View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Mi Primer Idioma es Español: A Systematic Review of Gifted Access for Multilingual Students

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Mi Primer Idioma es Español: A Systematic Review of Gifted Access for Multilingual Students
Language: English
Authors: Alejandra Amaris Fernández Morgado (ORCID 0009-0000-4539-4347)
Source: Journal of Advanced Academics. 2026 37(1):98-138.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 41
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Information Analyses
Descriptors: Literature Reviews, English Learners, Bilingual Students, Multilingualism, Gifted, Gifted Education, Disproportionate Representation, Student Evaluation, Ability Identification, Special Education, Critical Race Theory, Access to Education, Barriers
DOI: 10.1177/1932202X251394704
ISSN: 1932-202X
2162-9536
Abstract: This 2024 CEC Conference Poster Proceedings manuscript was based on my systematic literature review (SLR). Students whose first language is not English, labeled English learners (EL; or some othering variation of that term), are disproportionately underrepresented in gifted/enrichment/advanced education. Despite this growing demographic representing approximately 10% of the student population, they only represent approximately 2% of gifted and talented programs. Based on articles identified for this SLR, I highlight components of the referral process for multilingual students to gifted/enrichment/advanced education, along with potential biases. Findings included the connection between academic success and access/support to and within advanced education, as well as how teachers hold an enormous responsibility as gatekeepers for opportunities to learn.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1496585
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHxxPMxZkjvdz-Aat_OtMUrAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDE6hQZIVbsD2m9XTmwIBEICBm_H-OuFA3P2TgVU1VXV3WkgrQdRH1oFARq2qAC1o6yrP2AdZvrYf-lKmnu3Wc7GHXC5dcJYoGGzGRA6uwOUi-vL6lzKmtn43ysrJseUQV7v2A3R5Fwn20JEfB2tRKcxoh2Jzu7QW7dBgfOi-seFn_BtIbLiG3WCSb-bGKOjsj2ApqlnBbQ0NzDCALksgq9c9AIiEuaVWDg37jveu
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0191011251;[261p]01feb.26;2026Jan23.04:53;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0191011251-1">Mi Primer Idioma es Español: A Systematic Review of Gifted Access for Multilingual Students </title> <p>This 2024 CEC Conference Poster Proceedings manuscript was based on my systematic literature review (SLR). Students whose first language is not English, labeled English learners (EL; or some othering variation of that term), are disproportionately underrepresented in gifted/enrichment/advanced education. Despite this growing demographic representing approximately 10% of the student population, they only represent approximately 2% of gifted and talented programs. Based on articles identified for this SLR, I highlight components of the referral process for multilingual students to gifted/enrichment/advanced education, along with potential biases. Findings included the connection between academic success and access/support to and within advanced education, as well as how teachers hold an enormous responsibility as gatekeepers for opportunities to learn.</p> <p>Keywords: multilingual; multicultural; multiply marginalized; bias; enrichment; gifted; access; advanced education; English learner; schoolwide enrichment</p> <p>During the 2024 CEC Conference Poster Proceedings, I presented my systematic literature review (SLR), <emph>Mi Primer Idioma es Español: Gifted Access for Multilingual Students</emph> (see Figure 1). This is the second study from my three-study dissertation, and at that time, I had preliminary findings, but since then I have completed and defended my dissertation, which directly confronts educational borders, asking: Who is permitted entry into giftedness? How are multiply marginalized learners supported? And what damage results from systemic neglect? Through my research, particularly my second study, I revealed a troubling lack of validation and scholarship surrounding twice-exceptional (2E)/thrice-exceptional (3E) students who embody intersectional giftedness—especially multicultural and multilingual students with exceptionalities. Despite increasing advocacy, there remains scant literature and insufficient recognition of our lived realities and the question remains critical: When will educational systems recognize and nurture the fullness of who we truly are?</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Poster for the CEC 2024 Conference.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Students whose first language is not English, labeled English learners (EL; or some othering variation of that term), are disproportionately underrepresented in gifted/enrichment/advanced education. Despite this growing demographic representing approximately 10% of the student population, they only represent approximately 2% of gifted and talented programs ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref1">69</reflink>]). Based on articles identified for this SLR, I highlight components of the referral process for multilingual students to gifted/enrichment/advanced education, along with potential biases.</p> <p>Students whose native language is not English, are disproportionately overrepresented in special education ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref2">54</reflink>]), under-represented in gifted education ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref3">57</reflink>]), and appear to have limited access to advanced education (e.g., enrichment programs) in U.S. schools ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref4">15</reflink>]), which have the potential to enhance knowledge and skills and outcomes (e.g., graduation rates, homeownership; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref5">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref6">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref7">71</reflink>]). Despite the United States being increasingly representative of a greater variety of cultures, races, ethnicities, beliefs, and abilities (e.g., gifted), gifted programming remains disproportionately comprised of White and Asian students. Conversely, according to the Civil Rights Data Collection (U.S. DOE, 2016), compared to White peers (58.8%) Black or African American students make up 8.5% of the gifted and talented population, Latinx students comprise 18.1%, while only 2.4% of multilingual students considered English learners (EL) or emergent bilinguals (EB)[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref8">4</reflink>] are identified as gifted. These findings align with research studies where Black or Latinx students are consistently underrepresented in gifted or advanced education by 39% to 52% ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref9">21</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref10">24</reflink>]) and over-represented in special education particularly in the categories of emotional and behavioral disorders (23.4% Black; 18.3% Latinx; 4.15% EB; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref11">54</reflink>]), specific learning disability (45.12% Latinx; 44.69% EB; OSEP), and speech and language impairment (16.88%; OSEP). Thus, Black, Latinx, and multilingual/EB students are overwhelmingly under-identified in gifted and over-identified in special education, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive racial/ethnic, and language categories[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref12">5</reflink>] ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref13">49</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref14">58</reflink>]). Scholars underscore concerns with such disproportionality, as it can have short- and long-term ramifications on student's outcomes (e.g., employment, earning potential; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref15">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref16">39</reflink>]). Yet, these power structures, segregating some, while providing access to others, are a reality that continues to plague the U.S. educational system.</p> <p>Given the onslaught of actions targeting the multicultural, multilingual, and/ or multiply marginalized (M<sups>4</sups>) community, particularly since 2017, which has intensified over the last year, the focus of this article is on the underrepresented learners, with a focus on one of the most vulnerable groups: multilingual students who are EB and in particular, those whose first language is Spanish because it is the most commonly spoken language among this demographic ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref17">53</reflink>]). These learners are likely often at a disadvantage during the referral process to gifted and enrichment programming due to language barriers.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-3">Literature Review</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191011251-4">The Importance of Advanced Education</hd> <p>Research has consistently underscored the benefits of student access to advanced education, especially for students from M<sups>4</sups> backgrounds. Advanced education which encompasses gifted, enrichment, and advanced courses (i.e., dual accreditation, Advanced Placement [AP], International Baccalaureate [IB], honors, Cambridge programs) can prove to be beneficial for students at different levels. Specifically, enrichment programs (such as STEM [science, technology, engineering, math/STEAM [science, technology, engineering, art, math]) are designed to provide students with an experience that enriches their understanding of subject areas, further enhancing their knowledge in ways outside of the confines of the regular curriculum (see [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref18">61</reflink>], for systematic review), which is especially important for multilingual learners who may be gifted. Students who have access to these programs have greater likelihood in attending college and expanding their knowledge, due to greater opportunities to learn ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref19">61</reflink>]). This, in turn, increases their employability and later earning potential as adults ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref20">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref21">39</reflink>]). For example, enrichment programs provide students with opportunities to learn that they may have had previously limited access to due to various systemic barriers (e.g., poverty, language barriers, immigration realities; [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref22">2</reflink>]). Furthermore, schoolwide enrichment models, such as Renzulli's Enrichment Triad Model ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref23">62</reflink>])—comprised of a total talent portfolio, curriculum modification techniques, and enrichment learning and teaching—can lead to a significant increase in gifted referral and identification rates among students who are M<sups>4</sups> ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref24">2</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-5">Disproportionate Access to Advanced Education: Implications for English Learners</hd> <p>The research highlighting the ramifications of gifted disproportionality and limited access to advanced education is well established in having lasting implications for M<sups>4</sups> students, which may be even more pressing for multilingual students identified as EB. These implications are evidenced by poor outcomes (e.g., the achievement gaps, underachievement, potential to drop out; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref25">16</reflink>]) and long-term (e.g., lower-paying jobs, financial difficulties that can include debt or inability to own a home; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref26">39</reflink>]) outcomes. Scholars posit this disproportionality may be due to multiple reasons, including a lack of support and cultural validation in the classroom and a lack of opportunities to learn due to limited validation of students' gifts and talents ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref27">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref28">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref29">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref30">57</reflink>]). However, the implications for multilingual students who are EB are even greater given that they have the lowest identification rates ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref31">69</reflink>]) for advanced education among students from underrepresented groups. Despite multilingual students labeled EL or who are EB forming approximately 12% of the student demographic, they only represent approximately 2% of gifted students ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref32">69</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref33">70</reflink>]). Furthermore, their experiences run parallel with twice-exceptional children ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref34">51</reflink>]) due to schools often being sites that may reproduce systemic inequalities ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref35">3</reflink>]), using deficit-thinking lens to approach multilingualism and immigrants and/or multilingual learners labeled EL or EB ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref36">48</reflink>]), and shaping the access to advanced education, which mirrors broader patterns that overlook community voice and the complex intersections of language, race, and disability, intensifying inequities for marginalized students ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref37">64</reflink>]).</p> <p>There are likely various reasons for the limited identification and access to advanced education for multilingual learners, particularly those from Latinx backgrounds. These include lack of funding, no federal gifted legislation, specific state gifted policies, and possible bias in the referral and identification process ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref38">22</reflink>]). For instance, although there are no federal regulations for gifted programming, there are specific state regulations around multilingual learners who are EB, which scholars argue have historically shifted to a more deficit-bias mindset since the passing of the [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref39">4</reflink>]. This deficit-bias mindset, in turn, likely shapes perspectives on multilingual learners' ability to effectively engage in advanced education.</p> <p>Prior to the [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref40">4</reflink>], some states implemented bilingual programs specifically for multilingual learners using a more inclusive perspective regarding other languages. An exemplar bilingual enrichment program was established at Coral Way Elementary in Miami, Florida for Cuban exiles, students whose first language was not English, and English speakers born in the United States ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref41">15</reflink>]). The program provided a means for all students to become bilingual, framing it as both an enrichment activity and as a positive attribute ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref42">15</reflink>]). Yet, Senator Ralph Yarborough from Texas, who proposed the first federal policy for individuals whose native language was not English (i.e., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref43">4</reflink>]) framed the act under the premise that bilingualism was a deficit. Thus, the policy emphasized the need for remedial coursework rather than enrichment coursework.</p> <p>The reauthorizations of the Bilingual Education Act (1974, 1978, 1984, 1988, 1994, discontinued in 2001), with few exceptions, have gone through periods reflective of a deficit perspective national narrative towards multilingualism and immigrants and/or multilingual learners/EB ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref44">48</reflink>]). For example, under President Reagan, the reauthorization criticized bilingual programs and shifted the policy towards one that was of a deficit mindset regarding students who did not speak English. Whereas, during President Clinton's administration, the reauthorization in 1994 included funding for bilingual programs (like the original one in Miami). However, multiple legal cases involving multilingual students have paved the way towards a more deficit and a biased notion of assimilation instead of embracing language diversity as a strength that also exemplifies the diversity of the U.S student body ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref45">57</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-6">Possible Inhibitors and Promoters of Access to Advanced Education</hd> <p>According to scholars, this pervasive notion of deficit perspective related to multilingual students is likely evident at each stage of the referral to gifted and advanced education programming process ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref46">57</reflink>]), yet additional insight is needed. For instance, disproportionality is often attributed to the intersectionality of language with testing bias and teacher bias ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref47">57</reflink>]). Similarly, previous reviews (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref48">47</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref49">48</reflink>]) have supported these points by consistently highlighting different areas impacting disproportionality, which include teacher bias, testing bias, and culturally relevant leadership. This research has led to efforts throughout the U.S. to increase the representation of underrepresented groups using less traditional identification methods such as universal screening ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref50">7</reflink>]), schoolwide enrichment programs ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref51">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref52">60</reflink>]), and nonverbal assessments ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref53">32</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref54">57</reflink>]). However, previous reviews have also underscored the need for additional studies to further understand the experiences of students who are Black, Latinx, and, especially, those considered EB due to more limited insight into the process by which EB students gain access to advanced education. In the following sections, I briefly highlight potential inhibitors and promoters of access to advanced education.