Research questions

Teacher Impact within Opportunity Gaps in American Education

Student Name

Liberty University

Abstract

Teachers’ referral practices of students for gifted education have an impact on underserved students. Students of color are also underrepresented, as it relates to enrollment percentages in advanced coursework (e.g, AP, IB, and Honors). Achievement gap conversations focus on student outcomes, while opportunity gaps focus on systemic flaws that hinder underserved students’ from accessing and being exposed to advanced coursework. Illinois and Virginia have initiatives that address opportunity gaps by revising the qualifying criteria for identifying gifted and talented students. However, even though our society needs more developed talent, there has been a lack of education reform to address the problems.

Keywords: opportunity gap, underserved students, teacher referral, academic achievement, education reform

There are underserved populations of students who are affected by the opportunity gaps in American education. However, teacher preparation programs must also reexamine how preservice teachers are prepared to lead the next generations of students, as teachers’ impact in their classrooms and within student achievement cannot be overlooked (Elhoweris, 2008; Ford & King, 2014). Teachers need more support as they enter the classroom. Today’s classes are diverse, multi-cultural, complex, and present a host of challenges (Milner, 2010). Therefore, achievement gaps and opportunity gaps may not only affect students whose data is often evaluated for achievement but, these gaps may also affect teachers in the quality of preparation that they receive in teacher preparation programs or the types of learning opportunities that are available to them as preservice teachers. In a recent study through Rutgers University, it was suggested that teacher preparation programs do not typically focus on coaching preservice teachers to empower students, while also setting high expectations for rigorous coursework, especially in urban communities and schools (Rubin, El-Haj, Graham, & Clay, 2016). Higher Education institutions must evaluate the effectiveness of their teacher preparation programs that hope to positively impact future generations of children and citizens.

Furthermore, Siegle et al. (2016) added to the discussion of opportunity gaps within gifted education, as they examine the barriers that lie between underserved students and their participation in advanced coursework. These students, especially Blacks and Hispanics, usually have fewer opportunities to be recognized as gifted (Olzsewski-Kubilius & Clarenbach, 2014; Wright, Ford, & Young, 2017). There are many barriers that prevent these students from attaining academic achievement that their peers achieve through gifted and talented programs (Siegle et al., 2016). However, Ladson-Billings (2013) asserts that although teachers face much of the blame for student achievement deficits, and some of the blame is warranted, inequity is a societal problem and an unpaid debt that needs to be addressed at a national level.

Education does not appear to be a priority within national government budgets. Also, the distribution of wealth, mostly caused by systemic discrimination, is an essential component and contributing factor to the breadth of the opportunity gaps that exist in our society (Ladson-Billings, 2013). Discussions of achievement gaps in American education revealed that not all students have equal access to certain opportunities (e.g., finances for private tutoring and/or standardized test preparation) that prepare students for high levels of academic achievement (Milner, 2010). Education reform can no longer avoid addressing these opportunity gaps and closing the gaps must start with legislators and communities making a conscious effort to confront the systemic flaws in education (Jacobs, 2013).

It is important to understand that underserved students sometimes fail to perform because our educational system fails to prepare them. Olszewski-Kubilius and Clarenbach (2014) state, “in some cases, students’ failure to exceed grade-level performance may be due to a lack of access to more rigorous coursework” (p. 104). This report suggests that students may not particularly fail to perform at an advanced level because they are incapable of demonstrating their knowledge. It seems as if students are failing to reveal their giftedness because they have not been exposed to the rigor and preparation that advanced coursework could afford them. Our educational system must do more to recruit underrepresented populations of students for gifted education programs. Nevertheless, recruitment, alone, is not enough. Students have to be given the opportunity for their talent to emerge and develop, but this can’t be done when educators have deficit mind-sets.

Although there isn’t one specific strategy or approach to address opportunity gaps in American education, particular school districts in two states have taken steps to meet all students’ needs. For example, Illinois and Virginia have implemented talent identification and development programs that seek to identify a wider range of students for gifted education (Olszewski-Kubilius & Clarenbach, 2014). Their deliberate efforts to examine students—at an early age—based on qualifying criteria, and to train effective teachers, are approaches that can be considered, as it concerns serving all students. These initiatives promote change on a micro-level (e.g., two states), but strategic plans need to be developed and implemented, on a macro-level (e.g., nationally), to create equity for all students, but especially underserved students. Jacobs (2013) agrees that national and local community programs must continue to build momentum in serving students from all backgrounds. State-level approaches are missing from the conversation and perhaps there should be more vertical alignment with national and state-level educational practices.

