Research Question: Do school districts with higher participation in gifted and talented programs tend to receive higher accountability ratings?
Dependent Variable (x): DZRATING: District Accountability Rating (scale is A-F); measures academic performance based on student achievement, progress, and achievement gap closure.
Independent Variable (y): DPFPAGIFP: % Gifted & Talented Education; percentage of students participating in gifted and talented programs within the district.
Null Hypothesis: There is no effect of gifted program participation on accountability rating. Districts with higher percentages of students in gifted programs do not differ significantly in their accountability ratings compared to those with fewer gifted students.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is an effect of gifted program participation on accountability rating. Districts with a higher proportion of students in gifted and talented programs are more likely to earn higher accountability ratings.
I would be looking at whether districts that have a larger percentage of students in gifted and talented programs also tend to perform better overall on the established accountability ratings. The dependent variable (DZRATING) shows how each district performs under the Texas Education Agency’s A to F Accountability System, which captures things like student achievement, growth, and equity. The independent variable (DPFPAGIFP) shows the percentage of students identified as gifted and participating in advanced learning opportunities.
This question is interesting to me because gifted programs often come with extra academic challenge, enriched curriculum, and smaller learning environments that could potentially boost overall performance. It seems reasonable to think that districts investing in these programs might also have strong academic systems in general. At the same time, it’s possible that higher gifted participation happens more often in districts with greater resources or wealth, so any connection might reflect access and opportunity rather than the program itself. Or even that they want to place emphasis on the higher achieving students rather than investing in the academic performance across the school; though this might be a reach.
By comparing how many students participate in gifted programs with how well districts perform overall, this hypothesis would look at whether gifted education could be one factor tied to academic success. If the data shows a real relationship, that might suggest gifted programs are part of what makes certain districts excel, or that they’re a sign of other advantages that help boost performance. It could also raise further questions about whether higher participation in gifted programs reflects a misallocation of resources, suggesting that more emphasis might be needed on achievement for all students, rather than focusing additional resources on those identified as ‘gifted.’. Either way, it’s a clear and testable question using the data available.