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-7">Teacher Referral</hd> <p>Often, referral to advanced education starts with a teacher referral. Multiple studies suggest teacher bias is a factor in the referral process evident by the disproportionate number of White students in comparison to students who are M<sups>4</sups> in gifted education, specifically Black, Latinx, and EB ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref55">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref56">7</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref57">20</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref58">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref59">47</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref60">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref61">72</reflink>]). These biases are often based on preconceived ideas, lack of education, and stereotypes ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref62">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref63">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref64">47</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref65">72</reflink>]). This may be a result of inadequate educator training in gifted education fused with a lack of cultural awareness of M<sups>4</sups> communities, which result in many M<sups>4</sups> students being overlooked ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref66">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref67">47</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref68">72</reflink>]). For instance, many studies have noted that classroom practices and curriculum are better aligned with the experiences of White, middle-class students, and lack a cultural connection to students who are M<sups>4</sups> ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref69">47</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref70">48</reflink>]).</p> <p>Specifically for multilingual students, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref71">28</reflink>] state that although multilingual students who are EB or considered EL "may appear to be proficient in English, their English is not sufficiently developed for them to fully demonstrate their academic potential in English" (p. 339). Hence, this demographic of students may be more apprehensive in group discussions, and their abilities may be less obvious to teachers who are the referral gatekeepers and may lack training in identifying giftedness in students who are M<sups>4</sups> ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref72">28</reflink>]). According to [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref73">1</reflink>], language barriers have led teachers to err on the side of not referring a student, with the fear students might not do well on screening methods if conducted in English.</p> <p>The lack of racial diversity in the teaching force may be a contributing factor to bias. Scholars discuss the need to investigate the hiring process so the teaching staff, as well as the administrative staff, can better reflect the demographics of the student body ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref74">48</reflink>]). As of 2017 to 2018, the demographic of U.S. teachers was comprised of 79.3% White, 6.7% Black, 9.3% Hispanic, 2.1% Asian, 0.2% Pacific Islander, 0.5% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.8% as two or more races ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref75">50</reflink>]). Culturally unresponsive classrooms can cause students to disconnect from the classroom experience, especially when their reality is not being taken into account, leading to lower grades, and being interpreted by many teachers as not being fit for gifted programming; this is systemic bias ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref76">47</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref77">48</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref78">72</reflink>]). According to [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref79">2</reflink>], strategies related to advanced education, such as enrichment clusters, provide a gifted-like programming, which eliminates the IQ bias, and affords all students exposure. Although these alternative approaches are promising, there remains a gap in the literature about multilingual students who are considered EB and the factors surrounding their access to advanced education (e.g., enrichment opportunities, gifted education, and advanced programming).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-8">Testing Benchmarks</hd> <p>Multilingual students labeled EL are likely often at a disadvantage during the referral process to gifted and enrichment programming due to language barriers. According to the [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref80">53</reflink>], 76% of multilingual learners' first language is Spanish and "was the most commonly spoken language of ELs in 46 of the 50 states and the District of Columbia" (p. 1). Nonetheless, assessments are usually conducted in English, creating a barrier for multilingual learners/EB ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref81">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>To be identified for gifted programming, students must usually score 130 points or higher on an IQ test, used in most states within the United States where giftedness is measured, and of those states, 36% use that qualifying benchmark ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref82">7</reflink>]). Although multiple states have implemented the use of IQ tests in other languages or nonverbal tests ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref83">7</reflink>]), to even have the opportunity to be screened for gifted or to simply have access to advanced education programming, students must meet academic benchmarks, such as meeting a certain threshold on a district-used assessment ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref84">7</reflink>]). According to [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref85">57</reflink>], multilingual students labeled EL tend to score lower on tests of academic achievement, but those scores may be skewed by the "specific language demands of the test" (p. 160); thus, instead of assessing their academic skills these tests are likely gauging students' English proficiency. According to [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref86">57</reflink>], such referral practices not only likely decreased multilingual students' exposure and access to learning opportunities, but also contributed to systemic inequality in schools ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref87">57</reflink>])</p> <p>In an effort to address access limitations and enhance learning opportunities, scholars developed alternative methods to determine eligibility for referral to advanced education by considering their opportunity to learn. Specifically, in the 1970s and 1980s, researchers developed the opportunity to learn matrix to assess students' eligibility for gifted and enrichment programming ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref88">57</reflink>]), including students considered EB. The opportunity to learn matrix was intended to help school professionals determine if students were actually below a certain learning threshold or if they were merely not previously exposed to the material ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref89">57</reflink>]). For example, a third-grade Mexican student from a lower to middle income household, who spoke Spanish in the home, and spent the summer speaking mainly Spanish in Mexico while visiting family and was moved from an enrichment program to remediation towards the beginning of the year because she did not score well on a diagnostic test she took a few weeks after returning from Mexico. Hence, her opportunity to learn was not accounted for. However, often, when multilingual students labeled EL are referred for gifted and enrichment programming, opportunity to learn is not considered. As a result, students labeled EL are at risk of not meeting gifted and advanced education programming benchmarks and losing even more opportunity to learn because they are placed in remediation classes to bridge a learning gap ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref90">48</reflink>]).</p> <p>A way of frontloading the information and providing an alternative is the Enrichment Triad Model ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref91">62</reflink>]), which provides a different pathway for gifted referrals and identifications. It is more aligned with the recommendations made by [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref92">7</reflink>] for universal screening as a means of decreasing testing and teacher bias from the referral and identification process, in order to increase referral rates of underrepresented groups, such as multilingual students labeled EB. There have been cases demonstrating effective identification of multilingual students labeled EB using these alternative methods.</p> <p>Furthermore, research has indicated how dual language programs create alternative methods to the barriers that exist for M<sups>4</sups> students and can promote success in college ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref93">26</reflink>]), there has been an emerging shift from the deficit perspective used towards marginalized students; specifically in regard to the multilingual student demographic, there have been cases in viewing bilingualism as something that is positive ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref94">58</reflink>]). For instance, in Illinois and Austin, there have been actions to eliminate the deficit mindset that has surrounded multilingual students for many decades ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref95">57</reflink>]). Overall, there are promising results for creating programs that promote bilingualism within enrichment contexts.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-9">Referral Methods</hd> <p>Given that the predominant method of screening used for gifted identification is the IQ test, in most states where gifted is measured, it is further supported by academic grades and district or state-wide assessments ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref96">7</reflink>]). Those tests compare students of the same age group, assessing ability or aptitude within a neat vacuum and dismissing the person's opportunity to learn ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref97">57</reflink>]). However, alternative referral methods like the Enrichment Triad Model ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref98">62</reflink>]) provide a different pathway for gifted referrals and identifications.</p> <p>Laws like <emph>McFadden v. Board of Education for Illinois School District</emph> in 2013 have shaped the access that multilingual students have to advanced education via alternative methods. <emph>McFadden v. Board of Education for Illinois School District</emph> in 2013 involved the implementation of a bilingual gifted program, providing pluralistic approaches to the curriculum to develop the talents of multilingual students ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref99">57</reflink>]). There have also been laws and programs that have facilitated the transition from K-12 to higher education for multilingual students.</p> <p>Continued access to advanced education is further encapsulated within opportunities that exist in higher education. In <emph>Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin</emph> in 2013, the University of Texas at Austin had already diversified their student body by granting all students admittance who were within the top 10% of their graduating class ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref100">57</reflink>]); this increased both retention and graduation rates. However, they wanted to further diversify by using race as a factor in the admittance process, which led the case to court. However, once receiving access to any form of advanced education, students may require support to continue being academically successful. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref101">26</reflink>] found the implementation of Latinx learning community model that began with a pre-college enrichment program and continued in a variety of supports throughout the students' college experience, to be academically and emotionally successful for the students participating. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref102">26</reflink>] looked at the ways to provide access to multilingual students to higher education and provide different levels of support so that they can be successful after that initial entry. Both the Illinois School District and the University of Texas at Austin were taking proactive approaches to gifted education and advanced education programming so that their programs reflected the diversity of the overall national student demographic.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-10">Purpose and Research Questions</hd> <p>Given the importance of access to advanced education in relation to students' short-and long-term outcomes ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref103">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref104">37</reflink>]), the purpose of this systematic review is to shed light on the current state of the literature to gain a greater understanding of the means by which multilingual students, who are predominantly Spanish speakers, gain access to advanced education (e.g., enrichment programs, gifted education, and advanced courses). Following best practice systematic review guidelines (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref105">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref106">67</reflink>]), I conducted a narrative SLR, which enabled the synthesis of findings from numerous studies using various methodologies ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref107">10</reflink>], p. 413). These are the research questions:</p> <p>RQ 1: How do multilingual students who are considered EB gain access to advanced education (i.e., gifted programs, enrichment groups, and/or advanced programming opportunities) in schools?</p> <p>RQ 2: What methods do teachers use to identify multilingual students who are considered EB (e.g., district assessments, grades) for advanced education (e.g., enrichment opportunities/advanced programming)?</p> <p>RQ 3: Is special education classification taken into account in the advanced education referral process?</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-11">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191011251-12">Theoretical Framework</hd> <p>The theoretical framework for this study is founded on Gifted Critical Race Theory (GTCrit; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref108">51</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref109">52</reflink>]) and Latino/a/x/é Critical Race Theory (LatCrit; [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref110">66</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-13">Gifted Critical Race Studies</hd> <p>Critical race theory (CRT; [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref111">40</reflink>]) examines how race and racism intersect with various aspects of the power structures of society, including law, politics, education, and culture. It emphasizes the idea that racism is not just an individual act, but a systemic and structural issue deeply embedded in society. It seeks to uncover and challenge these racial inequalities to promote social justice and equity ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref112">40</reflink>]). Rooted in critical race theory, GTCrit ([<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref113">52</reflink>]) is the theoretical framework and analytical lens used to inform all three manuscripts of my dissertation, of which this study is the second manuscript. GTCrit establishes parallels in the experiences of students who are multiply marginalized, specifically mentioning those parallels between students who are 2e and those who are multilingual and multicultural by articulating that "every gifted student from a culturally underrepresented group is inherently a 2e learner as well" ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref114">51</reflink>], p. 248), and when the students are M<sups>4</sups>, they are 3e ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref115">14</reflink>]).