A dataset containing demographic information, gifted nomination status, and gifted identification status for all elementary school students in the state of Georgia (N = 705,074) was examined. The results indicated that automatic and teacher referrals were much more valuable than other referral sources. Asian and White students were much more likely to be nominated than Black or Hispanic students. Students receiving free or reduced-price lunches were much less likely to be nominated than students paying for their own lunches. The results suggest that inequalities in nomination, rather than assessment, may be the primary source of the underrepresentation of minority and low-SES students in gifted programs.

The disproportional representation of students from various demographic subgroups within identified gifted and talented populations has long frustrated policy makers, education advocates, researchers practitioners within the field, and those concerned with societal inequality in general. Despite the prevalence of articles in the media reporting on disproportional representation, little research has been conducted to track whether (a) the representation of these student subgroups, particularly students with limited English proficiency or students with disabilities, has changed over time or (b) states with and without policies differ in proportional representation of students identified with gifts and talents. For example, increasingly, gifted education advocates have pushed for mandates that all students be screened for gifted program eligibility as a way to combat disproportionality, despite little evidence that such methods influence proportionality. Therefore, this study sought to understand whether and how state and national gifted program demographics have changed over time and how proportionality is correlated with state mandates for gifted education identification or services. A preprint of this paper as well as additional figures are available at: https://osf.io/325m9/ .

The Fall 2009 issue of Gifted Child Quarterly focused on dispelling a wide range of myths related to the identification of gifted students (Borland, 2009;Callahan, 2009;Friedman-Nimz, 2009; Worrell) and touched on the ever-increasing prevalence of using multiple measures as a best practice in gifted and talented identification. In addition, the 2008-2009 State of the States Report (National Association for Gifted Children [NAGC], 2009) noted that multiple measures have become the most common form of identification for admission into gifted education programs used across the responding states. Multiple measures are used to improve aspects of measurement and evaluation, such as reliability, validity, fairness, and security. However, simply using multiple measures does not guarantee improvement in any of these areas (Chester, 2003;Cronbach, Linn, Brennan, & Haertel, 1997). In the context of student achievement, the use of multiple measures to improve these areas has been explored (Douglas & Mislevy, 2010; Erpenbach, Carlson, LaMarca, Winter, & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2002;Ryan, 2002); however, little research has considered the use of multiple measures in the context of identification of gifted students. Despite the increasing level of prevalence in state regulations and best practices, the degree to which schools and school districts correctly apply multiple measures for identification purposes remains unknown. Lohman (2006) and Lohman and Renzulli ( 2007) presented examples for combinations, but no research has documented the effectiveness of such methods in identifying gifted and talented students. Despite commonplace reference to the use of multiple measures in almost all aspects of education, including gifted education identification, no studies have evaluated the variability in the identified gifted populations that occurs when different combination methods are implemented. Literature Review Historical PracticesThe question regarding "Who are the gifted?" has raged for nearly 100 years, and yet only the weakest consensus exists on this topic. In fact, a recent study by Dai, Swanson, and Cheng (2011) noted that identification remains one of the most studied topics in the scholarly literature related to gifted education. Most states have formalized the definition regarding how to identify gifted and talented students. As of 2009, 41 of the 47 responding states reported having a formal definition (NAGC, 2009). Within these 41 states, the most common areas included (in order of prevalence) were intellectual, creative, performing/visual arts, specific academic, and leadership. However, of these 41states, only 29 states require its use by all local education agencies. Despite this variability, those states that have a specific definition and require its use

The use of the nomination stage as the first step in the identification process is pervasive across the field of gifted education. In many cases, nominations are used to limit the number of students who will need to be evaluated using costly and time-consuming assessments for the purpose of gifted program identification and placement. This study evaluated the effect of the nomination stage on the overall efficacy of a gifted identification system. Results showed that in nearly all conditions, identification systems that require a nomination before testing result in a large proportion of gifted students being missed. Under commonly implemented conditions, the nomination stage can cause the false negative rate to easily exceed 60%. Changes to identification practices are urgently needed in order to ensure that larger numbers of gifted students receive appropriate educational placement and to maintain the integrity of gifted education services.

This study examined the relationship between repetitive behaviors and sensory processing issues in school-aged children with high functioning autism (HFA). Children with HFA (N = 61) were compared to healthy, typical controls (N = 64) to determine the relationship between these behavioral classes and to examine whether executive dysfunction explained any relationship between the variables. Particular types of repetitive behavior (i.e., stereotypy and compulsions) were related to sensory features in autism; however, executive deficits were only correlated with repetitive behavior. This finding suggests that executive dysfunction is not the shared neurocognitive mechanism that accounts for the relationship between restricted, repetitive behaviors and aberrant sensory features in HFA. Group status, younger chronological age, presence of sensory processing issues, and difficulties with behavior regulation predicted the presence of repetitive behaviors in the HFA group. KeywordsAutism Spectrum Disorder; Repetitive Behaviors; Sensory Features; Executive Function Repetitive behaviors comprise one faction of the triad of clinical symptoms that characterize autism spectrum disorder (ASD), presenting concomitantly with social and communication deficits. Restricted, repetitive behaviors (RRBs) in autism refer to an assemblage of behaviors defined by their topographical similarity across contexts, inappropriateness, and repetition. These behaviors have been conceptualized as part of a continuum that ranges from lower order (stereotypy, self-injury) to higher order (compulsions, rituals /sameness, restricted interests) (Carcani-Rathwell, Rabe-Hasketh, & Santosh, 2006; Cucarro et al., 2003;Hus, Pickles, Cook, Risi, & Lord, 2006;Turner, 1999). Higher order behaviors, specifically the presence of restricted/narrow interests, odd object attachments or unusual object preoccupations (e.g., fascination with ceiling fans), are thought to be more unique to autism in comparison to other types of repetitive behaviors (e.g., self-injury) (Lam, Bodfish, & Piven, 2008 Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptRes Autism Spectr Disord. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 April 5. The clinical presentation of repetitive behaviors in autism has been linked to deficits in executive functioning (Turner, 1999). Executive function is an umbrella term for a set of subfunctions that are integrated throughout cortical and subcortical areas of the brain and used to carry out higher order cognitive tasks (O'Hearn, Asato, Ordaz, & Luna, 2008;Zelazo, Carter...