 1990, Gonzalez, Buerle and Felix-Holt, 1996, Castellano, 1998) Different cultures and different societies

encourage the development of different intelligences.  Still, the majority culture will overlook these intelligences as they are not valued thus causing a low number of linguistically and culturally different children to be identified.  (Kloosterman)  Multiple measures will allow other intelligences to be recognized.  (Gonzalez, Bauerle and Felix-Holt) 

     Since some of the multiple measures include nominations and teacher observations, what are some of the attributes of the Hispanic bilingual child?  Castellano (1998) succinctly points out that gifted Hispanic students have these common characteristics.  1)  They rapidly acquire English language skills once exposed to the language.  2)  They exhibit leadership abilities with strong interpersonal skills.  3)  The tend to have older playmates and easily engage adults in conversation.  4) They enjoy intelligent and effective risk-taking behavior.  5)  They can keep busy and entertained.  6)  They accept responsibility at home normally reserved for older children such as taking care of younger siblings or helping others with homework and 7) they are known to be “street smart” and able to survive in an Anglo dominated society.  Irby and Lara-Alecio (1996) agree on these characteristics plus they delve further into the mind of the Hispanic gifted bilingual student.  These researchers believe that the gifted Hispanic bilingual child will have much more cultural awareness.  This child will value and appreciate his or her native language and culture.  They have a high motivation to learn.  They are not only good readers but they want to read.  The child performs well in all areas of reading including identifying cause and effect relationships and has a very expressive vocabulary with a command of both English and Spanish.  The child works well in groups and is liked by peers.  Overall achievement is very high in the classroom.  The child can retain and use stored knowledge.  The child performs well in math and enjoys problem solving.  The child can perceive relationships between apparently unrelated areas.  Finally, Hispanic bilingual gifted children are also seen as very creative in the arts be it music, art or drama. 

     Understanding now who the Hispanic bilingual gifted learner, what do districts do to serve these children?  The clear answer is to develop and maintain a bilingual gifted program in which children receive instruction in both languages.  The students receive Spanish instruction at an advanced level while still receiving English instruction at the appropriate level for the students’ level of proficiency in English.  However, many districts ignore the talents of gifted bilingual students or simply place them in the English gifted program even though many times the children were tested using Spanish assessment measures. 

     Some tend to believe that since the bilingual child is gifted, the child should be able to handle the academic demands in a gifted English classroom despite having limited abilities in English.  This idea is perpetuated in part by how teachers and administrators judge the gifted child.    

     When a gifted bilingual child is placed inappropriately in an all English gifted classroom, anecdotal evidence and my personal observations suggest that many will struggle to meet the academic requirements of advanced English instruction especially in reading.  They do not perform well and their grades drop.  This is not due to a lack of intelligence or even motivation, but rather a lack of comprehensible input in English.  Some doubt if the child is truly gifted; therefore, the student is moved to the regular classroom where his or her grades do improve as a result of the less strenuous academic demands in English.  Although the fact still remains that this child is gifted and should receive gifted instruction.  Where this occurs, the gifted bilingual child is not being served correctly. 

     Furthermore, sometimes a gifted child will actually succeed in the gifted English classroom.  This occurrence gives more support to the misconception that since the bilingual child is gifted, he or she should be able to handle gifted instruction in whatever language.  From what I have witnessed and from speaking with parents whose bilingual children were initially placed inappropriately in a gifted English classroom, these children struggle but due to an incredible drive to succeed and to please both parents and teachers, the child survives.  Nevertheless, these children are oftentimes not comfortable in the classroom and emotionally they are very fragile.  One parent even reported to me that her child would come home in tears at least once a week because she did not understand everything the teacher had taught. 