</p> <p>According to [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref116">51</reflink>], GTCrit is a relative of dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit) with modifications in the vocabulary more commonly used in the gifted field, and focusing on the intersectionality of race, racism, with ability and potentiality ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref117">51</reflink>]). GTCrit does not require the official label of giftedness that is commonly provided through a screening, person, or institution (e.g., IQ test, psychologist, school district; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref118">51</reflink>], p. 253). GTCrit encompasses the importance of extinguishing the deficit ideology that is pervasive through gifted labeling and develop an inclusive lens that strives for equity through a "both/and not either/or mentality" ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref119">51</reflink>], p. 254). Through this framework, I examine the role that race/ethnicity and the intersectionality of racism/ability/deficit thinking ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref120">51</reflink>]) play in overall access to advanced educational opportunities for students who are M<sups>4</sups> in comparison to their White peers.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-14">Latino/a/x Critical Race Theory</hd> <p>LatCrit builds upon the tenets of CRT as it relates to the pan-ethnic demographic classification, referred to as Latino/a/x meaning someone who is from a Latin American country (e.g., Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico,[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref121">6</reflink>] Dominican Republic, or other countries that are part of Central America, and South America) either by birth or by familial connections ([<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref122">66</reflink>]). LatCrit explores themes often left unexplored by critical race theorists such as language, immigration, ethnicity, culture, identity, phenotype, and sexuality ([<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref123">66</reflink>]). LatCrit sheds light on the complexities of Latinx identities, as well as the forms of oppression that include, but are not limited to the intersectionality of racism, sexism, ableism, and classism ([<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref124">66</reflink>]). Within the educational context, this theory has been beneficial in informing both research on Latinx students and Latinx teachers. Through both GTCrit and LatCrit, I examine the role race/ethnicity and the intersectionality of racism/ability/potentiality/deficit thinking ([<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref125">51</reflink>]) play in overall access to advanced educational opportunities for students who are M<sups>4</sups>.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-15">Context</hd> <p>I conducted a SLR using a narrative approach as a means to answer each research question ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref126">10</reflink>]) related to multilingual student access to advanced education. Systematic narrative reviews make it possible to "formulate a new theory based on extant research, test hypotheses, or examine the evidence underlying assessment and intervention practices" ([<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref127">67</reflink>], p. 3) The narrative approach was more suitable for this review versus the meta-analysis that uses "statistical procedures to estimate overall relations" ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref128">10</reflink>], p. 424) or metasyntheses that are more aligned with qualitative analytic methods ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref129">10</reflink>]). Given that I included studies across various methodological approaches, a narrative review was more conducive to answering articulated research questions (Cumming et al.). I followed best practices for conducting a SLR as outlined by both Cumming et al. and Talbott et al.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-16">Positionality Statement</hd> <p>My positionality encompasses being a Cuban American woman whose first language is Spanish and a daughter of a writer whose liberal ways of seeing the world often left her in the margins of the Miami Cuban exile community. I come from a family shaped by centering ourselves within the margins: fleeing a totalitarian regime and rebuilding a life, intelligence overshadowed by systemic neglect and harsh discipline, and twice-exceptionality with abilities hidden beneath silence and anxiety. I have lived within the margins my entire life, never quite fitting in, so I learned to observe those that seemed to do so effortlessly. I often lacked the confidence to speak, unsure and fearful that what I would say would make my differences apparent to others. Since I was a child, my studious nature allowed me to access enrichment opportunities from my school desk, without having to say much. Through my mother's advocacy, I gained access to programs that nurtured my talents until I found the courage to share my voice, and over time, became less apologetic about being different. This is how my journey led me to become a special educator and eventually a doctoral candidate.</p> <p>Throughout my journey in search of equity and access for those underrepresented in advanced education programs, I have experienced macro- and microaggressions from both teachers and administrators. My research focuses mainly on the Latinx student and teacher demographic population, because not only do they align with my own personal demographic and experiences, but this is also the fastest going population in the USA ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref130">38</reflink>]) and currently being heavily targeted by the current administration—underscoring the need to shed light on issues of equity and access for Latinx teachers and students alike. My experiences as a Cuban American woman creating and teaching enrichment and gifted curriculum, has led me through a journey of better understanding the inner workings of such programs that are abundantly available to White children, while underrepresented by multiply marginalized students ([<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref131">58</reflink>]). As a Latina special educator and gifted teacher, I have witnessed ongoing pushback about referring and identifying M<sups>4</sups> students, who are 3e. I have often observed reluctance to refer multicultural or multilingual students whose first language was not English for a gifted evaluation, especially if they displayed problematic behaviors. Instead, they were often classified with a disability and placed into classrooms that focused on addressing them, but not their giftedness. To ignore a students' giftedness can result in them sitting in special education resource rooms or self-contained classes without receiving the education or full array of supports they need to excel in school and later in college or on the job ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref132">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref133">39</reflink>]). My experiences are a reflection of what is occurring nationally, and the journey of witnessing these inequities are encompassed throughout my three manuscripts, of which this study is one.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-17">Instruments/Tools/Procedures</hd> <p>The inclusion and exclusion criteria for this study can be found in Table 1. For this review, to be included, study participants needed to be students who were identified as EB in K-12 school settings in the US. This group of students was selected as the focus of this review due to the disproportionality that exists between the proportion of the increasing number of EB students in the U.S. and their limited representation in advanced education (e.g., enrichment/gifted/advanced programming; [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref134">57</reflink>]). Further, to be included, studies needed to focus on school-based access, identification, differentiation or individualization, and/or referral to advanced education for EB students. Given the increase in EB students, due to the influx of immigrating families (e.g., Central, South America, the Caribbean), it is important to determine whether commonly used referral and identification practices to advanced education for EB students exist, are culturally relevant, sustaining, responsive, and/or reflective of that diversity ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref135">23</reflink>]). Advanced education could include gifted, enrichment, AP, IB, honors, dual enrollment, dual language programs, certain magnet programs, and Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID). Also, because schools are the primary location where students are identified and referred to advanced education ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref136">15</reflink>]), K-12 settings were chosen. To ensure high-quality studies were identified, articles had to be published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, following the implementation of the [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref137">4</reflink>]. This start date was chosen due the dearth of studies prior to 1968, when the first law was enacted that recognized the needs of students who are EB.</p> <p>Table 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Inclusion</th><th align="left">Exclusion</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>United States (US)</td><td>Countries outside of the US</td></tr><tr><td>Literature following The Bilingual Education Act of 1968 to present</td><td>Literature published prior to The Bilingual Education Act of 1968</td></tr><tr><td>Participants in grades K-12</td><td>Participants in preschool, junior college, or higher education</td></tr><tr><td>Participants ages 4–22</td><td>Participants younger than age 4 or older than age 22</td></tr><tr><td>Participants whose first language is one other than English (EB, EL, ELL, ESOL)</td><td>Participants whose primary language is English</td></tr><tr><td>Peer-reviewed scholarly journals or articles, and case studies that discuss EL in relation to access, identification, differentiating or individualizing education, and referrals to enrichment, gifted, or advanced programming.</td><td>Theoretical papers, position papers, books or encyclopedias; scholarly journals, articles, reports that do not discuss EL, gifted, enrichment, culturally and linguistically diverse, or advanced programming</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0191011251-18">Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191011251-19">Search and Selection Procedures</hd> <p>To identify relevant studies that focused on the access that EB students have to advanced education, I searched Eric ProQuest and PsychInfo databases for articles from 1968–2022. the first search was done using Eric ProQuest with the following search terms: Field 1 had English as a second language OR English language learner* OR English language proficiency OR English learner* OR ESL OR ELL; Field 2 had Enrichment program* OR Advanced program; and Field 3 had Elementary school OR middle school OR High school. This search resulted in 401 studies; the limitations were that peer-reviewed and English were checked off. The second search was done using PsychInfo using the same search terms, which resulted in 168 studies.</p> <p>To identify studies that met inclusion criteria, I engaged in a systematic screening process ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref138">10</reflink>]). See Figure 2 for the screening phases.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Flow Chart.</p> <p>First, I and a colleague separately screened all 569 identified articles to determine whether they met inclusion criteria (see Table 1) by reading the article titles and abstracts. The coding that was used to screen studies was the following: 0 = does not meet inclusion criteria; 1 = meets inclusion, 2 = not sure if inclusion criteria are met and needs further screening. For phase 1 of screening articles, the interrater reliability was 91%. Following the initial screening of articles, the number of articles was narrowed down to 98 studies that met initial inclusion criteria. Next, four duplicates were identified and removed, resulting in 92 studies. I conducted further screening by reviewing the articles again for inclusion and exclusion criteria, specifically those my colleague and I had coded as a 2 ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mi>η</mi></math> </ephtml> = 43), which resulted in 49 studies. I then conducted an ancestry search of all articles that met inclusion criteria. I also did a hand search of journals (i.e., Journal of Advanced Academics, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development; Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners) that had published two or more articles that met inclusion criteria. No additional articles were found that met criteria. I then examined full texts of identified studies, which resulted in 25 studies that met criteria.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-20">Data Coding and Analyses</hd> <p>For the 25 studies that met inclusion criteria, I created a predefined coding schema. I coded each article to identify the publication year, the purpose of the study, research questions, characteristics of the participants, the strategies used to refer or identify students to advanced education, the results, and the study's strengths and weaknesses. Specifically, I extracted information regarding the access that EB students had to gifted programs, enrichment groups, and/or advanced programming in schools. I looked at the procedures or protocols in place to gain access to such programs, as well as which school personnel were involved in these processes. Additionally, I looked at the methods teachers used to identify EB students for advanced educational opportunities such as enrichment, gifted referrals, and advanced courses. I also determined if special education classification was considered, but it was mentioned as a separate classification in only four, which were not specifically linked to EB students. I then coded each study based on the following broad themes; access, teacher support, teacher identification methods within the context of EB students, and special education. I then analyzed data within and across all studies to answer each research question.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-21">Results</hd> <p>In the following sections, I highlight the synthesized findings across all 25 included studies. I first describe the study characteristics and provide descriptive information for each of the 25 studies in Table 2. Next, to answer each research question, I report relevant findings across articles. Findings included the connection between academic success and access/support to and within advanced education, as well as how teachers hold an enormous responsibility as gatekeepers for opportunities to learn.</p> <p>Table 2. Summary of Included Studies.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Author</th><th align="left">Purpose (P) and/or research question (RQ)</th><th align="left">Participants (P) and/or setting (S)</th><th align="left">Research design</th><th align="left">Patterns /trends</th><th align="left">Referral or Identification Strategy</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr2">Allen et al. (2016)</xref></td><td>(P) Understand the implementation of the SEM enrichment clusters.(RQ) How do schools improve access to gifted education methods for culturally and linguistically diverse students?</td><td>(P) Educators: Four classroom teachers, one ESOL teacher, and one gifted specialistStudents: 6% White/Caucasian; 24% African American; 68% Latino/a; 1% Other Ethnicity; 98% receiving free and reduced lunch)(S) Morris Elementary, a charter school in Georgia</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Social justice, SEM, Educator preparation/ PDsFunding</td><td>SEM</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr5">Bjorklund (2019)</xref></td><td>(P) To explore the ways that Latina/o students in honors and AP classes experience each of these facets of sense of belonging (social belonging, teacher–student relationships, and academic belonging) to gain more nuanced insights into their experiences and to give researchers and practitioners a clearer pathway to addressing their needs and improving their learning outcomes.(RQ) How do schools improve access to gifted education methods for CLD students?</td><td>(P) Students: Ten Latina/o students who were enrolled in AP and/or honors classes. Mexican - 6; Salvadorian-Mexican - 2; Mexican-Bolivian - 1; Nicaraguan-Cuban - 1; All speak Spanish at home; 7 out of 10 self identify as female; 1 student enrolled in 2 AP courses; 9 in a single AP or honors course. AVID – 10(S) Bay View High School in Georgia</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>(a) Participants felt a lack of sense of belonging in their AP and honors classrooms, and (b) participants felt a strong desire to defy perceived stereotypes and prove that they belonged in these courses. (c) students felt disconnected from their teachers and the White and Asian students in the class. They felt an overall lack of sense of social belonging amongst their peers, a lack of strong teacher–student relationships, and a lack of sense of academic belonging.</td><td>AVID</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr6">Booth et al. (2017)</xref></td><td>(P) examine advanced course completion rates among New Mexico public high school students(RQ 1) What percentage of students who entered a New Mexico high school in grade 9 and were enrolled for four years completed at least one advanced course? What percentage completed zero advanced courses, and what percentage completed two or more advanced courses? (RQ 2) How does the advanced course completion rate vary across student and school characteristics?