Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales–School Form in China

Abstract

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...

Accuracy of teachers' judgments of students' academic achievement: A meta-analysis.

“…Whereas some studies ask teachers to judge students on a very specific ability (e.g., arithmetic skills; Karing, 2009), others ask them to judge students' overall academic achievement (e.g., Li, Pfeiffer, Petscher, Kumtepe, & Mo, 2008). Whereas some studies ask teachers to judge students on a very specific ability (e.g., arithmetic skills; Karing, 2009), others ask them to judge students' overall academic achievement (e.g., Li, Pfeiffer, Petscher, Kumtepe, & Mo, 2008).…”

Validation of an Arabic Version of the Gifted Rating Scales–School Form

“…The original GRS-S scores' validity and reliability were established in several research studies. For example, the reliability of the subscales using Cronbach's alpha above .90 was obtained in several studies (see Lee & Pfeiffer, 2006;Li et al, 2008;Mohamed et al, 2017;Rosado et al, 2015). For validity, several authors confirmed the six-factor structure of the scale (e.g., Li et al, 2008;Rosado et al, 2015).…”

“…Pfeiffer and Jarosewich (2007) used the GRS-S on a U.S. sample (291 boys and 301 girls), revealing that gender has a significant effect on the GRS-S subscales. Li et al (2008) examined the validity and reliability of the GRS-S scores on a sample of Chinese elementary and middle schools and found a six-factor solution and criterion-related validity for the scale scores. Pfeiffer et al (2008) examined the psychometric properties of the GRS-S samples in the Southwest United States and found high internal consistency.…”

“…This study is important for several reasons. First, no studies have been conducted to examine the gender and grade invariance of the scores of the Arabic version of the GRS-S. Only one study examined the measurement invariance of the GRS-S. Li et al (2008) examined the measurement invariance of the GRS-S across the United States, Puerto Rico, China, South Korea, and Turkey. Measurement instruments should be invariant across cultures for the meaningful interpretation of the results (Drasgow & Kanfer, 1985).…”

El enfoque basado en competencias aplicado a estudiantes con sobredotación intelectual, su potencial en América Latina

“…Debido a su incidencia de sesgos mayor a la del Coeficiente Intelectual (CI) o por basarse en observaciones cualitativas que no pueden traducirse a una medida cuantificable capaz de ser utilizada como estándar de identificación, el número del CI se sigue utilizando como una de las medidas cuantitativas más efectivas para el diagnóstico de sobredotación en el mundo (Giessman et al, 2013). Algunas escalas que han complementado a las de inteligencia han sido las de habilidades multidimensionales como el Gifted Rating School Score (GRS-S), que son usadas para determinar qué tipo de sobredotación expresa un alumno (Li, Pfeiffer, Petscher, Kumtepe y Mo, 2008).…”