Do Gifted and Talented Programs Contribute to Racial Segregation in U.S. Elementary Schools?

This study investigates whether Gifted and Talented (G&T) programs in U.S. elementary schools contribute to racial segregation. Using nine years of data from the Civil Rights Data Collection, covering virtually all U.S. elementary schools, the study examines racial composition differences between G&T and general education. Findings reveal that G&T programs disproportionately enroll White and Asian students, increasing the Dissimilarity Index by 10-20% when G&T students are treated as separate groups. However, the programs have little effect on the Exposure Index. Overall, G&T programs contribute modestly to racial segregation, suggesting they are a moderate factor in within-school racial sorting.

Central Research Question

This study addresses whether Gifted and Talented (G&T) programs in U.S. elementary schools contribute to racial segregation within schools. While G&T programs are intended to provide advanced educational opportunities, they have raised concerns about reinforcing racial disparities, as they tend to enroll disproportionate numbers of White and Asian students compared to underrepresented minorities (URMs), specifically Black, Hispanic, and Native American students. The primary question is whether G&T programs exacerbate racial segregation within schools and what impact they have on overall segregation indices.

Previous Literature

Educational segregation in the United States has been a longstanding issue, explored extensively in academic and policy discussions. Historically, racial segregation in schools was a focus of landmark civil rights rulings, including Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, which aimed to dismantle racially segregated schools. The literature on educational segregation has expanded to consider within-school sorting, particularly in tracking and G&T programs. Previous studies have shown that G&T programs often enroll more White and Asian students due to differences in testing, teacher referrals, and socioeconomic status, which indirectly filter students by race. Some researchers argue that within-school tracking, such as G&T programs, can lead to "segregation without integration" where minority students are segregated into lower tracks. However, there has been limited comprehensive data to quantify the exact contribution of G&T programs to racial segregation within schools, making this study’s large-scale data approach a valuable addition to the field.

Data

The study uses data from the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), conducted biennially by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. This dataset includes nearly all U.S. public schools and covers five waves from 2009–2010 to 2017–2018, yielding a balanced panel of 46,704 elementary schools across nine school years. The CRDC data include school-level information on racial composition, G&T program enrollment, and other demographic details, allowing the study to distinguish between G&T and non-G&T students by race. This comprehensive dataset provides a strong basis for assessing the degree of racial imbalance in G&T programs and calculating how segregation indices, such as the Dissimilarity and Exposure Indices, are affected by G&T program structures.

Methods

The study measures the effects of G&T programs on racial segregation using the Dissimilarity and Exposure Indices, two standard segregation metrics. The Dissimilarity Index measures how evenly two groups (in this case, URM and White/Asian students) are distributed across units (schools and G&T programs), with higher values indicating more segregation. The Exposure Index assesses the likelihood of students from one racial group interacting with students from another, with higher values indicating less segregation. To isolate the effect of G&T programs, the study calculates these indices twice: once using between-school variation only and once treating G&T programs within schools as separate units. The difference between these calculations estimates the segregation contribution of G&T programs. Event-study models also examine enrollment changes over time in schools that introduced or discontinued G&T programs to assess whether these changes affect racial composition.

Findings/Size Effects

The findings confirm that G&T programs disproportionately enroll White and Asian students, with these groups accounting for 60.1% of G&T enrollments compared to 50.9% in non-G&T programs. In contrast, Black, Hispanic, and Native American students are underrepresented in G&T programs. Treating G&T programs as separate units reveals that the Dissimilarity Index, indicating uneven distribution, increases by 10–20%, suggesting moderate within-school racial sorting attributable to G&T programs. However, the effect on the Exposure Index, which measures interracial interaction likelihood, is minimal. This implies that while G&T programs increase uneven racial distribution, they do not significantly reduce cross-group interactions.

Further analysis of school-level and district-level heterogeneity shows that the segregating effects of G&T programs are more pronounced in smaller districts with higher URM enrollment shares, where within-school sorting is more likely. However, large racially diverse districts experience smaller G&T-driven segregation effects. The event-study models find no significant long-term changes in racial composition following the introduction or elimination of G&T programs, suggesting that G&T offerings do not strongly influence White or Asian families' school enrollment decisions.

Conclusion

The study concludes that G&T programs contribute moderately to racial segregation within U.S. elementary schools, primarily by increasing racial sorting rather than reducing interracial exposure. Although G&T programs are not the primary driver of racial segregation, their impact is non-negligible, accounting for 10–20% of the Dissimilarity Index in affected schools. These findings imply that while G&T programs have educational benefits, they may inadvertently sustain racial disparities. Policymakers seeking to address segregation in schools might consider reforms to G&T program eligibility criteria or explore alternative methods for delivering advanced educational opportunities without reinforcing racial imbalances.

Citation

Thompson, Owen. (2023). "Gifted and Talented Programs and Racial Segregation." Education Finance and Policy, 19(4), 692-732. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00415