</td><td>(P) 57,826 New Mexico high school students from 124 districts and 238 schools who entered a New Mexico high school in grade 9 in 2009–11 and were enrolled for four years. The analyses included only American Indian, Latinx, and White students, who account for about 97 percent of the state's student population.(S) New Mexico public high schools</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Higher percentage of White students completed at least one more course than Latinx or American Indian students.</td><td>An advanced course: gifted and talented, honors, AP, IB, dual-credit course, or distance learning course</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr9">Catapano and Gray (2015)</xref></td><td>(P) 1- Reform the delivery of education through this program and expose pre-service teachers to constructivist approaches to learning to make them more culturally responsive. 2 - Also to enhance the academic achievement of marginalized students and the education of all by teachers learning to utilize the assets of funds of knowledge children bring them to school. (RQ) (a) What benefits did the program provide to the participants? (b) Did Saturday School help change attitudes toward learning for the participants? And (c), how often did children participate in Saturday School?</td><td>(P) Pilot program: 2 preservice teachers and 12–14 first through fifth grade students organized by grade level, and 1 sixth grader. Overall program Students: 500 + children from a large urban school district in a Mid-Western city. Pre-service teachers: 100 + from a large state university(S) 2005–2010; magnet school in a large, urban, Mid-Western school district;</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>1 - Project-Based learning increased student attendance and achievement while it was more student-centered and student-driven; 2 - when the program was altered to include more curriculum standards and was more teacher-driven, there was less participation and enthusiasm.</td><td>Project-based learning - Saturday School enrichment program.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr11">Curwen and Colon-Muniz (2013)</xref></td><td>There is no clearly outlined purpose or research question. However, it is inferred that the purpose of this study is to study the experiences of Latinx students when exposed to an enrichment/dual immersion program that validates their culture, language, and experiences.</td><td>(S) Sunshine Elementary K-8, independent charter schools in Southern California; Located in a high-poverty neighborhood in California with a high concentration of immigrant families, primarily from Mexico; school serves approximately 700 mostly Latino children of whom 80% qualify for FRL and 70% are ELL</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>The practices, processes, and routines within this school community contributed to development of skilled educators in creating engaging and meaningful instruction to meet the individual needs of students</td><td>Academic/enrichment extended day program; dual-immersion English-Spanish bilingual educational site that leads to fluency in both languages.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr12">Damiani (1996)</xref></td><td>Project Mandala Family Support Plans were intended to give the family's involvement in their child's education structure and meaning. One question was listed in the discussion: Is it feasible for school divisions to implement a similar program for gifted children and their families?</td><td>(P)14 school divisions in a southeastern state;143 children ages 4 to 8 and 11 to 14, were identified as high ability learners by individual psychoeducational assessment: 73% African American, 10% Anglo, 7% Asian, 4% Latinx-American, 2% East Indian, and 3% Pacific Islander, 2% ESL, 6 children with disabilities, 58% FRL, one participant was Native American. Approximately 58% of the children were eligible for a free or reduced fee lunch at school. Two children were visually impaired and four had learning disabilities. Families came from metropolitan, suburban and rural areas. (S): Saturday and summer enrichment programs at a local college</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Importance of clear communication with families; Importance of family involvement in educational planning; Teacher training.</td><td>Saturday and summer enrichment programs.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr17">Fenty and Allio (2017)</xref></td><td>An evaluation of a statewide Virtual Advanced Placement (VAP) program. One of the main purposes of the program was to increase access to AP courses for students who would have otherwise been underrepresented in AP programs.The research questions guiding this study include the following: RQ(1) Who have high schools in New York state targeted for increased access to VAP? RQ(2). How does enrollment in the VAP program compare with statewide enrollment across underrepresented groups? RQ(3) What challenges to VAP access have high schools experienced?</td><td>The 20 grant recipients consisted of nine individual school districts, eight Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES), and three BOCES consortia. Grantees represented the southern, central, eastern, and western geographic regions of the state and included the following: school districts and BOCES of about 125,000 to over 1 million students, small cities, rural towns, and individual schools.</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Underrepresentation of Latinx by half; significant underrepresentation of students labeled ELL,.8 v 8% of students with IEPs/504s 1.8% v 17%; lack of support for multiply marginalized learners.</td><td>Distance learning/AP</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25">Giacchino-Baker and Piller (2006)</xref></td><td>(P) The goal of the survey was to determine the attitudes, motivation, support, and commitment behind both English and Spanish-speaking parents' decisions to enroll their children in the program.</td><td>(S) San Bernardino County, CA</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Spanish speaking parents looked at these programs as access to success - getting a good job, being fluent in two languages, fitting in, while also preserving the home language.</td><td>Two-way dual-language/immersion program.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27">Graefe and Ritchotte (2019)</xref></td><td>RQ 1: How does gifted Latinx students' performance on AP exams compare with gifted White students? RQ 2: How does gifted Latinx students' performance on AP exams compare with nonidentified Latinx students' performance? RQ 3: What are the factors that predict success on AP exams for Latinx students?</td><td>(P) Latinx students and gifted students in Grades 9 to 12 who took an AP exam during the academic years in which the grant was in effect (i.e., 2012–2013, 2013–2014, 2014–2015). The population of gifted students who took at least one AP exam was 152. The population of gifted Latinx students who took at least one AP exam during the designated time period was 52; the number of nonidentified Latinx students who took at least one exam was 257. (S) city with lower income households, with a large number of CLD students that fairly closely mirrored the overall demographics of the district.</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>When given access to gifted programming, Latinx students outperform White students.</td><td>Access to gifted programming and AP.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr30">Henderson (2019)</xref></td><td>(P) An opportunity to analyze educator discourses across contexts regarding which students dual-language bilingual education programs serve or should serve.</td><td>(Texas educators [<italic>N = </italic>323] and Utah educators [<italic>N = </italic>91]) and interview (Texas educators [<italic>N = </italic>20] and Utah educators [<italic>N = </italic>20]).</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Elitist; Access; White and wealth privilege. French seen as superior language.</td><td>Dual language bilingual education</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr31">Hertberg-Davis and Callahan (2008)</xref></td><td>(RQ) How do students enrolled in AP and IB classrooms perceive and evaluate their learning experiences in these environments?</td><td>(P) 200 teachers, 300 students, 25 building-level administrators/ coordinators and 8 program coordinators.(S) 23 high schools from seven states representing varied geographic regions and community sizes (metropolitan, suburban, rural)</td><td>Qualitat ive</td><td>Elitist; Access; White privilege; Need for teacher preparation for equity as the goal; Underrepresentation/ excludes numerous groups of gifted students, including minority students, students from low-SES backgrounds, gifted underachievers, and second-language learners.</td><td>AP and/or IB courses</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr33">Horn (2015)</xref></td><td>(P) The model has two goals: (a) to identify students who may not be considered for gifted programs using traditional methods of identification, and who, without that opportunity, are less likely to pursue advanced levels of learning on their own; and (b) to nurture gifted potential at an early age so that Young Scholars will be prepared to engage in challenging subject matter and rigorous courses in elementary school, middle school, high school, and beyond.</td><td>(S) Fairfax, Virginia</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Significant increase in identification rates due to increased access.</td><td>Young Scholars Talent Development Model / SEM</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr34">Kanno and Kangas (2014)</xref></td><td>RQ 1: What institutional mechanisms at this school, if any, inhibit ELLs' access to advanced college-preparatory courses (hereafter, high-track courses)? RQ 2: How do teachers' and guidance counselors' beliefs and practices affect ELLs' course selection? RQ 3: How do ELLs and their parents respond to the school's course recommendations?</td><td>(P) 8 ELLs (3 African, 4 Latinx, 1 Asian) transitions from high school to postsecondary education. (S) Brighton High School, a suburban public high school in Pennsylvania.</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Barring access to ELLs because of not being proficient in English.</td><td>Advanced college-preparatory courses.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr35">Kettler et al. (2006)</xref></td><td>The students were placed in a program that honors their native language as an advanced academic skill rather than an academic risk factor. The authors hypothesized that Spanish-speaking eighth-grade students (a) would earn qualifying scores on the AP Spanish exam and (b) increase their sense of belonging at school, self-efficacy, and academic aspirations.</td><td>(S) The Waco Independent School District (WISD), in Waco, TX. (P) WISD is an urban school district with a total of 15,591 total students, 80.8% of which meet economically disadvantaged criteria. This district contains 45.7% Latinx, 37% African American, and 16% White students, with 11.6% of students being limited English speakers.</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Importance of administrative support, appropriate teacher training and curriculum development is necessary, and to successfully implement this program is to remember the unique characteristics of the students (individualize the curriculum and make it culturally relevant).</td><td>AP Spanish classes</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr36">Kibler et al. (2015)</xref></td><td>(P) This study examines how a two-way, dual language enrichment program for Spanish-language learner (SLL) and English-language learner (ELL) adolescents influenced students' social networks with peers of different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.</td><td>Students, in Grades 9–12, were enrolled in either: (1) Spanish 4 or Advanced Placement Spanish for SLLs 2 or (2) the English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) program for ELLs - Program participants included 20 students: 10 English-dominant learners of Spanish, and 10 Spanish-dominant learners of English. (S) a suburban/rural high school in a small town in a south-Atlantic state</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Language designation and course-taking patterns, in that ELLs are rarely present in (almost exclusively honors) classes.</td><td>Two-way dual-language program.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr42">La Porte (2016)</xref></td><td>(P) To better understand the role and efficacy of visual arts across the curriculum in an International Baccalaureate (IB) Primary Years Program (PYP) at one public elementary school in the United States with a large percentage of disadvantaged students.</td><td>(S) Westwood Elementary School. The public school is located in Northwest Arkansas, a region with a dramatic Latino population growth over the past 20 years. Since the 2000 Census, the Latino population in the county increased another 143.3%. (P) 75 fourth grade students participating, 55% were Latino. Caucasian students were 37% of the population, and 7% were Pacific Islanders. Of the fourth graders, 83% qualified for the FRL program with 55% noted as Limited English Proficiency (LEP), and 9% needed special education. By the end of the 5th grade only 36 of 80 had attended Westwood since kindergarten due to a high rate of student mobility.</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>There was a positive impact of the IB PYP program on the academic and social emotional development of disadvantaged students.</td><td>IB Primary Years Program.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr43">Matthews and Rhodes (2020)</xref></td><td>(RQ) How do different school districts identify and serve gifted students in kindergarten, first, and second grade? (P) The overall goal of this study was to investigate how selected districts recognize and support young, gifted learners. Findings can help to clarify which approaches may show promise in the identification and education of young, gifted students in other settings.</td><td>These documents that were analyzed were the Academically or Intellectually Gifted (AIG) plans from seven different school districts: Cabarrus, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Gaston, Iredell-Statesville, Kannapolis City, Mooresville, and Union in NC.</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Universal screening was used in 5 of the 7 districts, which may have increased since the study. The study demonstrated that collaborating with the ESL team increases representation.</td><td>Universal screening; Enrichment/ front-loading opportunities.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr44">Matthews and Mellom (2012)</xref></td><td>(P) The stated program goals included to (a) improve students' academic English language skills; (b) assist their overall academic achievement, with a focus on science; (c) provide opportunities for students to become familiar with college campus life; and (d) promote a pipeline of higher education aspirations and eventual enrollment.</td><td>(P) 85 English-learning students from; (S) one ethnically diverse, high-poverty high school in a large school district in Georgia</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Choosing more advanced courses post-program, increased college interest, improved academic skills, and educational capital.</td><td>Science and academic English-themed summer enrichment programs, relying on project-based lessons and team-based work.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr45">Miller and Gentry (2010)</xref></td><td>(P) The purpose of this qualitative study was to learn about the experiences and perceptions of the kindergarten through fifth-grade students participating in Project HOPE (Having Opportunities Promotes Excellence) during the fall of 2008. (RQ) 1: Can an established out-of-school enrichment program, like Super Saturday, successfully involve high-potential students from low-income families in its enrichment classes? RQ 2: How do high-potential students from low-income families describe their experiences of participating in an out-of-school enrichment program? What kinds of experiences did these students have in their Super Saturday class, with their peers, and with their instructors? RQ 3: How do high-potential student participants from low income families and student participants from non-low income families evaluate their participation in Super Saturday?</td><td>(S) 5 school districts in the Midwest. (P) The final sample for the qualitative portion of study consisted of 33 of these 37 students who were either observed and/or interviewed by Project HOPE staff. Four students who consented were not interviewed or observed due to scheduling problems or absences. Eighteen of the 33 students were both observed and interviewed.</td><td>Mixed Methods</td><td>Findings describe academic benefits for high-potential students from low-income families when they are exposed to areas of high interest, high-level content, and hands-on activities through enrichment.