Roeper Review, 33:170–181, 2011 Copyright © The Roeper Institute ISSN: 0278-3193 print / 1940-865X online DOI: 10.1080/02783193.2011.580500 Gifted Girls: Gender Bias in Gifted Referrals Margarita Bianco, Bryn Harris, Dorothy Garrison-Wade, and Nancy Leech The goal of this mixed-methods study was to explore the effect of gender on teachers’ willingness to refer students to a gifted and talented program. Teachers (N = 28) were provided with one of two profiles (i.e., female or male) describing a gifted student. Results indicated that teachers’ decisions for referral to gifted programs were significantly influenced by the student’s gender; teachers were much less willing to refer a female student than an identically described male student to gifted programs. Further, qualitative analysis revealed that teachers’ descrip- tions of students and reasons for their referral decisions differed considerably based on the student’s gender. Responses illustrated gender bias in teachers’ perceptions, expectations, and beliefs about the profiled students. Implications for practice are discussed. Keywords: gender bias, gifted, girls, teacher referral Females, as well as gifted and talented females, have his- torically faced many challenges and inequalities within the educational system. The challenges are complex and can inhibit females from reaching their full potential during their school years and beyond. Among the many barriers that girls face are the biases that teachers’ have based on gender (M. Sadker & Sadker, 1994). Given that one of the most com- mon methods for screening students for gifted identification includes teachers’ observations and nominations (Coleman, Gallagher, & Foster, 1994; Hallahan, Kauffman, & Pullen, 2009), teachers’ perceptions of students, and teachers’ unin- tended biases, it is critically important that we examine which students teachers nominate for gifted programs and why the students were chosen. In the current study we asked what the effect of students’ gender on teachers’ nominations is for gifted referrals and what this means for gifted girls. We begin with a brief background on the literature regarding teacher nominations and the effects of teacher bias as well as gender bias, followed by a brief explanation of the cur- rent study. We then present the quantitative and qualitative findings followed by discussion and the implications of the current study. Received 13 October 2009; accepted 23 March 2010. Address correspondence to Margarita Bianco, School of Education and Human Development, University of Colorado Denver, 1380 Lawrence Street, Room 640, Campus Box 106, P. O. Box 1733364, Denver, CO 80217-3364. E-mail: Margarita.Bianco@ucdenver.edu TEACHER REFERRALS Classroom teachers play a very important role in the ini- tial identification of gifted students. Although methods for identifying gifted and talented students vary widely between states and local school districts, it is frequently teachers’ rat- ings and nominations that form the initial pool of students to be formally tested for identification of giftedness (Davis & Rimm, 2004; Richert, 1997). In other words, teachers’ judgments and recommendations of whom to include for formal assessment often becomes the first step in the iden- tification process. As such, gaining access to gifted/talented identification and services is often dependent on teachers’ perceptions. This “gatekeeper” role is an “obvious potential source of unfairness in the entrance process” (McBee, 2006, p. 103). Relying on teachers’ judgments and ability to accu- rately identify gifted students has been widely debated over the last several decades (Gagné, 1994; Hoge & Cudmore, 1986; Pegnato & Birch, 1959). In Pegnato and Birch’s clas- sic study, they examined the effectiveness of various methods for identifying gifted students and reported that teachers were ineffective at identifying students who had an IQ over 130. Simply stated, the results of their study indicated that teachers’ judgments related to students’cognitive abilities were unreliable. Although Pegnato and Birch are frequently cited to support the notion that teachers are unreliable when asked to identify gifted students in their classrooms, their study has been criticized for the research methodol- ogy employed (see Gagné). Gagné re-evaluated Pegnato and Birch’s methodology and computed a correlation coefficient