How professional learning impacts gifted educators’ perceptions and practice

Year 2025, Volume: 12 Issue: 1, 23 - 53, 30.06.2025

Katie Lewis , Angela Novak

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15395939

Abstract

Effective equity-driven professional learning (PL) is one strategy to work against the disproportionality of marginalized populations in gifted and talented programs. This professional learning should be steeped in equity and culturally responsive practices, ongoing, job-embedded, collaborative, sustained, and operationalized within the context of the educators’ lived and work experiences. In a critical convergent mixed-methods research design, we, as university researchers, partnered with a gifted coordinator in a large Texas school district, providing equity-focused professional learning to gifted resources teachers (GRTs), and asking GRTs to pass this training on to other educators, on characteristics of students identifying as Latiné, bilingual, and gifted to determine the impact of the PL on GRTs’ sense of cultural awareness and knowledge of gifted characteristics for this population of learners. We collected pre- and post-PL quantitative data on two instruments to measure GRTs’ perceptions, as well as qualitative data on PL exit surveys, GRTs’ logs of training other educators, an interview of the gifted coordinator, and researchers’ notes. Quantitative findings included short-term positive changes on GRTs’ cultural self-awareness, but without consistent long-term changes on the same measure. Additionally, GRTs showed growth in identifying characteristics of gifted Latiné bilingual students. Qualitative data resulted in four themes: understandings, outcomes, barriers, and needs. Mixed methods analysis contributed to the discussion of white exceptionalism and adult learning theory. Results provide continued empirical support for the Four Zone Equity-Driven Professional Learning Model (4ZEPL).

Keywords

professional learning, culturally responsive, gifted, perceptions, equity, Latiné bilingual, Practices