     Again, what should a district do to properly serve bilingual gifted students?  The first step is to establish the idea that children who are not fluent in English are not necessarily in need of remedial instruction.  If this idea is pervasive, the reason for a gifted bilingual program will never be understood.  Children who are gifted can still need support in certain areas be they linguistic or academic.  When meeting the instructional needs of gifted bilingual children, educators must consider several key aspects.  A classroom that meets both the academic and, perhaps more importantly, the linguistic needs of the student is an absolute necessity for the reasons established previously for bilingual education.  A model bilingual gifted classroom would be one replete with literature in both languages.  The teacher would provide advanced instruction in the native language while continuing to develop English by way of ESL strategies.  In order for the bilingual gifted program in general to be successful, Cohen, (1990), has suggested that the following factors should be taken into account.  Individual schools need to broaden its idea of giftedness.  A broader view will promote the identification of more students and the expansion of the program.  Also, districts need to use a variety of assessments as has been discussed earlier.  Different school districts probably will need the freedom to choose what model best fits their Hispanic bilingual gifted children.  There is no one size fits all model when it comes to educating the gifted child.  A pull-out model may be best or a self-contained bilingual gifted program.  It depends on the students.  Finally, and of utmost importance, the staff needs to have more awareness when it comes to the potential of bilingual students and gifted programs.  If teachers do not support either program, the program will not be successful.  There has to be “buy in” or acceptance that both programs are a valid way of teaching students.  Related to this idea, the staff must be knowledgeable about how giftedness can manifest itself in different populations such as the Hispanic bilingual population.  If the ideas of giftedness are all based on the Anglo, middle-class student idea of giftedness, many will not be considered or served as gifted. 

     How to serve the gifted bilingual child is a difficult question without an easy answer, yet the answer is there.  When one combines research based learning strategies for teaching English to children whose native language is something other than English with what is known for properly identifying and placing gifted bilingual students, the answer is quite obvious.  Even more exciting is witnessing what bilingual gifted Hispanic students can do in the gifted setting.  From my experience, it is absolutely amazing!  Other school districts should be and will be  equally amazed if they follow what research has to say. 

Reference List

Bermúdez, Andrea B. PhD. & Márquez, Judith A. PhD. June-July 1998.  Insights into Gifted and Talented English Language Learners.  IDRA Newsletter {online}.  Available:  www.idra.org/Newslettr/1998/Jun/Andrea.htm {10/4/01}.

     Cantu, Linda.  June-July 1998.  Traditional Methods of Identifying Gifted Students Overlooks Many.  IDRA Newsletter {online}.  Available:  www.idra.org/Newslettr/1998/Jun/Linda.htm {10/4/01}.

     Cohen, Linda M. 1990.  Meeting the Needs of Gifted and Talented Minority Language Students.  ERIC EC Digest, #E480, {online}.  Available:  www.cec.sped.org/ericec/digests/e480.html {9/27/01}

     Crawford, James. (2001).  Census 2000:  A Guide for the Perplexed {online}.  Available:  http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/census02.htm.  (9/27/01). 

     Cummins, Jim, PhD. (1999).  Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills and Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency Skills {online}.  Available:  http://www.iteachilearn.com/cummins/bicscalp.html.  (9/27/01). 

     Gonzalez, Virginia., Bauerle, Patricia & Felix-Holt, Maria.  (Winter 1996).  Theoretical and Practical Implications of Assessing Cognitive and Language Development in Bilingual Children with Qualitative Methods.  The Bilingual Research Journal, Volume 20, No. 1, pages 93-131.

     Irby, Beverly J. PhD. &  Lara-Alecio, Rafael, PhD. (1996).  Attributes of Hispanic Gifted Bilingual Students as Perceived by Bilingual Educators in Texas.  SABE Journal, Volume 11, pages 120-143. 

     Kloosterman, Valentina I. (1997).  Building a Bridge:  A Combined Effort Between Gifted and Bilingual Education.  The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented 1997 Spring Newsletter.  Available:  www.sp.uconn.edu/~nrcgt/news/spring97/spring972.html.  (9/27/01).

     Krashen, Stephen D., PhD. (1996).  Chapter 4:  Does Literacy Transfer?  Under Attack:  The Case Against Bilingual Education. In E.J. Glasser (ed.), (pages 23-31).   Culver City, California:  Language Education Associates. 

     Ramírez, J. David., Yuen, Sandra D. & Ramey, Dena R. (1991).  Final Report:  Longitudinal Study of Structured English Immersion Strategy, Early-Exit and Late-Exit Transitional Bilingual Education Programs for Language Minority Children Executive Summary {online}.  Available:  www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/ramirez.longitudinal.html. (9/27/01). 

 

My school

Home Page

My school district