Authors : Thienkholal Guite

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 12 - December

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/49fumtbt

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4w9u28rw

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25dec728

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : Mathematical giftedness has remained one of the most challenging issues to identify especially among students in social economic disadvantaged groups (SEDGs) who have remained underrepresented in gifted sports education interventions in many countries around the world. Mathematically gifted learning is perceived in many different ways, but confined to the conceptual clarity and assessment instruments and methods of recognizing gifted learners, the most advanced mathematical potential remains to be viewed as complex and culturally situated. In this paper, a critical analysis of the conceptualized barriers and structural injustices that have led to the misidentification of mathematical giftedness among SEDG learners is critically analyzed. Relying on recent and classic peer-reviewed literature, the discussion points out the ambiguities in definition, biases involved in standardized and language-specific evaluations, and the gatekeeping aspect of the teacher judgments. Patterns of misidentification, such as the masking of giftedness among twice-exceptional students and students with limited academic exposure are examined as well as a long-term academic and psychosocial impact of being excluded in gifted pathways. The paper suggests inclusive, multidimensional methods of identification, which are based on culturally responsive assessment, multi-source compilation, dynamic evaluation of learning potential, and integration with the community in the school. Policy guidelines in fair identification systems are also expressed. The critique highlights the necessity of the systemic redesign, claiming that the fair identification of mathematical giftedness is not only an assessment problem but a justice-oriented necessity which requires the maintenance of structural and pedagogical change.

Keywords : Mathematical Giftedness, Equitable Identification, Socio-Economically Disadvantaged Groups (SEDGs), Culturally Responsive Assessment, Structural Inequalities in Education.

References :

1. Al-Hroub, A., & Whitebread, D. (2019). Dynamic Assessment for Identification of Twice-Exceptional Learners Exhibiting Mathematical Giftedness and Specific Learning Disabilities. Roeper Review, 41(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2019.1585396
2. Arnstein, K. B., Desmet, O. A., Seward, K., Traynor, A., & Olenchak, F. R. (2023). Underrepresented Students in Gifted and Talented Education: Using Positive Psychology to Identify and Serve. Education Sciences, 13(9), 955. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090955
3. Assmus, D., & Fritzlar, T. (2022). Mathematical creativity and mathematical giftedness in the primary school age range: An interview study on creating figural patterns. ZDM Mathematics Education, 54, 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01328-8
4. Bahar, A. K., & Maker, C. J. (2020). Culturally responsive assessments of mathematical skills and abilities: Development, field testing, and implementation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(3), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20906130
5. Beumann, S., Weber, D., & Benölken, R. (2025). Identifying and fostering giftedness in students with disabilities: Potential barriers in identification and support from a mathematics educational perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 2027–2059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10587-2
6. Borland, J. H., Schnur, R., & Wright, L. (2000). Economically Disadvantaged Students in a School for the Academically Gifted: A Postpositivist Inquiry into Individual and Family Adjustment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(1), 13-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620004400103
7. Callahan, C. M. (2005). Identifying Gifted Students from Underrepresented Populations. Theory Into Practice, 44(2), 98–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3497028
8. Delgado-Valencia, L., Delgado, B., Navarro-Soria, I., Torrecillas, M., Rosales-Gómez, M., Sánchez-Herrera, M. d. l. C., & Soto-Díaz, M. (2025). The Identification of Giftedness in Children: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 15(8), 1012. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15081012
9. Gubbins, E. J., Siegle, D., Ottone-Cross, K., McCoach, D. B., Langley, S. D., Callahan, C. M., Brodersen, A. V., & Caughey, M. (2021). Identifying and Serving Gifted and Talented Students: Are Identification and Services Connected? Gifted Child Quarterly, 65(2), 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986220988308 
10. Harris, B., Plucker, J. A., Rapp, K. E., & Martínez, R. S. (2009). Identifying gifted and talented English language learners: A case study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32(3), 368–393.
11. Jung, J. Y., & Hay, P. (2018). Exploring gifted education. Routledge.
12. Long, D. A., McCoach, D. B., Siegle, D., Callahan, C. M., & Gubbins, E. J. (2023). Inequality at the Starting Line: Underrepresentation in Gifted Identification and Disparities in Early Achievement. AERA Open, 9. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584231171535 
13. Mann, E. L. (2009). The Search for Mathematical Creativity: Identifying Creative Potential in Middle School Students. Creativity Research Journal, 21(4), 338–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410903297402
14. Mun, R. U., Hemmler, V., Langley, S. D., Ware, S., Gubbins, E. J., Callahan, C. M., McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2020). 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
15. Ozturk, B., & Tan, S. (2025). Identifying Twice-Exceptional Students: A Systematic Research Review. Journal of Advanced Academics, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X251387416
16. Shaheen HR’A (2025) The impact of early giftedness identification on long-term academic success: a cross-sectional study in King Abdullah II schools for excellence in Jordan. Front. Educ. 10:1594727. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1594727
17. Sipahi, Y., & Bahar, A. K. (2025). Mathematical Creativity: A Systematic Review of Definitions, Frameworks, and Assessment Practices. Education Sciences, 15(10), 1348. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15101348

18. Smeets, K., Rohaan, E., van der Ven, S., & Bakx, A. (2025). The effects of special educational needs and socioeconomic status on teachers' and parents' judgements of pupils' cognitive abilities. The British journal of educational psychology, 95(2), 321–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12719