Teachers with biases can alter students’ life trajectories, if their gifted education referral practices are inequitable—based upon race—which is also an Office of Civil Rights (OCR) violation (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). Just as the 21st century student must be prepared to compete with scholars in a competitive global market (Olszewski-Kubilius & Clarenbach, 2014), 21st century teachers must be prepared to engage, teach, and advocate for all students in today’s diverse classrooms. It should be possible for students to believe that regardless of their backgrounds, their schools are equitable and are conduits for their academic and social success. Teachers are under pressure to ensure that each student succeeds, especially with the expectations for standardized testing and ties to teacher evaluations. Specifically, the South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE) has recently revised teacher evaluation policies and teacher effectiveness measures must include evidence of student learning (e.g., student learning objectives or SLOs). Comprehensive teacher evaluation systems, such as those implemented in South Carolina, will encourage educators to consistently focus on equity for all students.

Opportunity gaps have a substantial impact on our society and this paper will examine the following research question: Do teacher recommendations limit traditionally underserved students’ opportunities for enrollment in advanced courses? Research shows that minority student populations are often underrepresented in advanced, rigorous coursework (Tyson, 2013). Student motivation and learning can be adversely affected when educators do not identify and remove barriers, in educational systems, which hinder student achievement (Wright, Ford, & Young, 2017; Tyson, 2013). Professional development that focuses on equity in education may help teachers better understand opportunity gaps, while also urging them to safeguard equitable opportunities for all students.

Learning Theory Association

Bandura’s (1986, 1997, 2001) social cognitive theory emphasizes, “that much of human learning occurs in a social environment. By observing others, people acquire knowledge, rules, skills, strategies, beliefs, and attitudes” (as cited in Schunk, 2016, p. 117). This learning theory may provide answers to the research question in regards to teacher referral practices. If teachers are not effectively taught to identify and refer gifted and talented students, one may hypothesize that teachers learn identification and referral methods through interactions with and observations of other teachers within their social learning environments (e.g., schools or school districts). However, modeled behaviors are not always appropriate behaviors; it would be wrong to deny a student an opportunity for growth because another teacher doesn’t agree with the decision. As a part of social cognitive theory, teacher self-efficacy is also an important factor in the underrepresentation conversation.

Social cognitive theory is relevant in the field of education because teacher preparation programs are typically designed for preservice teachers to observe veteran teachers, also known as practicum hours, before they begin their student-teaching semester. Through practicum hours, preservice teachers learn more about classroom dynamics as they log observation hours. Schunk (2016) describes vicarious learning—within the constructs of the social learning theory—as a source of learning in which humans learn from models through observations or listening. Essentially, vicarious learning is a fundamental principle of teacher preparation. As an example, the University of South Carolina prepares their middle-level education students by outlining expected learner outcomes on their website; it states that teacher candidates will have opportunities to observe, experience, and apply best practices as they progress through the program (see http://www.sc.edu/study/majors_and_degrees/middle_level_education.php).

Additionally, the concept of self-efficacy, as a part of the social cognitive theory, is defined as one’s belief in his or her abilities (Schunk, 2016). This can certainly affect how often underserved students are referred to gifted education; teachers may not possess sound judgment or confidence in the gifted education referral process. This may be the result of an overreliance on testing, or there may not be an established protocol for identifying and referring students (Wright, Ford, & Young, 2017). Contrarily, teachers may feel overly confident in their abilities to identify talent in their classrooms. Without the proper systems in place, our underserved students may continue to struggle with teacher inconsistencies that limit their enrollment in advanced coursework.

Teacher judgment and referrals for gifted education are common themes in educational literature that examine opportunity gaps and how those affect students of color. However, Ladson-Billings and Henry (1990) provide a noteworthy discussion of culturally relevant pedagogy and the process of educators becoming more comfortable with the specific dynamics of teaching Black children in America. Even though this work was published close to 30 years ago, it is still relevant in the 21st century. The authors argue that culturally relevant teaching empowers students to find their place in the process of being able to “critically examine educational content and process and ask what role they have in creating a truly democratic and multicultural society” (Ladson-Billings & Henry, 1990, p. 82). Student empowerment should allow students’ talent to emerge and teachers will have the opportunity to assess students without leaning upon a deficit-mindset. Milner (2010) describes this mind-set as one in which educators “tend to focus on what students do not bring to the classroom; that is, they may focus on student deficits rather than their many assets” (p. 15). As this conversation continues, talent identification protocols, culturally relevant thinking and teaching, and valuing students’ abilities, can be applied to all populations of students, not just underserved students.

Definitions of Key Terms

Advanced coursework: Advanced courses or programs can be defined as those that are designed to be more rigorous, even faster paced, than basic level instruction and also provide students with opportunities to be more prepared for college (Cisneros et al., 2014). Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses and programs are examples of the opportunities that some students have, in which they can attempt to earn college credit while in high school.