References

• Baker, E. A. (2022). Crafting qualitative research questions: A prequel to design. Sage. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014). Teachers know best: Teachers’ views on professional development. https://usprogram.gatesfoundation.org/-/media/dataimport/resources/pdf/2016/11/gates-pdmarketresearch-dec5.pdf
• Bishop, R. S. (1990). Mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors. Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom, 6(3), ix–xi.
• Blee, K.M. and Taylor, V. (2002). Semi-Structured Interviewing in Social Movement Research. In B. Klandermans and Staggenborg (Eds.). Methods of Social Movement Research, pp. 92-117. University of Minnesota Press.
• Brookfield, S. (2014). Racializing the discourse of adult education. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 5(4), 20-41. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijavet.2014100102
• Chuang, S. (2021). The applications of constructivist learning theory and social learning theory on adult continuous development. Performance Improvement, 60(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21963
• Cohen J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge Academic.
• Collins, K. H. (2020a). Talking about racism in America and in education: The reflections of gifted Black educational professional and mother of gifted Black young adult. Parenting for High Potential, 9(3). 5-9.
• Collins, K. H. (2020b). Gifted and bullied: Understanding the institutionalized victimization of identified, unidentified, and underserved gifted students. In F.H.R. Piske & K.H. Collins (Eds.). Identifying, preventing, and combating bullying in gifted education. Information Age.
• Collins, K. H. (2021). Redressing and neutralizing institutional racism and systemic biases in gifted education. In C.M. Fugate, W.A. Behrens, C. Boswell. & J. L. Davis (Eds.). Culturally responsive teaching in gifted education. Routledge.
• Colorado Department of Education. (2010). Equity Toolkit for Administrators. https://www.cde.state.co.us/sites/default/files/documents/cde_english/download/resources- links/equity%20toolkit%20final_2010.pdf
• Combs, E., & Silverman, S. (2016). Bridging the gap: Paving the pathway from current practice to exemplary professional learning (Part 1). Johns Hopkins University, Frontline Research and Learning Institute. https://www.frontlineeducation.com/FrontlineEducation/media/images/Resources/ESSA_Bridging_the_Gap.pdf
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning
• Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf
• DeCarlo, M. (2018). Scientific inquiry in social work. Pressbooks.com https://scientificinquiryinsocialwork.pressbooks.com/chapter/6-2-paradigms-theories-and-how-they-shape-a-researchers-approach/
• DeCuir-Gunby, J., Marshall, P., & McCulloch, A. (2011). Developing and using a codebook for analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development research project. Field Methods, 23(2), 136-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X10388468
• DeWitt, P. (2023). Is turnkey training for educators really effective? Is the strategy “faddish quackery”? Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/opinion-is-turnkey-training-for-educators-really- effective/2023/04
• Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
• González, N., Moll, L. C., Amanti, C. (Eds.) (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Routledge.
• Gorski, P. C., & Swalwell, K. (2015). Equity literacy for all. Educational Leadership, 72(6), 34–40.
• Gray-Grant, D. (2017, March 21). Your complete guide to writing a better speech. Gray-Grant Communications. https://www.publicationcoach.com/ten-ways-to-write-a-better-speech/
• Ellis, P. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge University Press.
• Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C.§ 6301 (2015). https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1177
• Ford, A. (2019). Equalizing learning environments through a model of professional development converging critical self-reflection, cultural proficiency, and self-determination theory. Educational Planning, 26(3), 19-30.
• Ford, D.Y., & Grantham, T. C. (2003). Providing access for culturally diverse gifted students: From deficit to dynamic thinking. Theory Into Practice, 42(3), 217-225. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1477423
• Fultz, M., Lara-Alecio, R., Irby, B. J., & Tong, F. (2013). The Hispanic bilingual gifted screening instrument: A validation study. National Forum of Multicultural Issues Journal, 10(1), 1-26.
• Gawali, S. (2023). Skewness and kurtosis: Quick guide. Analytics Vidhya. https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2021/05/shape-of-data-skewness-and-kurtosis/
• Gentry, M., Gray, A.M., Whiting, G.W., Maeda, Y., & Pereira, N. (2019). System failure: Access denied. Urgent! Systemic change required. Gifted education in the United States: Laws, access, equity, and missingness across the country by locale, title I school status, and race. Gifted Education Research & Resource Institute. https://www.education.purdue.edu/geri/new-publications/gifted-education-in-the-united-states/
• Irby, B., & Lara-Alecio, R. (1996). Attributes of Hispanic gifted bilingual students as perceived by bilingual educators in Texas. SABE Journal, 11, 120-140.
• Lewis, K.D., & Novak, A.M. (2019). Identifying and supporting culturally, linguistically and economically diverse gifted learners: Guiding teachers through the four zones of professional learning. In A.M. Novak & C.L. Weber (Eds.), Best practices in professional learning and teacher preparation: Special topics for gifted professional development (Vol. 2; pp. 133-158). Prufrock Press.
• Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E. G. (2013). The constructivist credo. Left Coast.
• Lopez, M. H., Krogstad, J. M., & Passel, J. S. (2023). Who is Hispanic? Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/05/who-is- hispanic/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CHispanic%E2%80%9D%20and%20%E2%80%9CLatino%E2%80%9D,this%20populatio n%20in%20our%20work.
• Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist. One World/Ballantine.
• Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800
• Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Lazarewicz, K. (2020, February 25). 5 surprising facts about professional development [Blog]. ASCD. Professional learning. https://ascd.org/blogs/five-surprising-facts-about-professional-development
• Lindsay, R. B., Nuri-Robins, K., Terrell, R. D., Lindsey, D. B. (2018). Cultural proficiency: A manual for school leaders (4th ed.). Corwin.
• Long, T. & Johnson, M. (2000). Rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing, 4(1), 30-37. https://doi.org/10.1054/cein.2000.0106.
• Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon.
• National Association of Gifted Children (2019). Pre-K Grade 12 Gifted Education Programming Standards. https://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/standards/Intro%202019%20Programming%20Standards%281%29.pdf
• Novak, A.M. & Lewis, K.D. (2022). A methodological approach to designing a theory: The journey of the four zone professional learning model. The Roeper Review 44(1), p. 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2021.2005206
• Novak, A. M., & Lewis, K. D. (2021, March 13). Four zones of professional learning: Fostering equity in gifted programs [Multi-Presentation Session]. Council for Exceptional Children 2021 Convention and Expo. Virtual.
• Novak, A. M. & Lewis, K. D. (2023). Perceptions of a gifted coordinator on university/district collaboration providing culturally responsive gifted professional learning: A phased analysis of the four-zone equity driven model of professional learning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 46(3), 276-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532231180903
• Novak, A.M., & Lewis, K.D. (2018). Tools of the trade: Finding the best fit for your professional learning needs. In A. Novak & C. Weber (Eds.), Best practices in professional learning and teacher preparation: Methods and strategies for gifted professional development (Vol.1; pp 51-69). Prufrock Press.
• Novak, A. M., Lewis, K. D., & Weber, C. L. (2020). Guiding principles in developing equity-driven professional learning for educators of gifted students. Gifted Child Today 43(3), p.169-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520915743
• Office of Management and Budget. (1977). Race and ethnic standards for federal statistics and administrative reporting (Directive No. 15). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC Wonder. https://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/populations/bridged-race/directive15.html
• Perez-Medina, L. (2020). The impact of a sustained professional learning community around co-teaching of ELLs. In M. G. Dove & A. Honigsfeld (Eds.), Co-Teaching for English learners. Evidence-based practices and research-informed outcomes (pp. 115-122). Information Age Publishing.
• Powell, C. G., & Bodur, Y. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions of an online professional development experience: Implications for a design and implementation framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.09.004
• Roberson, J. J. (2021). The need for culturally responsive gifted educators. In C. M. Fugate, W. A. Behrens, C. Boswell. & J. L. Davis (Eds). Culturally responsive teaching in gifted education. Routledge.
• Roberson, J. J. & Collins, K. H. (2025). Sparking change to promote equity: Implementing culturally responsive leadership practices in gifted and advanced programs. Routledge.
• Roberts, K., Dowell, A., & Nie, J. (2019). Attempting rigour and replicability in thematic analysis of qualitative research data; a case study of codebook development. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(66), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0707-y
• Saad, L. F. (2020). Me and white supremacy: Combat racism, change the world, and become a good ancestor. Sourcebooks.
• Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Sandlin, J. A. (2005). Andragogy and its discontents: An analysis of andragogy from three critical perspectives. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 14, 25-42. https://www.iup.edu/pse/files/programs/graduate_programs_r/instructional_design_and_technology_ma/ paace_journal_of_lifelong_learning/volume_14,_2005/sandlin2005.pdf
• Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2013). Building racial literacy in first-year composition. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 40(4), 384–398.
• Troxclair, D., Shaunessy-Dedrick, E., & Mursky, C. ( 2017). Designing professional development activities. In S. K. Johnsen & J. Clarenbach (Eds.), Using the national gifted education standards for pre-k-grade 12 professional development (2nd ed., pp. 109-126). Prufrock Press.
• The University of Akron. (2023). Adult learning theory. https://uakron.edu/polymer/agpa- k12outreach/professional-development-modules/adult-learning-theory
• Trochim, W. M. K. (2023). Single group threats. Research Methods and Knowledge Base. https://conjointly.com/kb/single-group-threats/
• Urdan, T. (2017). Statistics in Plain English (4th ed). Routledge.
• Weber, C. L., & Mofield, E. L. (2023). Considerations for professional learning supporting teachers of the gifted in pedagogical content knowledge. Gifted Child Today, 46(2), 128-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175221149258
• Western Governors University. (May 24, 2022). Andragogy vs. pedagogy: Key differences in learning. https://www.wgu.edu/blog/andragogy-pedagogy-key-differences-learning2205.html.
• World Council for Gifted and Talented Children. (2021). Global principles for professional learning in gifted education. https://world-gifted.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/professional-learning-global-principles.pdf
• Zakierski, M. & Siegel, A. (2019). Creating professional learning partnerships. International Journal for Cross- Disciplinary Subjects in Education, 10(1), 3964-3969. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2019.0481
• Zuo, G., Doan, S. & Kaufman, J. H. (2023). How do teachers spend professional learning time, and does it connect to classroom practice? Findings from the 2022 American instructional resources survey (Report No. 134-18). RAND Corporation. www.rand.org/t/RRA134-18.