The Measurement of Giftedness and the Implications on Gifted Program Selection

Presented to

Dr. David Stockburger

Missouri State University

In Partial Fulfillment

of PSY 527 and

requirements for the degree

Educational Specialist in Guidance and Assessment

Lori Brock

October 2014 Definitions There is no universally accepted definition of gifted children resulting in a plethora of definitions. The Federal definition of the term ‘gifted and talented,” when used with respect to students, children, or youth, means students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in such areas as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities." (No Child Left Behind Act, P.L. 107-110 (Title IX, Part A, Definition 22) (2002); 20 USC 7801(22) (2004)) The newest definition from the National Association for Gifted Children’s (NAGC) describes gifted children as those who demonstrate outstanding levels of aptitude (defined as an exceptional ability to reason and learn) or competence (documented performance or achievement in top 10% or rarer) in one or more domains. Domains include any structured area of activity with its own symbol system (e.g., mathematics, music, language) and/or set of sensorimotor skills (e.g., painting, dance, sports). Each state has it’s own definition of gifted; for example, the state of Missouri describes gifted children as children who exhibit precocious development of mental capacity and learning potential as determined by competent professional evaluation to the extent that continued educational growth and stimulation could best be served by an academic environment beyond that offered through a standard grade-level curriculum. (Missouri Rev. Stat. § 162.675) Programs serving a gifted population must determine which definition to operate from and how to measure high achievement, exceptional ability, or learning potential. Thus, one will find many differing methods of identifying gifted students within any one state. The definition of giftedness is a highly debated topic on all levels; is giftedness the amount of general intelligence an individual possesses or is it a group of specific abilities? To add to the confusion, many of the theories of intelligence have not yet been applied in gifted education, while others, i.e. the Theory of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1983), enjoy widespread application in all educational circles. In order to discuss measurement, the definition stated by Missouri will provide our definition of gifted children. It must be noted that Missouri provides school districts with a definition, but leaves it to the school district to establish criteria for identification and/or services. Measurement Missouri school districts use multi-faceted approaches to identify gifted students. Most use comprehensive individual Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests as one of several identifiers. The Wechsler tests, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV) and Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III), and the Stanford Binet (SB-5) are the most commonly used measurement tools for identifying gifted individuals. These standardized tests of intelligence are administered individually and assess IQ, which is how capable a person is of learning. IQ as it is measured today, is a statistically derived number that represents a test score's distance from the mean (average score of everyone tested), centered on 100, with each standard deviation (square root of variance) equaling 15 IQ points. NAGC recommends using the General Ability Index (GAI), the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) or the Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI) rather than the Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) when using the WISC-IV in identification of giftedness. These indices do not measure processing skills, due to the fact that gifted children may be reflective and perfectionistic which lowers their Processing Speed Index. Thus, the FSIQ often does not represent a child’s intellectual abilities as well as the GAI. The GAI emphasizes reasoning ability while the VCI and the PRI are especially useful for culturally diverse, bilingual, twice exceptional students or visual-spatial learners. Group achievement tests such as Terra Nova/CTBS, Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), California Achievement (CAT), Stanford Achievement (SAT), and state mandated grade level achievement tests as well as individual achievement tests such as the Woodcock-Johnson (WJ-III achievement), Wechsler (WIAT), Peabody (PIAT), and Kaufman (K-TEA) are also used to identify gifted individuals. These assess how much one has already learned when compared to the average of all children the same age across the United States. Other instruments play only a supplementary role in the identification of gifted children these include performance assessments, portfolios, rating scales and interviews. The Stanford- Binet (Form L-M), an excellent measure of abstract reasoning is also used as a supplementary test as it is the only IQ test that can discriminate individuals in the exceptionally and profoundly gifted range of intelligence. The identification process varies but often includes a rating scale used to refer/nominate a student for gifted services, who then is administered an achievement test as well as an IQ test. Other districts include performance assessments indicating creativity or leadership.

General discussion Problems with measuring giftedness are due to the lack of a universal definition of giftedness. School A may use an intelligence test and an achievement test to identify it’s gifted students, school B may use an achievement test and a rating scale, and school C may use a portfolio and an intelligence test. The Missouri Scholars Academy (MSA) which identifies 300 gifted rising Missouri juniors for a three week summer program uses the following selection criteria: GPA, student scores from a variety of intelligence and aptitude tests score, student essays, and evidence of leadership, creativity, intellectual curiosity, problem solving ability and initiative. Each year students who have participated for years in Missouri school gifted programs do not qualify for MSA due to the lack of consensus regarding criteria for gifted services across the state. It is important that a good match be made between the strengths of a child and the attributes of the gifted program; hopefully that explains some of the differing identification processes. However, if a child is gifted in any area, a program should be available to meet their individual learning needs, thus assessment tools must be carefully selected in order to identify students with matching attributes to available programming. Students with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds as well as those students from low socioeconomic backgrounds often do not qualify due to the normed population for each of the tests. The Wechsler tests are standardized on children in proportion to their distribution in the American population. However, the Nonverbal scale of the SB5 can be used with non-English speaking children. Rarely are students gifted in the domains included in the arts or those gifted in leadership areas included in gifted programing, due to a lack of technically sound screening instruments for those domains. While STEM is a current buzzword in education circles attracting grant money and publicity, the students most capable of leading the future arenas of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics are not served or remain unidentified due to state budget cuts leading to gifted programming cuts. However, the federal mandated Special Education Services, of which I now am part of as a School Psychological Examiner, are required to not only serve all but to find children who qualify that might attend private schools or homeschools. This is relevant in that the Special Education definitions are universal thanks to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Thus, the measurement process, although full of paperwork, is successfully identifying students for services that they then derive benefits from.

Conclusion A definition of giftedness must be agreed upon across each state at the very least. A variety of assessment tools can then be selected in order to bring uniformity to the measurement of giftedness. Program goals and objectives will be brought into line with that definition and teachers (regular education, special education and teachers of gifted students) will be educated regarding the needs and characteristics of gifted children. Accurately identification of gifted students for gifted programs designed with their needs in mind will benefit all the educational stakeholders in a school district. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books Inc. Jarosewich, T., Pfeiffer, S. I., & Morris, J. A. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 322-336.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2011) Taking a bold step. Compass Points. 4 (11), pp. 1-2

Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 161–169.

Roeper, A. (1982). How the gifted cope with their emotions. Roeper Review, 5 (2), 21 – 24.

Silverman, L. K. (2002). Upside-Down Brilliance: The Visual-Spatial Learner. Denver: DeLeon.

Stephens, K.R., and F.A. Karnes. 2000. State definitions for the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children 66(2): 219-38.