</td><td>Project HOPE (Saturday enrichment program) for some of the participants</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr46">Morita-Mullaney et al. (2020)</xref></td><td>(RQ)1: How do the ELA and math achievements of emergent bilingual students in ESL and DLBE programs in Grades 3–6 differ across time? (Phase I); RQ 2: How do the course placements and performances of emergent bilinguals in ESL and DLBE programs in middle school (Grades 7–8) differ? (Phase II) RQ 3: How do course placement differences among emergent bilinguals in ESL and DLBE programs impact their opportunities to take advanced-level core and elective courses? (Phase II).</td><td>(S) urban Indiana district of over 16,000 students that hosts a K-12 DLBE program. (P) 162 emergent bilingual students enrolled in either (a) a DLBE program (<italic>n = </italic>26) in an elementary school followed by middle school or (b) an ESL (<italic>n = </italic>136) program in 10 other elementary schools followed by middle school in SD from the 2013–2014 through 2018–2019 school years.</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Initially, dual language bilingual education was positive, but with time, there was exclusionary tracking which prevented these students from accessing more advanced courses in upper grades.</td><td>Dual language bilingual education.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr55">Parkes (2008)</xref></td><td>(P) The purpose of this study is to take a closer look at these two issues: who has chosen dual language for their children and why.</td><td>(S) SW - Albuquerque, NM; (P) Nearly all (95.2%) of those responding were parents of a dual language student, thus "parents," "respondents" and "families" will be used interchangeably Throughout this study. Nearly two-thirds of the parents (65%) reported speaking Spanish with the child most often, while 27.3% reported speaking English most often. 5% of respondents reported speaking both English and Spanish most often with the child and five respondents most often spoke some other language with their child; (P) 695 participants, 7 elementary schools and one middle school - dual language program.</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>94% choose dual language programs so that the kids were able to be bilingual and biliterate, 63% involved access to success.</td><td>Dual language program</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr56">Pereira and Gentry (2013)</xref></td><td>(P) The purpose of this study was to investigate the schooling experiences of Latinx ELLs who had been identified as having high potential by their teachers.</td><td>(P) Latinx ELLs in Grades 2 through 6. In all, 22 students, 20 parents, and 22 teachers were interviewed. (S) Four Midwestern schools.</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Need for more teacher preparation as only 1 was prepared for gifted and/or ELL. Students were happy and felt included.</td><td>Project HOPE (Saturday enrichment program) for some of the participants.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr59">Ray (2009)</xref></td><td>(P) The purpose of this research was to identify both the factors that inform teachers' sense of agency (antecedents) and the instructional behaviors that result from that sense of agency (manifestations). (RQ): What are the characteristics of teacher agency at an academically successful dual language school?</td><td>(P) participants were 4 teachers (all whose first language was Spanish, whether US born or not) who were providing instructional services to students in grades 1–5; (S) a small, inner-city school in South Texas.</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>The role played by dual language teachers encompasses all of the challenges experienced by general teachers with the addition of teaching students in a way that will facilitate acquisition of a second language and balancing the demands of the program with larger societal forces that often are unsupportive of second language learning.</td><td>Dual language program.</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr63">Ricciardi and Winsler (2021)</xref></td><td>(RQ) 1: How many students in our low-income sample are taking advanced, honors, and AP courses and when? RQ 2: To what extent do demographic factors (gender, ethnicity, disability status, and SES), school readiness measures of academic, motor, and socioemotional competence at kindergarten entry, and prior academic skill (test scores and grade point average [GPA] at the end of elementary school) predict later advanced course enrollment in middle and high school?</td><td>(P) 32,885 sample of students - 59% Latinx, 34% Black, 82.2% free or reduced lunch. (S) large urban area in the Southeastern United States.</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>When having full access to enrollment, ELL students are more likely to enroll in all varieties of advanced programming. However, students receiving special education services are significantly less likely to enroll in any advanced educational courses, except possibly AP later on. Students who are retained or suspended at any point are also far less likely to enroll in advanced courses. Preschool teacher perceived behavior problems were also negatively related to the odds of enrollment.</td><td>Advanced courses (AP, gifted)</td></tr><tr><td><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr65">Solano-Campos (2017)</xref></td><td>(RQ) how are the linguistic repertoires of students who have been traditionally marginalized in typical U.S. public schools supported in the IB? And, more specifically, what is the nature of the experiences of bilingual and multilingual immigrant/refugee children in IB settings?</td><td>(P) 12 students in 4th grade; (S) charter state-funded IB school in the southern United States, in one of the largest refugee resettlement areas in the country.</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Despite the globalization policy, the efforts from this school are to implement Sheltered English rather than nurture bilingualism in the those students who are emergent in English. They are barred from access to language learning opportunities and are placed in ESOL.</td><td>IB Primary Years Program</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>. SEM = schoolwide enrichment model; ESOL = English for speakers of other languages; PD = professional development; AP = advanced placement; AVID = advancement via individual determination; CLD = culturally and linguistically diverse; IB = international baccalaureate; PBL = project-based learning; FRL = free and reduced lunch; ELL = English language learners; ESL = English as a second language; VAP = virtual advanced placement program; BOCES = board of cooperative educational services; SES = socio-economic status; WISD = Waco independent school district; SLL = Spanish language learner; PYP = primary years program; LEP = limited English proficiency; AIG = academically or intellectually gifted; HOPE = having opportunities promotes excellence; DLBE = dual language bilingual education; GPA = grade point average.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-22">Study Characteristics</hd> <p>Of the 25 studies, there was variability in the type of advanced education investigated. Ten studies focused on enrichment programs, eight explored dual language programs, eight were centered around AP/IB/honors/distance learning, and one dealt with an AVID program. There was some overlap in studies (enrichment and dual language ‒ [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref139">11</reflink>]; AP/IB/Honors and dual language ‒ [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref140">35</reflink>]). From the 25 included studies, six of the studies were quantitative, seven used mixed methods, and twelve were qualitative studies. See Table 2 for more detailed information regarding the different studies.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-23">Research Question 1: Multilingual Students Gaining Access to Advanced Education</hd> <p>In 23 of the 25 studies, a prevalent theme included the experiences of multicultural and/or multilingual learners in accessing and/or navigating through gifted, enrichment (schoolwide, weekend, summer), and advanced education. Of the 23 studies that related to access to advanced education, 10 highlighted the barriers or lack of access that multilingual learners experienced ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref141">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref142">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref143">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref144">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref145">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref146">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref147">46</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref148">56</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref149">63</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref150">65</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-24">Enrichment and Gifted Programs</hd> <p>Ten of the studies focused on enrichment and/or gifted programs and found overall promising effects on EB students' access and outcomes ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref151">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref152">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref153">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref154">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref155">27</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref156">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref157">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref158">43</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref159">45</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref160">56</reflink>]). Enrichment programs can be organized in different ways (e.g., Saturday programs, in daily thirty-minute blocks at the end of the language arts time, summer programs) and can highlight different focus areas (e.g., science, math, art, music, writing, reading), but they generally seek to enhance the learning experiences of students. Several studies found that access to enrichment led to EB gifted identification. For instance, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref161">2</reflink>] found that the implementation of schoolwide enrichment led to an increase in the number of underrepresented Latinx multilingual learners being identified as gifted, which then resulted in the study's gifted program demographics mirroring the overall Latinx student demographic more closely. Similarly, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref162">43</reflink>] found that universal screening, and front-loading through enrichment programs led to increases in identification of multilingual students for gifted. Yet, in contrast, the information regarding Project HOPE ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref163">56</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref164">45</reflink>]) did not seem to indicate that the multilingual students who were participants were later identified for gifted programming.</p> <p>Other studies focused on both short and long-term multilingual student outcomes via enrichment and gifted programs. For example, the schoolwide enrichment program [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref165">11</reflink>], which dealt with both enrichment and dual language programs, focused on providing positive student experiences, which in turn, affected the students' overall experience at school by building their cultural capital and building on the students' multiple intelligences. [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref166">44</reflink>] researched a summer enrichment program in which the participants self-reported positive short-term and long-term impacts that included: choosing more advanced courses post-program, increased college interest, improved academic skills, and sharing their educational capital. Both [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref167">56</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref168">45</reflink>] discussed the positive impact of Project HOPE, a Saturday enrichment program that increased their commitment to performing well academically and being future directed. Lastly, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref169">27</reflink>] found that when given access to gifted programming, Latinx multilingual students considered EL outperformed White students in Advanced Placement courses and three times more likely to pass AP exams than their Latinx peers who were not identified as gifted.</p> <p>Access across programs varied based on race/ethnicity, and the impact on identification also varied based on having or not having access. For instance both [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref170">56</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref171">45</reflink>] left questions as to whether or not Project HOPE led to an increased representation of multilingual students who were in gifted programming. In several other studies ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref172">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref173">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref174">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref175">31</reflink>]), including both enrichment and dual language programs (discussed further in the next section), results indicated that the advanced courses were often mostly comprised of White students rather than multilingual students. For example, while [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref176">27</reflink>] found that frontloading of information via enrichment and/or gifted programs were important markers of success later on in high school (i.e., AP) for both White and multilingual students, these programs were often attended by predominately White students, who were additionally more supported. Conversely, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref177">33</reflink>] showed a significant increase (565%) in the number of M<sups>4</sups> students receiving gifted services in high school due to increased access to enrichment earlier on. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref178">33</reflink>] also found that teacher preparation (e.g., professional developments in curriculum and supporting M<sups>4</sups> learners, and the Advanced Academic endorsement, which helps identify giftedness) and alternative screening (e.g., the Naglieri Non-Verbal Ability Test) were vital to the success of the Young Scholars Program.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-25">Dual Language and International Baccalaureate Programs</hd> <p>Nine studies ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref179">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref180">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref181">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref182">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref183">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref184">42</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref185">46</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref186">55</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref187">59</reflink>]) examined access to dual language and international programs, with access and effectiveness variability often depending on student race/ethnicity. Dual language immersion programs like the International Studies programs, are advanced education programs, in which students learn core subjects (e.g., math and history) in both languages. In Henderson's ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref188">30</reflink>]) research, despite the study being centered around a dual language program, there was a larger demographic of White students who had access to French and the Latinx students were pathed towards Spanish classes. In [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref189">46</reflink>], which was a longitudinal study, initially EB students in a dual language bilingual program in Indiana, performed very well, but over time there was exclusionary tracking that prevented those students from more advanced courses in the upper grades. [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref190">65</reflink>] found the IB program highlighted in the study, practiced more of an "elite bilingualism emphasizing proficiency in dominant, colonial languages by English proficient speakers, valued over refugee students' mother tongue bilingualism" (p.44). However, La Porte's ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref191">42</reflink>]) study of an IB Primary Years Program found the program to have a positive impact as a result of a strengths-based mindset, project-based learning opportunities, and culturally responsive classrooms that led to increased test scores, improved behavior and attendance, as a result of the students feeling empowered and excited about school.</p> <p>Of the 23 studies dealing with access, eleven ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref192">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref193">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref194">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref195">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref196">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref197">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref198">45</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref199">46</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref200">56</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref201">63</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref202">65</reflink>]) shared information from their studies that demonstrate that multilingual learners have a lack of access or barriers to that access in these different situations. For example, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref203">65</reflink>] shared how despite a globalization policy in the IB program, it mirrored a hierarchical societal structure by implementing Sheltered English (i.e., an approach to teaching language to EBs) rather than nurturing bilingualism for students who are EB. [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref204">46</reflink>] shared how with time there were barriers placed that maintained multilingual learners in remedial coursework via tracking that prevented multilingual students from accessing more advanced courses in the upper grades.