Abstract:The problem of culturally, linguistically, and economically diverse (CLED) student underrepresentation in gifted programs demonstrates a need to examine systemic processes, including the building of systemic capacity at the district and school levels where policies for gifted programs are formed and implemented. To examine the effects of this process on one diverse district’s gifted identification and services, we conducted 10 focus group interviews with 61 participants including gifted coordinators, teacher leaders, and gifted facilitators in the middle of a district initiative aimed at improving equitable identification and services in its gifted program. Data were analyzed using the six-phase approach of Thematic Analysis, which included (1) familiarization, (2) coding, (3) searching for themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and then (6) writing our report. Three overarching themes emerged from the in-depth analysis: (1) building systemic capacity, (2) shifting conceptions of giftedness, and (3) equitable identification practices and inclusive programming. Findings indicated the importance of systemic capacity building in teachers for improved CLED student identification into gifted programs and services. Essentially, building systemic capacity and shifting conceptions of giftedness share a reciprocal relationship in leading to more equitable gifted identification practices and inclusive programming. Moreover, implementing flexible and nuanced policy that takes into consideration school climate and culture is critical to building systemic capacity while working toward goals of equity. Recommendations are provided for researchers and practitioners based on these major findings.

Expanding Gifted Identification to Capture Academically Advanced, Low-Income, or Other Disadvantaged Students: The Case of Arkansas

Consequences of Implementing Curricular-Aligned Strategies for Identifying Rural Gifted Students

Promising Practices for Improving Identification of English Learners for Gifted and Talented Programs

Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education

Identifying and Serving Gifted and Talented Students: Are Identification and Services Connected?

Eight Universal Truths of Identifying Students for Advanced Academic Interventions

Inequality at the Starting Line: Underrepresentation in Gifted Identification and Disparities in Early Achievement

What Happens After Nomination? Evaluating the Probability of Gifted Identification With the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking

Disentangling the Roles of Institutional and Individual Poverty in the Identification of Gifted Students

Building Systemic Capacity to Improve Identification and Services in Gifted Education: A Case Study of One District

Finding the missing Einsteins: Expanding the breadth of cognitive and noncognitive measures used in academic services

Identifying and Serving English Learners in Gifted Education: Looking Back and Moving Forward

Assessment Practices and the Underrepresentation of Minority Students in Gifted and Talented Education

Development of an identification procedure for a large urban school corporation: Identifying culturally diverse and academically gifted elementary students

Who Gets Identified? The Consequences of Variability in Teacher Ratings and Combination Rules for Determining Eligibility for Gifted Services for Young Children

A Meta-Analysis of Gifted and Talented Identification Practices

An Analysis of Individual, Parental, and Family Determinants of Gifted Placement among Children of Immigrants – Evidence from the 2014 SIPP Data

Assessing the Influence of No Child Left Behind on Gifted Education Funding in Texas: A Descriptive Study