Identification of Gifted and Talented Youth for Educational Programs

Feldhusen, John F.; Jarwan, Fathi A.

doi:10.1016/b978-008043796-5/50020-6

Cited by 63 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Modern conceptions of giftedness receive little attention in the typical school setting. In the United States, a global IQ score is still the dominant criterion used for acceptance into gifted programs at the grade-school level (Abeel, Callahan, & Hunsaker, 1994;Feldhusen & Jarwan, 2000;Tannenbaum, 1986). In fact, several states still prescribe a minimum score on an intelligence test in order for a gifted program to be eligible for funding (U.S. Department of Education, 1993).…”

Section: What Is the Dominant Model In The United States Today? When mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptions of Giftedness

Kaufman¹,

Sternberg²

2008

Handbook of Giftedness in Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Johnny, a 9-year-old elementary school student, has an IQ of 140, which would qualify him as "gifted" by virtually any IQ-based definition of giftedness anyone might use. Johnny has few friends, in large part because he has very poor social skills. Johnny has no hobbies to speak of, and is unengaged in significant extracurricular activities outside of school. And despite his IQ, Johnny is a good, but not great, student.Davy is also 9 and is in the same school as Johnny. He has an IQ of 120, which would quality him as "gifted" by some, but not other IQ-based definitions of giftedness. Davy is very active in sports and is the best soccer player of any age in his school. He also is a highly talented trombonist, and is first trombone in the elementary-school orchestra. His teacher believes he has the potential for a career in musical performance, should he wish to follow that path. Davy is very popular and is one of the top three academic performers in his class.Who is gifted? Johnny? Davy? Both? Or neither? In answering this question, four things must be kept in mind.First, "giftedness" is a label-nothing more. We are frequently asked whether such-and-such or so-and-so child is gifted. The answer depends on the criteria one sets. But there is no one absolute or "correct" set of criteria. Criteria for such labeling are a matter of opinion, nothing more, and there are many disagreements as to how the label should be applied.Second, the label can be applied in either a more general or a more specific way. The more general way implies that giftedness is relatively general across many domains-that is, someone is either gifted or not. On this view, someone who is gifted is gifted very broadly. The more specific way implies that giftedness is something that is potentially limited to one or several narrow domains-for example, verbal skills; or within the verbal domain, writing skills; or within the writing domain, fiction-writing skills. Indeed, relatively few successful fiction writers are also successful nonfiction writers, and vice versa.

show abstract

Section: What Is the Dominant Model In The United States Today? When mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptions of Giftedness

Kaufman¹,

Sternberg²

2008

Handbook of Giftedness in Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, some popular scales consist of nonrepresentative standardization normative samples with low interrater reliability and lack of diagnostic precision (Jarosewich et al, 2002;Siegel & Powell, 2004). Some rating scales only measure specific subject areas such as math, language, foreign language, social studies, business, and shop mechanical skills (Feldhusen & Jarwan, 2000). Some researchers have even voiced concerns about the validity and reliability of teacher nomination and ratings of gifted children (Hoge & Coladarci, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales–School Form in China