Opportunity gaps: these gaps are much different than the narrative of studies and reports about achievement gaps. Opportunity gaps are expansive and highlight the systemic flaws that are inherent in the processes in which underserved students are educated (Milner, 2010). On the other hand, achievement gaps focus on the outcomes of educational systems—comparatively measured student performance, based upon common standards and standardized test scores (Ladson-Billings, 2013).

Preservice teachers: These teachers are engrained in the process of teacher preparation programs (Milner, 2010). A school has not yet employed these teachers, rather they are learning through the observation of or under the tutelage of a veteran teacher, who is already credentialed. As a component of a traditional teacher licensure program, these teachers will eventually instruct students under the supervision of a field supervisor and a credentialed teacher.

Underrepresented students: These students may or may not also be underserved students, depending on the demographics of their school and school communities. Traditionally, this group consists of Black and Hispanic/Latino students, and their enrollment in advanced coursework pale in comparison to those of White and Asian students of similar intellect and aptitude (Tyson, 2013).

Underserved students: These are students with low socioeconomic statuses (SES), some face language barriers (English Language Learners or ELLs), and many have limited access to educational programs that influence early childhood development (Siegle et al., 2016). These are traditionally students of color (e.g., Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Native American) who typically receive an education riddled with limited resources, inexperienced or deficit-minded teachers, and insufficient services.

Gaps in the Research

Research regarding opportunity gaps tends to focus on student achievement gaps, the types of students who are marginalized, as well as those who lack access to early childhood development programs, and other programs that widen the opportunity gaps between underserved students and White students. However, more work is needed in the area of teacher judgment, teacher training, and talent identification protocols. Olszewski-Kubilius and Clarenbach (2014) suggest that,

We must continue to emphasize the importance of training for all educators so as to identify and provide appropriate educational opportunities for all the high-ability and high-achieving students in their schools and classrooms. This training and education must include specific strategies and procedures for meeting the needs of culturally and linguistically different gifted learners. (p. 108)

This assertion encapsulates the work that lies ahead, which must involve a substantive review of the effectiveness of teacher preparation programs. Yes, teachers’ responsibilities are extensive and teacher preparation programs attempt to prepare preservice teachers for the classroom, but the perpetuation of achievement and opportunity gaps prove that more work needs to be done to prepare all educators.

On the other hand, teacher preparation programs may have made adjustments to their curriculum and their expectations of what preservice teachers should be able to do once they complete the program. Milner (2010) describes a scenario in which preservice teachers, because of colorblindness or disagreement with the curriculum, may reject a culturally diverse teacher educator’s practices in regards to conversations about race or culture. It is difficult to grow without one being open to respecting different opinions. Underserved students may continue to only have limited access to advanced coursework, if preservice teachers, who are eventually credentialed, continue to reject the importance of cultural diversity.

More research can be conducted on the impact that alternatively certified teachers have on student achievement and opportunity gaps. Unlike most other professions, there is a belief that if someone has completed undergraduate studies with relevant coursework, they can be successful after earning alternative teacher certification. However, research shows that alternatively certified teachers have a much lower retention rate, and students’ academic achievement declines, throughout the school year, in those teachers’ classrooms (Ladson-Billings, 2013; Berry, 2013). It is disappointing that the education profession struggles to retain quality, certified teachers.

Biblical Worldview

A Biblical worldview perspective allows one to examine education with a different lens. With a Christian worldview, the issue with the social cognitive learning theory is that it emphasizes that much of human learning is social; people are believed to learn through observations of others’ modeled behavior. However, there are limits to the theory as to how people choose to model observed behavior. An assumption was once grounded in modeling as form of imitation, but Bandura (1986) separates the concept into “three key functions of modeling: response facilitation, inhibition/disinhibition, and observational learning” (as cited in Schunk, 2016, p. 124). As this paper examines teacher impact on traditionally underserved students’ enrollment in advanced courses, more research needs to be conducted on social cognitive learning as a facet of teacher referrals of students for gifted education.

Social cognitive learning theory has some comparable characteristics with what Sire (2009) would describe as naturalism. Part of the social cognitive theory makes assumptions about a human’s ability to learn from interactions with people, their behaviors, and the environment (Schunk, 2016). This theory could fit into the naturalism worldview because it supposes that, “we need a moral plumb line by which we can evaluate the conflicting moral values we observe in ourselves and others” (Sire, 2009, p. 109). There is a connection between people doing what they want to do, while also considering what to do because of other’s modeled behaviors. Within a Christian worldview, a different approach will yield a different perspective.

In a Christian worldview, Acts 10:34-36 (New Living Translation) tells us that God doesn’t show any favoritism; therefore, teachers should do what is right by all students, based upon their abilities. Regardless of what behaviors are observed, teachers have an obligation to advocate for all students in order to promote equity. Teachers can benefit from the support and guidance of mentor teachers (Van Brummelen, 2009), and mentor teachers could be other teachers within the department, within the larger setting of the school, or within the school district. Although mentor teachers are important, teachers shouldn’t show favoritism to any student when considering a recommendation for gifted education. Also, teachers should not blindly follow modeled behaviors, as Exodus 14 (New Living Translation) shows us the consequences of doing so.

