Running Head: INTELLECTUAL GIFTEDNESS and ATHLETIC TALENT

Intellectual Giftedness 1

Running head: INTELLECTUAL GIFTEDNESS AND ATHLETIC TALENT

Connections Between Intellectual Giftedness and Athletic Talent

Caley P. Roark

Millersville University Intellectual Giftedness 2

The purpose of this research proposal is to gather enough evidence to support the hypothesis that high school students identified as intellectually gifted are also more likely to excel in the field of athletics. 200 public high school students will participate: half of those will be previously identified as intellectually gifted, half will have no such identification.

Because current research identifies multiple ways of evaluating athletes, three aspects of athletic talent identification will be uses. First, athletes will be assessed on biological ability or raw skill. Secondly, athletes will be assessed using statistics gathered from on-field performances. Finally, each athlete’s coach will assess them based on their experience working with high school athletes. These three pieces of data will generate an “Athletic Talent Number” for each athlete; the means for both groups will be processed in a t-test to see if a connection exists and if the hypothesis is supported. Intellectual Giftedness 3

Schools often apply labels to children to help educators provide individualized needs-specific instruction.

Sometimes these labels are transpicuous and provide the uninitiated with enough information to begin understanding the child's needs. Often, however, these labels are too ambiguous and cause more frustration than comprehension. The terms gifted and talented fall into the latter category; definitions and usage differ from author to author (Tranckle & Cushion, 2006, p.

267) and can apply to both intellectual and athletic contexts.

To ease this confusion, educational researcher Françoys

Gagné developed the Differentiated Model of Giftedness and

Talent (DMGT) (2000). The DMGT (Appendix A) serves to not only define the terms giftedness and talent, but also seeks to document the process connecting the two. Basically, Jaqcues van

Rossum and Gagné define giftedness as "the possession and use of high natural abilities…in at least one of four ability domains."

(2006, p. 283) These four domains are Intellectual, Creative,

Socioaffective, and sensoriMotor. To possess “high natural abilities” one must demonstrate a level of performance among the top 10% of same-age peers, in any of the domains (van Rossum &

Gagné 2006, p. 283).

Through what the DMGT calls the Developmental Process, these natural abilities are applied in areas of human activity, and developed into Systematically Developed Skills (SYSDEV). Intellectual Giftedness 4

These skills are organized into fields that are relevant to school-age children and adolescents; they are: Academics, Arts,

Business, Leisure, Social action, Sports, and Technology. A student who demonstrates proficiency in any of these areas is considered talented.

To transfer giftedness into a talent, Gagné’s Developmental

Process includes informal and formal learning and practice. For instance, a student who demonstrates giftedness in the sensoriMotor domain does not necessarily possess an innate ability to throw a dominating curveball, shoot free throws at a high percentage, or be a successful gymnast. It is through training and practice that the student develops those skills and becomes talented in the field of sports. Similar examples could be made for those students who are gifted in the other domains.

It should be noted that the Developmental Process is not limited to learning and practice. Gagné includes catalysts such as the environment, intrapersonal characteristics, and chance

(van Rossum & Gagné, 2006, p. 283). These factors can promote or impede development. Using the sensoriMotor/Sports example from above, even a gifted student who receives pitching training might not develop into a talented pitcher if the his culture does not value pitching as a skill. Similarly, if the same student does not possess the needed intrapersonal skills, such as maturity or dedication, the talent will not develop. This Intellectual Giftedness 5 leads to an important realization of the DMGT: one must be gifted to be talented, but being gifted does not automatically presume talent.

While Gagne identifies four domains of giftedness, most educational institutions focus primarily on only two of the domains. The Pennsylvania Department of Education only identifies students based on Intellect and Creativity

(Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2004, p. 11). According to the Pennsylvania Gifted Guidelines, a student is identified as "gifted" when they possess a year or more above grade level achievement, retention/acquisition reflecting gifted ability, an expertise in one or more subject areas, and early skill development (2004, 12-13).

This final criterion is a common one outside of government institutions. Johns Hopkins University operates a yearly search for highly gifted students, where an important criterion is a score of 700 on the SAT, a primarily mathematical and verbal test, before age 13 (Brody, 2005, p. 88). A study by Kwang-Han

Song and Marion Porath identifies giftedness based exclusively on cognitive characteristics, including creativity and visual sensitivity (or observation)(2005, p. 230). Clearly, in the education realm, only the intellectual and creative domains described by Gagne define giftedness. There is little emphasis placed on the socioaffective and sensoriMotor domains. Intellectual Giftedness 6

Students identified as gifted by school psychologists often possess a common set of behavioral, social, and cognitive characteristics beyond those used for identification. A high degree of energy, perfectionism, and idealism are common traits among gifted students (Song & Porath, 2005, p. 233).

Multipotentiality, or the ability to develop high levels of competency across a diverse set of abilities and interests, can be both a blessing and a curse for gifted students (Dixon &

Moon, 2006, p. 75). Underachievement can plague students who feel that this high level of potential means eventual unattainable success. (Dixon & Moon, 2006, p. 77). Socially, students who are identified gifted find meaningful friendships both in school and through heavy attendance in summer experiences and extracurricular activities (Brody, 2005, p. 91).

While educational institutions tend to focus on the first two of Gagné’s domains, there has been little effort to identify students using the sensoriMotor domain. By simply proposing a gifted domain focused around a natural physical ability, Gagne is a leader in the identification of gifted athletes (Tranckle and Cushion, 2006, p. 267). Educational psychologist Mihaly

Csikszentmihalyi’s work supports Gagné’s Developmental Process; he argues that environment, specifically social constructs, define when a person is labeled talented (Tranckle and Cushion,

2006, p. 266). Csikszentmihalyi might argue that in areas where Intellectual Giftedness 7 sport is of little value, the talented pitcher from the aforementioned example might not be labeled as talented. This argument could be extended as a reason that gifted athletes are not identified: athletics, within the educational school day, have little value (Baker & Cote, 2003, p. 139).