</p> <p>In studies that dealt with teacher support, nine of those cases demonstrated situations in which multicultural and/or multilingual learners lacked adequate support from teachers. For instance, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref205">31</reflink>] describe how the AP and IB programs in the school needed to focus time on teacher preparation because they only seemed to know how to support and teach White students, and preparation could help them create culturally relevant classroom, where they knew how to support M<sups>4</sups> students.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-26">Teacher Preparation</hd> <p>Of the 25 included studies, 14 studies ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref206">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref207">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref208">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref209">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref210">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref211">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref212">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref213">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref214">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref215">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref216">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref217">45</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref218">56</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref219">59</reflink>]) highlighted how teacher preparation was important to their programs achieving equity and a positive learning environment in the identification, representation, and/or experiences of multicultural or multilingual learners in advanced education. Throughout these studies, the teachers learned methods in how to teach and support M<sups>4</sups> students, such as the Young Scholars Talent Development Model in Virginia, which included research-based practices and learning the importance of considering "the influence of home, prior knowledge, language, learning preferences, and culture as they plan learning experiences that build on strengths" ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref220">33</reflink>], p. 27).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-27">Alternative Screening Methods</hd> <p>Two studies highlighted the need for alternative screening methods. For instance, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref221">43</reflink>] whose study spanned numerous districts underscored the importance of a single-step method of universal screening to circumvent testing and teacher bias in order to increase the representation of underrepresented demographics. One of the districts went further and collaborated with EL teams and they had one of the most notable successes in increasing the representation of multilingual learners. Of the three longitudinal studies ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref222">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref223">46</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref224">63</reflink>]), [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref225">63</reflink>] added an interesting layer because their study looked at a school that had open enrollment, allowing students to choose the advanced courses they wanted, diminishing testing and teacher bias. In the case of multilingual students identified as EB, they were more likely to enroll in advanced classes and the approach seemed to favor multilingual learners. However, it did not do the same for students who were in special education or who had experienced different forms of discipline throughout their lives ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref226">63</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-28">Research Question 2: Teachers Methods to Identify EB Students for Advanced Education</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191011251-29">Ineffective Methods</hd> <p>Several studies examined the role of teacher bias (<emph>n = </emph>9) and multilingual student access (<emph>n = </emph>23) to advanced education. In numerous cases, teacher biases or preconceived notions had a negative impact on whether a multicultural/multilingual student gained access to advanced education ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref227">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref228">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref229">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref230">56</reflink>]). For example, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref231">30</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref232">31</reflink>] found that once in their different programs (enrichment and dual language immersion), M<sups>4</sups> students felt disconnected or unsupported by their teachers. Specifically, Henderson's ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref233">30</reflink>]) study found that teachers would discourage students from enrichment program participation if they were struggling academically and/or linguistically. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref234">31</reflink>] found that the teachers lacked commitment to provide scaffolding or support for what they considered nontraditional students. However, Allen et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref235">2</reflink>]) study demonstrated how teacher biases can be minimized by providing enrichment schoolwide versus based on referral; the students' enthusiasm with regards to going to school increased as a result of the enrichment program and the way it was organized.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-30">Effective Methods</hd> <p>Several studies highlighted the importance of specific methods to identify EB students for advanced education. Specifically, several research teams focused on project-based learning and EB student access to advanced education. Project-based learning is a student-centered approach that provides students with the opportunity to explore real-world challenges through active, inquiry-based learning, which centers collaboration, creativity, and research. Project-based learning that was more student-centered and available to all, resulted in positive experiences and/or increased identification for advanced programming ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref236">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref237">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref238">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref239">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref240">45</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref241">56</reflink>]), leading to more equitable school cultures. Additionally, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref242">35</reflink>], found the importance of honoring the students' home language within the curriculum, which in their study led to a 79% pass rate of the multilingual learners taking AP classes, along with increased self-confidence. However, unequal teacher preparation resulted in one-size-fits-all approaches that lead to inequitable experiences for Latinx M<sups>4</sups> students ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref243">31</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-31">Research Question 3: Special Education Classification in the Referral Process</hd> <p>Out of the 25 studies, none specifically reported how special education classification was considered in the referral process for EB students to advanced education. In other words, none addressed the intersectionality of multilingual learners, advanced programming, and special education. However, three studies ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref244">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref245">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref246">63</reflink>]) reported special education as a consideration in advanced programming. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref247">17</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref248">63</reflink>] found the representation of multilingual learners/EB in gifted paralleled with students in special education, and [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref249">33</reflink>] specifically paralleled the experiences of "students whose primary language is not English" with twice exceptional learners (p. 19). In [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref250">17</reflink>] both students in special education and those who are multilingual were underrepresented in AP courses. However, in [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref251">63</reflink>], multilingual students were well represented in AP courses, although still less in comparison to Asian or White students, but students who were in special education, and/or who had been retained or suspended remained significantly less (around 65% less) likely to enroll in advanced courses. [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref252">63</reflink>] included factors such as the impact of preschool teachers who had perceived behavior problems in students, led to negative odds of those students enrolling in advanced courses later in life. However, students identified for gifted had significantly higher possibilities (five times higher) of enrolling in advanced courses than other students, and the majority of those gifted students were White and Asian. Nonetheless, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref253">33</reflink>], found that the Young Scholars Model's success was demonstrated through longitudinal increased identification of gifted services as a result of curriculum that supported M<sups>4</sups> learners and multiple modalities of learning, in addition to alternative screening methods (e.g., the Naglieri Non-Verbal Ability Test).</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-32">Discussion</hd> <p>Students whose native language is not English are disproportionately underrepresented in gifted education ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref254">57</reflink>]), have limited access to advanced education, and are overrepresented in special education ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref255">54</reflink>]). Advanced education can prove to be beneficial for students at different levels. For instance, enrichment programs can provide students with an experience that further enhances their knowledge in ways outside of the confines of the regular curriculum, which is especially important for multilingual learners who may be gifted. Students who have access to enrichment in elementary school, for example, often experience a significant increase in gifted access in the upper K-12 grades ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref256">33</reflink>]), which then enhances the likelihood of attending college, staying in college ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref257">26</reflink>]), and expanding their knowledge. Yet, current understanding of the state of the literature on how multilingual students gain access to advanced education (e.g., enrichment programs, gifted education, and advanced courses) is more limited. This systematic review addresses this need. In the following sections, I discuss findings and prevalent themes.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-33">Research Question 1: Gaining Access</hd> <p> <emph>Trend: Enrichment programs provide frontloading that can positively impact a student's trajectory into advanced coursework and beyond.</emph> </p> <p>Certain studies discussed the positive impacts of different advanced education programs (dual language, schoolwide/summer/weekend enrichment), which often empowered multilingual students in gaining access to advanced educational spaces through the provision of educational equity and capital. Out of 23 studies that related to access to advanced education, 10 highlighted the barriers or lack of access that multilingual learners experienced. Of the 10 studies centered around enrichment programs, six expressed that the students had positive experiences. The others expressed how M<sups>4</sups> students felt marginalized. Thus, access to advanced education mattered, however, multilingual students had varying ability and experiences accessing those spaces.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-34">Research Question 2: Teachers and Access (or Lack Thereof)</hd> <p> <emph>Trend: Educational opportunities for teachers can positively impact their roles as gatekeepers of advanced learning opportunities, specifically in regard to M<sups>4</sups> learners.</emph> </p> <p>Five studies ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref258">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref259">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref260">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref261">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref262">59</reflink>]) discussed how pivotal teacher support was to the success of the interventions in each study. Overall, much of the literature that discussed the level of support teachers provided (positive or otherwise), indicated that it is essential to educate teachers regarding underrepresented student demographics and being culturally responsive.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-35">Research Question 3: Special Education Considerations</hd> <p> <emph>Trend: Students who are multilingual and considered English learners, and students in special education are often categorized in similar ways and have some overlapping experiences. However, there is no instances in this study where articles were found that discussed students who are thrice-exceptional (multilingual/emergent English learner, in special education via IEP or 504, and gifted).</emph> </p> <p>From 25 studies included in this SLR, only three discussed special education as a consideration in advanced programming ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref263">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref264">33</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref265">63</reflink>]), but only one ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref266">33</reflink>]), addressed in subtle terms, the intersectionality of multilingual learners, advanced programming, and special education. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref267">17</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref268">63</reflink>] established parallels between multilingual learners and learners in special education through inferences that discussed both groups within the same section in the literature. However, neither studies that considered special education, did so in relation to multilingual learners as thrice-exceptional (i.e., gifted, disability, and multi-lingual). However, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref269">33</reflink>] did create specific parallels of twice-exceptionality with special education by describing how both are gifted learners from underrepresented communities.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-36">Limitations</hd> <p>There are several limitations specific to this SLR. First, during the process of extracting the literature, I could not find sufficient information to fully address my third research question looking at thrice-exceptionality, the intersectionality of multiculturalism, multilingualism, special education classifications and access to advanced programming; this will be my focus in future studies. Second, I know from reading the articles that the vast majority of them are related to multilingual learners who speak Spanish, I would like to look at my articles further to pinpoint exactly how many of them include multilingual participants who speak Spanish.</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-37">Directions for Future Research</hd> <p>There are several directions for future research. First, it will be important to examine the intersectionality of special education, twice- and thrice-exceptionalities, multiculturalism, and multilingualism. There is a dearth of studies that consider the intersectionality of multilingualism and special education classifications as it relates to advanced education. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to recreate this SLR from the onset of the pandemic into the current administration (i.e., 2025) to see the impact of both on the access that multilingual learners have to advanced education. It would be beneficial to examine what literature includes the intersectionality of multilingual learners and their access to higher education, which was discussed in [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref270">26</reflink>].