God gave Moses instructions to lead the Israelites out of Egypt through the Red Sea. The Egyptians decided to follow the Israelites through the parted sea, because the Israelites walked through on dry land (i.e., social cue), but the Egyptians did not know that none of them would survive as God allowed the walls of the sea to crash down. Making decisions without following instructions led to destruction. Likewise, teachers could suffer grave consequences, while also contributing to negative educational experiences for underserved students, if they do not follow an established protocol for identifying and referring students for gifted education. Consequently, our American education system should be reexamined with the intent to identify and remove any inequities that exist and further widen the opportunity gaps for our underserved students.

Conclusion

There needs to be a fundamental shift from the current governmental and societal philosophies towards equitable practices to a reformed system that benefits all students. As Milner (2010) reminds us in his work, our educational system should demonstrate the beliefs in the Declaration of Independence “that all people are created equal and have the same opportunities for success” (p. 30). Teachers should not shoulder the blame, but it would be egregious to dismiss their roles in achievement and opportunity gaps. Teacher preparation programs can improve, but preservice teachers need to confront and reflect upon any cultural biases that they may have before they enter a classroom (Van Brummelen, 2009). Few studies discuss teacher self-efficacy, but their beliefs in their abilities and lack of instruction can lead to destruction. As teachers grow, personally and professionally, perhaps American education can become void of systemic racism and discrimination that perpetuates itself through the lives of children who rely on adults for guidance and support. Change is necessary, but the process may need to be disruptive to truly bring about the change we need.

References

Berry, B. (2013). Good schools and teachers for all students: Dispelling myths, facing evidence, and pursuing the right strategies. In Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (Eds.). (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu

Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (Eds.). (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu

Cisneros, J., Gomez, L. M., Powers, J. M., Holloway-Libell, J., & Corley, K. M. (2014). The advanced placement opportunity gap in Arizona: Access, participation, and success. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 11(2), 20+.

Elhoweris, H. (2008). Teacher judgment in identifying gifted/talented students. Multicultural Education, 15(3), 35-38.

Ford, D. Y., & King Jr., R. A. (2014). Blacked Out: Racial and gender segregation in gifted education 60 Years after brown vs. board of education. Multiple Voices For Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 14(2), 3-11.

Jacobs, G. (2013). Bridging the opportunity gap/Hay que igualar la oportunidad. YC Young Children, 68(5), 46-47,49. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/1511123816?accountid=12085

Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Lack of achievement or loss of opportunity? In Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (Eds.). (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu

Ladson-Billings, G., & Henry, A. (1990). Blurring the borders: Voices of african liberatory pedagogy in the United States and Canada. The Journal of Education, 172(2), 72-88. 10.1177/002205749017200207

Milner, H. R. (2010). Start where you are, but don’t stay there: Understanding diversity, opportunity gaps, and teaching in today’s classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Clarenbach, J. (2014). Closing the opportunity gap: Program factors contributing to academic success in culturally different youth. Gifted Child Today, 37(2), 102-110.

Rubin, B. C., El-Haj, T. R. A., Graham, E., & Clay, K. (2016). Confronting the urban civic opportunity gap: Integrating youth participatory action research into teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(5), 424-436. doi:10.1177/0022487116667195

Schunk, D. H. (2016). Learning theories: An educational perspective (7th ed.).

Siegle, D., Gubbins, E. J., O’Rourke, P., Langley, S. D., Mun, R. U., Luria, S. R.,…Plucker, J. A. (2016). Barriers to underserved students’ participation in gifted programs and possible solutions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(2), 103-131. doi:10.1177/0162353216640930

Sire, J. W. (2009). The universe next door: A basic worldview catalog (5th ed.).

South Carolina Department of Education. (2018). Educator evaluation guidance 2017-2018: Expanded ADEPT forms and resources, early adoption of SCTS. Retrieved from https://ed.sc.gov/educators/educator-effectiveness/expanded-adept-resources/educator-evaluation-guidance-2017-2018/

Tyson, K. (2013). Tracking, segregation, and the opportunity gap: What we know and why it matters. In Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (Eds.). (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu

U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Race and national discrimination: Overview of the law. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/raceoverview.html

Van Brummelen, H. (2009). Walking with God in the classroom: Christian approaches to learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Colorado Springs, CO: Purposeful Design Publications.

Wright, B. L., Ford, D. Y., & Young, J. L. (2017). Ignorance or indifference? Seeking excellence and equity for under-represented students of color in gifted education. Global Education Review, 4(1), 45-60.