Pfeiffer

Petscher

et al. 2008

Gifted Child Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Gifted Rating Scales-School Form (GRS-S), a teacher-completed rating scale, is designed to identify five types of giftedness and motivation. This study examines the reliability and validity of a Chinese-translated version of the GRS-S with a sample of Chinese elementary and middle school students (N = 499). The Chinese GRSS was found to have high internal consistency. Results of the confirmatory factor analysis corroborated the six-factor solution of the original GRS-S. Comparison of the GRS-S scores and measures of academic performance provide preliminary support for the criterion validity of the Chinese-translated GRS-S. Significant age and gender differences on the Chinese GRS-S were found. Results provide preliminary support for the Chinese version of the GRS-S as a reliable and valid measure of giftedness for Chinese students. Keywordsgifted rating scales; Chinese children; reliability; validity Hundreds of thousands of school-age children in the United States and worldwide are considered annually for programs for the gifted and talented (Pfeiffer & Jarosewich, 2003). Exceptional general intelligence was once thought to be the hallmark of giftedness but now is regarded as only one manifestation of giftedness. Recent theories emphasize the multidimensionality of outstanding abilities (e.g., Gardner, 1983;Sternberg, 1997; Tannenbaum, 2000). Although most people think only of intellectual giftedness, children display artistic, musical, athletic, dramatic, interpersonal, aesthetic, leadership, creative, and other gifts. Screening and identifying different types of gifted students have been regarded as challenging and important tasks to ensure that gifted students receive the special resources and services that they need to reach their full potential (Gallagher, 2003;Pfeiffer, 2002). One problem with the current identification process is that most instruments are designed to measure only intellectual factors. There are few reliable screening tools available to complement intelligence tests in providing assessment of multiple dimensions of giftedness (Jarosewich, Pfeiffer, & Morris, 2002). Several standardized achievement tests, such as Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (Hoover, Hieronymus, Dunbar, & Frisbie, 2001) and California Basic Educational Skills Test (National Evaluation Systems, 2005), have been used in the identification process. One disadvantage in using standardized achievement tests is that they are not sufficiently difficult to measure students' high ability, knowledge, and (Davis & Rimm, 2004). Another problem regarding the current identification process is that some instruments do not include representative norms, although they may consist of multiple types of giftedness (Richert, Alvino, & McDonnel, 1982). HHS Public AccessA number of teacher rating scales have been developed to assess intellectual and academic giftedness. However, many of the rating scales suffer from limitations that compromise their diagnostic value (Jarosewich et al., 2002). For example, some popular scales consist of...

show abstract

“…For academic acceleration programs and related evaluation studies see Heller and Reimann (2002). Methodological problems of talent search for gifted programs are treated by Hany (1993Hany ( , 1997Hany ( , 2001Hany ( , 2004 and Neber (2004) or-with international perspectivesby Feldhusen and Jarwan (2000), Kanevsky (2000), Sternberg and Grigorenko (2002), and Sternberg and Subotnik (2000).…”

Section: German Gifted Program Activities and Their Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Education and Counseling of the Gifted and Talented in Germany

Heller

2005

Int J Adv Counselling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the principle reasons responsible for the fact that nurturing the gifted and talented in Germany has (once again) advanced to a pedagogic concern in the 1990's lies in the dichotomy of equality and excellence. Are these two pedagogic goals actually incompatible, as often maintained in open discussions? After a long period of oscillation between these two poles, in the age of information a new emphasis has increasingly been placed on excellence. "It becomes more and more important for bright students to be using their abilities to stimulate this new era with economic and political productivity. But this will not happen if the current 'laissez faire' approach to gifted students continues into the next decade" (Gallagher, 2000, p. 691). Following a short definition of giftedness and related conceptions, arguments for gifted education stemming from the areas of learning psychology and instructional psychology will be discussed. The central problems concerning identification and programming will then be addressed in greater detail. Hypotheses will be developed, on the basis of the ATI model that gifted students need creative, stimulating learning environments. Various approaches will be presented here and discussed in the context of TIMSS and PISA. The second part of the article will deal with guidance and counseling issues with respect to the special needs of gifted children and adolescents and their social contact persons (peers, parents, teachers). In conclusion, German program evaluation, studies in the fields of gifted education, counseling and nurturing giftedness and talent will be presented. The outcomes of these studies and their consequences for improvements for the quality of gifted and talented education and counseling in Germany will be discussed. Excellence is one of the most important educationalpsychological challenges of the new century.

show abstract

Identification of Gifted and Talented Youth for Educational Programs

Cited by 63 publications

References 38 publications

Conceptions of Giftedness

Conceptions of Giftedness

Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales–School Form in China

Education and Counseling of the Gifted and Talented in Germany

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About