</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-38">Implications for Practice</hd> <p>There are several implications for practice based on findings. First, enrichment programs, which was the intervention mostly seen throughout this SLR, can be especially promising in providing students with learning opportunities that they may have had previously limited access to due to various systemic barriers (e.g., poverty, language barriers, immigration realities; [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref271">2</reflink>]). Furthermore, schoolwide enrichment models have shown promise in increasing the gifted referral and identification rates among students who are M<sups>4</sups> ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref272">2</reflink>]), especially those who are EB. Thus, schools should actively implement enrichment programs.</p> <p>Another implication for practice is the implementation of statewide initiatives (although it lacks an official state twice-exceptional policy or law; [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref273">19</reflink>]) focusing on twice- and thrice-exceptional students and multilingual learners who are EB. For instance, in Colorado and Texas, school professionals consider traits beyond intelligence quotient (IQ) to identify students as gifted (e.g., leadership, artistic ability, creativity, productive thinking; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref274">29</reflink>]). Additionally, teachers are trained to identify and educate students from underrepresented groups and funding is provided to local educational agencies related to gifted services in early childhood and the implementation of universal screening ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref275">29</reflink>]). States across the U.S. should consider implementing such initiatives.</p> <p>So how do schools increase access to advanced education for EB students in an era when so many programs are being gutted and dismantled on a federal level? The answer may be at the state, district, and local school levels within the public school system. Colorado, for example, has successfully implemented statewide initiatives (although it lacks an official state twice-exceptional policy or law; Foley-Nicpon & Teriba, 2022) targeting twice- and thrice-exceptional students and multilingual learners who are EB. In Colorado and Texas, school professionals consider traits beyond IQ to identify students as gifted (e.g., leadership, artistic ability, creativity, productive thinking; Hafenstein et al., 2022). Additionally, teachers are trained to identify and educate students from underrepresented groups and funding is provided to local educational agencies related to gifted services in early childhood and the implementation of universal screening (Hafenstein et al., 2022). These are all practices that have the potential to benefit EB students. However, there is legislation in states throughout the U.S. that are taking aim at advanced educational programs to remove advanced education from public schools. What happens if those opportunities cease to exist in public schools? Will private schools be the ones to continue to offer them, and continue the perpetuation of the cycle of inequity in this country?</p> <hd id="AN0191011251-39">Conclusion</hd> <p>Advanced education's hierarchical structure can be compared to current societal structures, where most wealth and power is amassed in 1% of the population ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref276">41</reflink>]). Consistently, White students have access to advanced education, while EB students continue to have more limited access. When power structures like advanced education are opened up to everyone, the hope is that schools are providing a more equitable space for all students. When M<sups>4</sups> students, especially those who are EB, gain access to advanced education programs, they have a greater likelihood of attending college and expanding their knowledge, due to greater opportunities to learn ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref277">26</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref278">61</reflink>]). This, in turn, increases their employability and later earning potential as adults ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref279">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref280">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>Given the findings of this SLR and the current reality of the US in 2025, the ideas of access and power structures are increasingly present. Who is given passage to these hierarchical structures that empower some and marginalize many? As a society, it is important that educators, researchers, and policymakers come to understand how important it is to shed light on current educational practices that limit the access of EB students to advanced education and to research and implement practices that support them in fulfilling their potential and enhancing their short-and long-term outcomes; in other words, opportunities to unleash their full potential.</p> <ref id="AN0191011251-40"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref51" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Allen J. K. (2017). Exploring the role teacher perceptions play in the underrepresentation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in gifted programming. Gifted Child Today, 40(2), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217517690188</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref22" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> *Allen J. K., Robbins M. A., Payne Y. D., Brown K. B. (2016). Using enrichment clusters to address the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse learners. Gifted Child Today, 39(2), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217516628568</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref27" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Barajas-López F. (2014). Mexican Immigrant students' schooling experiences and the construction of disengagement in mathematics learning contexts. Journal of Latinos and Education, 13(1), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2013.800818</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref8" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bilingual Education Act of 1968 Elementary and Secondary Act Amendments, Pub. L. No. 90–247, title VII, §702, 81 Stat. 816. (1968). https://<ulink href="http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-81/pdf/STATUTE-81-Pg783.pdf#page=32">www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-81/pdf/STATUTE-81-Pg783.pdf#page=32</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref12" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> *Bjorklund P. (2019). "Whoa. You speak Mexican?": Latina/o high school students' sense of belonging in advanced placement and honors classes. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 24(2), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2019.1570202</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref121" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> *Booth E., Shields J., Carle J. (2017). Advanced course completion rates among New Mexico high school students following changes in graduation requirements. REL 2018-278. Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. Social Science Premium Collection https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/reports/advanced-course-completion-rates-among-new-mexico/docview/1968430480/se-2">www.proquest.com/reports/advanced-course-completion-rates-among-new-mexico/docview/1968430480/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref50" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Card D., Giuliano L. (2016). Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(48), 13678–13683. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605043113</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref208" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Carlone H. B., Huffling L. D., Tomasek T., Hegedus T. A., Matthews C. E., Allen M. H., Ash M. C. (2015). "Unthinkable" selves: Identity boundary work in a summer field ecology enrichment program for diverse youth. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1524–1546. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1033776</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref152" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> *Catapano S., Gray J. (2015). Saturday school: Implementing project-based learning in an urban school. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education, 12(1), 1–12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1056672.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cumming M. M., Bettini E., Chow J. C. (2023). High-quality systematic literature reviews in special education: Promoting coherence, contextualization, generativity, and transparency. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 412–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221146576</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Curwen M. S., Colón-Muñiz A. (2013). Educators challenging poverty and Latino low achievement: Extending and enriching the school day. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 9, 65–77. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1027061.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Damiani V. B. (1996). The individual family support plan: A tool to assist special populations of gifted learners. Roeper Review, 18(4), 293–297. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/individual-family-support-plan-tool-assist/docview/62695379/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/individual-family-support-plan-tool-assist/docview/62695379/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis A. M. (2018). Not so gifted: Academic identity for Black women in honors. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 19(2), 47–71. <ulink href="http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/582">http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/582</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis J. L. (2024). Intentionally opening the world of twice exceptionality for culturally diverse learners. Teaching for High Potential, 17(1), 1–16.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Jong E. (2011). Foundations for multilingualism in education. In Language policy in the United States (pp. 126–138). Caslon Publishing. https://<ulink href="http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/return-bilingual-education">www.colorincolorado.org/article/return-bilingual-education</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dixson D. D., Worrell F. C., Olszewski-Kubilius P., Subotnik R. F. (2016). Beyond perceived ability: The contribution of psychosocial factors to academic performance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13210</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Fenty N. S., Allio A. (2017). Using distance learning to impact access of diverse learners to advanced placement programs. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(2), 39–56. https://research.ebsco.com/c/vc3evs/viewer/pdf/z7vulhxkhb. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/using-distance-learning-impact-access-diverse/docview/2009558659/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/using-distance-learning-impact-access-diverse/docview/2009558659/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fish R. E. (2017). The racialized construction of exceptionality: Experimental evidence of race/ethnicity effects on teachers' interventions. Social Science Research, 62, 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.08.007</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foley-Nicpon M., Teriba A. (2022). Policy considerations for twice-exceptional students. Gifted Child Today, 45(4), 212–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175221110943</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford D. Y. (2010). Multicultural issues: Underrepresentation of culturally different students in gifted education: Reflections about current problems and recommendations for the future. Gifted Child Today, 33(3), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621751003300308</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford D. Y. (2015). Multicultural issues: Recruiting and retaining Black and Hispanic students in gifted education: Equality versus equity schools. Gifted Child Today, 38(3), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217515583745</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford D. Y., Wright B. L., Trotman Scott M. (2020). A matter of equity: Desegregating and integrating gifted and talented education for under-represented students of color. Multicultural Perspectives, 22(1), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15210960.2020.1728275</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ford D. Y., Young J. L. (2021). Underrepresented culturally and linguistically diverse gifted students: Recommendations for equitable recruitment and retention. In Roberts J. L., Inman T. F., Robins J. H. (Eds.), Introduction to gifted education (pp. 337–352). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gentry M., Gray A., Whiting G. W., Maeda Y., Pereira N. (2019). Access denied/system failure. Gifted education in the United States: Laws, access, equity, and missingness across the country by locale, Title I school status, and race. Report cards, 78 S. E. HENSHON technical report, and website. West Lafayette, IN; Lansdowne, VA: Purdue University; Jack Kent Cooke Foundation. https://<ulink href="http://www.education.purdue.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/access-denied-abstract.pdF">www.education.purdue.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/access-denied-abstract.pdF</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Giacchino-Baker R., Piller B. (2006). Parental motivation, attitudes, support, and commitment in a Southern Californian two-way immersion program. Journal of Latinos and Education, 5(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532771xjle0501_2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gonzales S. M., Baier S. T., Brammer E. C. (2022). Are you HIP?: How one Latinx learning community integrates ten high-impact practices to foster student success. A practice report. Student Success, 13(1), 74–79. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.1907</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Graefe A. K., Ritchotte J. A. (2019). An exploration of factors that predict advanced placement exam success for gifted Hispanic students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(4), 441–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19853194</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gubbins E. J., Siegle D., Peters P. M., Carpenter A. Y., Hamilton R., McCoach D. B., Puryear J. S., Langley S. D., Long D. (2020). Promising practices for improving identification of English learners for gifted and talented programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 43(4), 336–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220955241</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Hafenstein N. L., Boley V., Lin J. (2022). State policy and funding in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 45(4), 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175221110938</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Henderson K. I. (2019). The danger of the dual-language enrichment narrative: Educator discourses constructing exclusionary participation structures in bilingual education. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 16(3), 155–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2018.1492343</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Hertberg-Davis H., Callahan C. M. (2008). A narrow escape: Gifted students' perceptions of advanced placement and international baccalaureate programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(3), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208319705</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hodges J., Tay J., Maeda Y., Gentry M. (2018). A meta-analysis of gifted and talented identification practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752107</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Horn C. V. (2015). Young scholars: A talent development model for finding and nurturing potential in underserved populations. Gifted Child Today, 38(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514556532</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Kanno Y., Kangas S. E. N. (2014). "I'm not going to be, like, for the AP": English language learners' limited access to advanced college-preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848–878. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214544716</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Kettler T., Shiu A., Johnsen S. K. (2006). AP As an intervention for middle school Hispanic students. Gifted Child Today, 29(1), 39–46. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/ap-as-intervention-middle-school-hispanic/docview/62108222/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/ap-as-intervention-middle-school-hispanic/docview/62108222/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Kibler A. K., Atteberry A., Hardigree C. N., Salerno A. S. (2015). Languages across borders: Social network development in an adolescent two-way language program. Teachers College Record, 117(8), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811511700805</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Klimecká E. (2022). Advantages and disadvantages of being "gifted": Perceptions of the label by gifted pupils. Research Papers in Education, 38(6), 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2022.2065523</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krogstad J. M. (2023, September 22). Key facts about U.S. Latinos for National Hispanic Heritage month. Pew Research Center. https://<ulink href="http://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/22/key-facts-about-us-latinos-for-national-hispanic-heritage-month/#:∼:text=The%20U.S.