Re-conceptualising How We Respond to Secondary Gifted Learners' Needs: A Critical Narrative and ANT Approach Investigating Programming and Placement Within Ontario's Current Public Education System
Abstract
In spite of significant scholarly attention paid to the needs of intellectually Gifted students, programming and placement practices in publicly funded educational institutions in North America have remained stagnant in the 21st Century (Gallagher, 2015; see also Borders, Woodley, & Moore, 2014; Brown & Stambaugh, 2014; Gallagher, 2000). Critical disability theorists have made significant advancements toward more socially just systems of education for individuals with exceptionalities who have been stigmatized for their impairments by investigating the attitudinal, structural, and political barriers that create the disability of one’s impairment. This research was poised to address the same social injustice of inaccessibility for a group of marginalized pupils with a bona fide exceptionality—Intellectual-Giftedness—in pursuit of intellectual accessibility. This social constructionist and interpretivist, Critical Narrative Inquiry (CNI) focused on the construction, deconstruction, and reconceptualisation of pedagogical responses to the needs of secondary Gifted learners in public education in Ontario, Canada.
This dissertation is comprised of four chapters and four integrated articles that offer scholarly, methodological, and data discoveries at various phases along my learning journey toward identifying precisely what is preventing the intellectual accessibility in our classrooms and schools for our high-ability pupils. Together, these chapters and manuscripts embody my learning as both participant and researcher, from taking issue with the robust stagnation of the field of Gifted education to problematizing our varied approaches to meeting the needs of these pupils, as well as employing a novel methodological approach using complementary “show and tell” methods that drew upon material-semiotics and autoethnography, which gave rise to a more complex, more three-dimensional way of understanding the topography (Hamilton & Pinnegar, 2013) of this status quo phenomenon. A close and meticulous examination of the features, the different terrain, and the contours show exactly what and how this phenomenon is existing so we may engage in informed debate as to why we might be subscribing to a recycling of what Sayer (1992) calls “practically adequate” practices and discourses.
This research contributes meaningfully to this renewed conversation around re-taking responsibility for our high-ability pupils in public education. I offer four calls to action for educational stakeholders and policymakers that must be implemented in order to disrupt the established status quo of programming and placement practices based on replicated policy that do not serve the contemporary needs of high-ability pupils today. This work has implications for the classroom and school levels, at system and governance levels, as well as for the fields of Gifted education and Disability Studies.