1. Identification / Assessment of Gifted Learners Dr. Georgann Toop Dr. Jennifer Scrivner

2. What is identification of the gifted? A process by which educators attempt to become aware of students whose ability, motivational patters, self-concept, and creative capabilities are above and beyond everyone else. We will discuss: major issues/concerns of identification methods to deal with these issues general set of guidelines

3. Search, Screening and Identification Issues and Procedures: Intellectual ability High Achievement Specific academic ability Creative ability Leadership/Motivation Visual/Performing Arts Barbara Clark (2004)

4. Research suggests…. A comprehensive identification program should provide the following: Evidence that students demonstrate extraordinary ability in relationship to their age/peer group Evidence of the range of capabilities and needs Processes that measure potential as well as achievement Methods to seek out and identify students from varying linguistic, economic, and cultural backgrounds, and special populations. Implications for educational planning Smith, Dean, Kaplan (1990)

5. Measuring Intelligence Standardized measures have changed little in 30 years  Sternberg – information processing framework with outlined components of giftedness  Feuerstein – IQ measures what people already know, which is not as important as what they can learn or where their cognitive deficiencies lie  WISC-R (1949,1958 and recently)  Stanford-Binet (1916, 1937, 1960, and recently)  CogAT (1983)  Inclusive vs. Exclusive “the danger of false negative is a real one…the danger of false positives is not”

6. Reliability (Accuracy in Measurement) Reliable: standardized tests Not so reliable: rating scales, self-concept inventories, and observation systems Reliability must be present to a high degree for the identification process to be fair.

7. Ceiling Effect (Obscuring their True Achievement) 95% or above on grade level tests Solution: Off grade-level testing/above grade level testing.

8. Tests Used in Identification Ability Tests CogAT – Cognitive Abilities Test The Raven – MAT – Millers Analogy Test Wechsler – WISC III /WISC R Stanford Binet Intelligence Test – SB IV Achievement Tests ITBS - Iowa Test of Basic Skills FCAT- Florida Achievement Test – nationally normed 2 years ago Stanford 9

9. Screening Nomination forms Teacher reports of student functioning Family history/student background Peer identification Student inventory Student products/achievements/grades Multidimensional screen tests None should be used alone; all should be used in combination

10. What does the research tell us…. Teachers most often choose children like themselves as gifted Teachers typically identify 45% of the children in classes who were cognitively gifted, actually missing 55%. Further, of the children they nominated only 26% actually qualify; 74% do not qualify 25% of the gifted go through school undetected Teacher effectiveness in gifted identification drops from 45% in middle school to 10% in kindergarten Teacher effectiveness is improved with 5 day training sessions (Pegnato & Birch 2000) (Gear 1978)

11. Research on Parents …….. Jacobs (1971) found that parents could identify 76% of the gifted children in a kindergarten classroom. This is significantly higher than the teacher’s ability at that level.

12. The Six Principles 1. Advocacy – should be what is best for all 2. Defensibility – research based 3. Equity – should guarantee no one is overlooked 4. Pluralism – broadest definition of giftedness 5. Pragmatism – should allow for modification 6. Comprehensiveness – as many as possible gifted learners should be identified and served National Report on Identification, Assessment and Recommendations for Comprehensive Identification of Gifted and Talented Youth