%20population%20grew%20by,other%20racial%20or%20ethnic%20group">www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/22/key-facts-about-us-latinos-for-national-hispanic-heritage-month/#:∼:text=The%20U.S.%20population%20grew%20by,other%20racial%20or%20ethnic%20group</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kundu A. (2020). The power of student agency: Looking beyond grit to close the opportunity gap. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ladson-Billings G., Tate W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146819509700104</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lafer G. (2017). The one percent solution. Cornell University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *La Porte A. M. (2016). Efficacy of the arts in a transdisciplinary learning experience for culturally diverse fourth graders. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(3), 467–480. https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/126. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/efficacy-arts-transdisciplinary-learning/docview/1826529909/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/efficacy-arts-transdisciplinary-learning/docview/1826529909/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Matthews M. S., Rhodes H. A. (2020). Examining identification practices and services for young advanced and gifted learners in selected North Carolina school districts. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(4), 411–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20908878</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Matthews P. H., Mellom P. J. (2012). Shaping aspirations, awareness, academics, and action: Outcomes of summer enrichment programs for English-learning secondary students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(2), 105–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12439197</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Miller R., Gentry M. (2010). Developing talents among high-potential students from low-income families in an out-of-school enrichment program. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(4), 594–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1002100403</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Morita-Mullaney T., Renn J., Chiu M. M. (2020). Obscuring equity in dual language bilingual education: A longitudinal study of emergent bilingual achievement, course placements, and grades. TESOL Quarterly: A Journal for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages and of Standard English as a Second Dialect, 54(3), 685–718. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.592</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mun R. U., Ezzani M. D., Lee L. E. (2020a). Culturally relevant leadership in gifted education: A systematic literature review. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 43(2), 108–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220912009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mun R. U., Hemmler V., Langley S. D., Ware S., Gubbins E. J., Callahan C. M., McCoach D. B., Siegle D. (2020b). Identifying and serving English learners in gifted education: Looking back and moving forward. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 43(4), 297–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220955230</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2023a). English learners in public schools. Condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2023b). Characteristics of public school teachers. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved July 8, 2023, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/clrhttps://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/clr</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Novak A. M. (2022a). Not white saviors, but critical scholars: The need for gifted critical race theory. In Nyberg J. L., Manzone J. A. (Eds.), Creating equitable services for the gifted: Protocols for identification, implementation, and evaluation (pp. 246–262). IGI Global. https://<ulink href="http://www.igi-global.com/pdf.aspx?tid=290604&ptid=268283&ctid=4&oa=true&isxn=9781799881537">www.igi-global.com/pdf.aspx?tid=290604&ptid=268283&ctid=4&oa=true&isxn=9781799881537</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Novak A. M. (2022b). Peter Parker principle: From White privilege to gifted critical discourse. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(2), 128–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211037704</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Office of English Language Acquisition. (2019). The top languages spoken by English learners (ELs) in the United States. https://ncela.ed.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/files/fast%5ffacts/olea-top-languages-fact-shee t-20191021-508.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). (2022, April 8). OSEP fast facts: Students with disabilities who are English learners served under idea part B. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/osep-fast-facts-students-with-disabilities-english-learners</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Parkes J. (2008). Who chooses dual language education for their children and why. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(6), 635–660. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb470.0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Pereira N., Gentry M. (2013). A qualitative inquiry into the experiences of high-potential Hispanic English language learners in Midwestern schools. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24(3), 164–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X13494204</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters S., Engerrand K. G. (2016). Equity and excellence: Proactive efforts in the identification of underrepresented students for gifted and talented services. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(3), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216643165</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters S. J. (2022). The challenges of achieving equity within public school gifted and talented programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(2), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211002535</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Ray J. M. (2009). A template analysis of teacher agency at an academically successful dual language school. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(1), 110–141. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/template-analysis-teacher-agency-at-academically/docview/742873949/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/template-analysis-teacher-agency-at-academically/docview/742873949/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reis S. M., Peters P. M. (2021). Research on the schoolwide enrichment model: Four decades of insights, innovation, and evolution. Gifted Education International, 37(2), 109–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429420963987</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renzulli J. S., Reis S. M., Brigandi C. (2021). Enrichment theory, research, and practice. In Plucker J., Callhan C. (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education (pp. 185–199). Routledge. https://<ulink href="http://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003233961-15/enrichment-theory-research-practice-joseph-renzulli-sally-reis-carla-brigandi">www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003233961-15/enrichment-theory-research-practice-joseph-renzulli-sally-reis-carla-brigandi</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renzulli J. S., Renzulli S. R. (2010). The schoolwide enrichment model: A focus on student strengths and interests. Gifted Education International, 26(2–3), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142941002600303</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Ricciardi C., Winsler A. (2021). Selection into advanced courses in middle and high school among low-income, ethnically diverse youth. Journal of Advanced Academics, 32(3), 291–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X21990096</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russakoff D. (2015). The prize: Who's in charge of America's schools?Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> *Solano-Campos A. (2017). Language ideologies in a U.S. state-funded international school: The invisible linguistic repertoires of bilingual refugee students. Journal of Research in International Education, 16(1), 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240917692759</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solórzano D. G., Bernal D. D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085901363002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Talbott E., Maggin D. M., Van Acker E. Y., Kumm S. (2017). Quality indicators for reviews of research in special education. Exceptionality, 26(4), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2017.1283625</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE). (2016). Civil rights data collection: gifted and talented enrollment. https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2015-2016</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE). (2018a). Civil rights data collection: gifted and talented enrollment. https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/2017-2018/School-Programs/Gifted-and-Talented/Gifted-Talented-Enrollment</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE). (2018b). Civil rights data collection: overall student enrollment. https://ocrdata.ed.gov/assets/downloads/2017-2018/Student-Enrollment/All-Enrollment/Enrollment-Overall.xlsx%E2%80%8B</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE). (2021). Civil rights data collection: National summary for 2020-21 school year. https://civilrightsdata.ed.gov/profile/us?surveyYear=2020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> 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. https://doaj.org/article/74103e5e147341ae90ee8cb1548505d0. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1137997.pdf</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0191011251-41"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Alejandra Amaris Fernández Morgado https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4539-4347</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> I would like to note here that I use various terms for individuals whose first language is not English. English learner (EL) is one that is often used in the literature and within schools to indicate that a person is just recently learning English not as their first language. Additionally, EL can also refer to someone who was categorized upon entering school because they come from a home where English is not the dominant language spoken there or their parents' first language is not English. Increasingly, scholars have begun to use the term emergent bilingual (EB), as a more inclusive term. This manuscript will use the different terminologies at times together, and at others separately as needed - this speaks to the evolution of the language and awareness of what it implies.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Racial/ethnic, and language categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive because there exists overlap in which individuals can identify as a combination of the different demographics (e.g., Black and Latinx, White and Latinx).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> I am including Puerto Rico even though it is considered a U.S. territory.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Kim G. Stephenson, Special-issue-editor; Karen L. Brown, Special-issue-editor; Katie D. Lewis, Special-issue-editor and Alejandra Amaris Fernández Morgado</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref130"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref139"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref140"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref142"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref143"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref144"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref146"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref147"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref148"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref149"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref150"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref154"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref155"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref156"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref157"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref158"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref159"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref180"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref184"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref186"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref187"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref273"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref274"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref276"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1496585
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Mi Primer Idioma es Español: A Systematic Review of Gifted Access for Multilingual Students
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alejandra+Amaris+Fernández+Morgado%22">Alejandra Amaris Fernández Morgado</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4539-4347">0009-0000-4539-4347</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Advanced+Academics%22"><i>Journal of Advanced Academics</i></searchLink>. 2026 37(1):98-138.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 41
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Literature+Reviews%22">Literature Reviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+Learners%22">English Learners</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bilingual+Students%22">Bilingual Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multilingualism%22">Multilingualism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gifted%22">Gifted</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gifted+Education%22">Gifted Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disproportionate+Representation%22">Disproportionate Representation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Evaluation%22">Student Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ability+Identification%22">Ability Identification</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Education%22">Special Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Critical+Race+Theory%22">Critical Race Theory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Access+to+Education%22">Access to Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/1932202X251394704
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1932-202X<br />2162-9536
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This 2024 CEC Conference Poster Proceedings manuscript was based on my systematic literature review (SLR). Students whose first language is not English, labeled English learners (EL; or some othering variation of that term), are disproportionately underrepresented in gifted/enrichment/advanced education. Despite this growing demographic representing approximately 10% of the student population, they only represent approximately 2% of gifted and talented programs. Based on articles identified for this SLR, I highlight components of the referral process for multilingual students to gifted/enrichment/advanced education, along with potential biases. Findings included the connection between academic success and access/support to and within advanced education, as well as how teachers hold an enormous responsibility as gatekeepers for opportunities to learn.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1496585
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1496585
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/1932202X251394704
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 41
        StartPage: 98
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Literature Reviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English Learners
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Bilingual Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multilingualism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gifted
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gifted Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disproportionate Representation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ability Identification
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Special Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Critical Race Theory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Access to Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Mi Primer Idioma es Español: A Systematic Review of Gifted Access for Multilingual Students
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alejandra Amaris Fernández Morgado
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1932-202X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2162-9536
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 37
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Advanced Academics
              Type: main
ResultId 1