Comparison of Traditional and Problem Solving Assessment Criteria

Abstract

A B S T R AC T Identifying students who are gifted has been grounded traditionally in criteria emphasizing unitary measures of intellectual ability, which has caused great concern for educators interested in identifying academic talent and potential in culturally and linguistically diverse students. Recently, multiple intelligences (MI) theory has been examined as an alternative perspective with promise for addressing concerns evident in groups identified using traditional methods. To date, research on the effectiveness of assessment practices grounded in MI theory has been sparse. The purpose of this research was to describe the performance of elementary school children on an alternative screening measure designed for use in identifying students who are gifted. The Problem Solving Assessment procedure represented an application of MI theory, and decisions made using it were compared to those that would be made using a more traditional, unitary approach to identification. Positive relations were evident among scores for different types of intelligences and between them and the traditional measure. More importantly, different groups of students were identified using each approach, with a more diverse population generated with the Problem Solving Assessment procedure. The results are discussed with regard to ongoing practices and future directions in gifted education. For many years, identification of students who are gifted and talented has been grounded in the definition suggested by Marland (1972):Gifted and talented children are those identified by professionally qualified persons who by virtue of outstanding abilities are capable of high performance. These are children who require differentiated educational programs and services beyond those normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize their contribution to self and society.Children capable of high performance include those with demonstrated achievement and/or potential ability in any of the following areas:

Identifying Exceptional Talent in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Increasing Diversity and Assessing Creative Problem-Solving

“…The balance changed in the targeted schools to more equitable percentages after DISCOVER was incorporated into the identification process: Hispanic, 73.5% in the eight schools and 71.5% served in special programs in the schools; White, 21% in the schools and 26.5% in the special programs; African American, 4.2% in the schools and 2.0% in special programs. In a school district with a high percentage of African American students, the balance was changed to reflect the ethnic balance in the school district when an assessment modified from DISCOVER was used as an identification tool (Reid et al, 1999;Romanoff et al, 2009). The conceptual framework for these and the new assessments that were created using the same framework are presented in the following sections.…”

“…Not only were students from diverse and traditionally underrepresented groups identified through DISCOVER shown to be exceptionally talented, but they were successful in programs for gifted students or in regular education programs (Reid et al, 1999;Romanoff et al, 2009;Sak & Maker, 2003;Erdimez & Maker, 2015). For example, Erdimez and Maker (2015) found that the combined scores on the components of the DISCOVER assessment administered at the beginning of Grade 3 explained 43.9% of the variance in American Indian students' overall achievement at the end of Grade 4, whereas an often-used nonverbal test of intelligence explained only 19.5% of the variance in achievement in the same group of students (Tan & Maker, 2015).…”

“…These results are similar to the findings of researchers who compared students selected with the DISCOVER performance-based assessments of creative problem-solving with students selected by conventional methods such as IQ and achievement. The percentages of students selected using DISCOVER and a performance-based assessment modified from DISCOVER paralleled the percentages of individuals with certain demographic characteristics in the populations of low-income, highly diverse students in the schools in several areas, including the following: race/ethnicity (Nielson, 1994;Reid et al, 1999;Romanoff et al, 2009), ancestral origin, preferred language, second language, religious preference, birthplace of parents, mobility, family income, family home, parents' occupation, parents' educational attainment, degrees earned, teaching experience, identified as gifted, and work or volunteer at a school (Nielson, 1994).…”

Identifying and Serving English Learners in Gifted Education: Looking Back and Moving Forward

“…Although there was no main effect for assessment activity or ethnicity, ethnicity moderated assessment activity results: White Americans received the highest scores in math, South Pacific/Pacific Islanders in oral linguistic categories, and Native Americans in spatial artistic oral linguistic categories. As such, performance-based assessments may have potential for identifying more diverse groups of students than tests of cognitive abilities (Reid et al, 1999;Sarouphim, 2005;Sarouphim & Maker, 2010).…”

Project stream:A 13‐year follow‐up of a pre‐college program for middle‐ and high‐school underrepresented gifted

“…Revised theories of giftedness reflect more inclusiveness mat embraces a wider variety of abilities and talents (Gardner, 1983;Sternberg, 1981). Educators continue to seek alternative means of identification to match the multidimensional definition of giftedness (Borland & Wright, 1994;Clasen, 1993;Frasier, 1994;Maker, 1996;Reid, Udall, Romanoff, & Algozzine, 1999). Specific efforts have concentrated on programs designed to recognize and to develop a range of talents in traditionally underserved groups.…”