However, outside of educational institutions, many argue that children who are athletically gifted (those with natural ability in the sensoriMotor domain) need to be identified

(Ellis, 229). The Australian Institute for Health (AIH) “noted that there is a need to actively unearth talent1 in order for nations to remain internationally competitive.” (Tranckle and

Cushion, 2006, 265) The AIH maintains a very elaborate and extensive program called the National Talent Identification and

Development (NTID) program.

The purpose of the NTID, according to its website, “is to identify and subsequently fast track the development of potential elite athletes to an Olympic and World Championship level of competition.” The NTID looks at a multitude of sports, including boxing, cycling, diving, and rowing (Australian

Institute of Sport, 2007). Similarly, the International

Basketball Federation holds its own talent identification program (FIBA, 2007). Companies such as TRACS, Inc. are founded

1 Note the ongoing discrepancy in the use of the word talent, which here refers more closely to Gagné’s definition of giftedness (Gagne 2006) Intellectual Giftedness 8 and operation around the premise that elite athletes can be identified at a young age and coached to international success2

(TRACS, 2007).

Recognizing that there are environments where identifying gifted athletes is valued (or profitable), the question then becomes “What models are used to identify gifted athletes?”

Brad McGregor (2007) argues that athletic giftedness identification methods have existed in some form since at least the 1970s. He cites an example of a swimming coach lining up swimmers by the pool, and selecting those with “splayed-out” feet for the breaststroke (McGregor 2007, p. 3). While this is a very informal example, it does equate to a very basic form of athletic gifted identification.

Beyond simple visual inspections, gifted athletes may be found by tracking very conventional physical concepts: time, weight, height, and distance (van Rossum & Gagne, 2006, p.287).

Showing exceptional physical coordination before age 2 or

being identified as a promising high-level gymnast at age 4

are examples of outstanding precocity. And precocity,

which is the demonstration of abilities typical of much

older individuals, is a trademark of high natural abilities

2 Again, Gagne and Csikszentmihalyi’s research hold: in organizations where gifted athletes are valued, they are identified (Gagne 2006; Trankle and Cushion 2006) Intellectual Giftedness 9

(the giftedness in the DMGT). (van Rossum and Gagne, 2006,

Darlene A. Kulka, a physical education and sport science professor at Kennesaw State University, identifies three categories of sport giftedness/talent identification. The first two, called Morphological and Motor, test physical and physiological characteristics, such as length and relationships among segment lengths, flexibility, and reaction times (Kulka,

2003, p. 7). New research is being conducted to see if gene- based technology might be viable as an identification process

(McGregor 2007, p.9).

However, because those organizations that search for gifted athletes often focus on specific sports, it is often more practical to identify developed talent than raw giftedness.

Again, specific skills in any one specific sport represent developed talent, not natural ability, i.e. no one is born with the innate ability to thrown a curveball. Because of the motivation to find athletes in specific sports, most of the research available focuses on athletic talent identification, rather than sensoriMotor gifted identification.

The first method of athletic talent identification is similar to those used in sensoriMotor gifted identification.

For instance, natural abilities that are crucial for success in a specific sport can be measure, then compared to known means. Intellectual Giftedness 10

A study examining the identification of talented female soccer players in Australia measured subjects’ ability to jump vertically, sprint, and complete a multistage fitness test

(Hoare & Warr, 2000, p.753). These skills are all important for a soccer player; those players who possess skill levels well above the means were considered talented.

In some team sports, a talented individual can be identified by statistical methods, such as the number of points scored during a season (van Rossum and Gagne, 2006, p. 287).

This second method is common in professional sports, where baseline statistics measure an athlete’s success. For instance, in baseball, .333 is considered an excellent batting average.

Typically, the best players in a given sports are ranked by a statistic; Michael Jordan, Pele, and Wayne Gretzky are considered exceptionally talented based on individual statistics

(van Rossum and Gagné, 2006, p. 288). Statistics also support a players technical and tactical approach to teams sports (Memmert

& Roth, 2007, p. 1423)

Others identify talent through other non-statistical means.

Kulka’s third category of talent identification includes personality traits that affect athletic ability. These traits include coachability, readiness, and self-concept3 (Kulka, 2003, p. 8). 3 These personality traits mirror Gagné’s Interpersonal Catalyst arm of the DMGT. Intellectual Giftedness 11

Finally, there is need to recognize the role of the coach in the talent identification process. Just as a teacher plays an important resource in the identification of gifted students

(Pennsylvania Department of Educaiton, 2004), a coach plays a large part in identifying talented athletes. “Much of the success of the TID (Talent Identification and Development) in

Australia relies on the ‘educated-eye’ of the…Coach.” (Richards,

1999, p. 4)

Once an athlete is label as a “talented athlete,” it can be assumed that he or she is gifted, per the DMGT (van Rossum and

Gagne, 2006, p. 284). While it is logical to presume that that athlete is gifted with natural sensoriMotor ability, the DMGT makes no concrete connections between specific talents and specific gifted domains. It is possible, then, that an individual talented in the Sports Field be gifted in any of the domains, including Intellectual. However, there is little, if any, research available connecting athletic talent and intellectual giftedness.

Despite a lack of research on this specific connection, there is a great deal of research connecting athletic participation and intellectual success. Most of this research is done at the high school level (Bucknavage & Worrell, 2005, p.

75). Intellectual Giftedness 12

A recent study in a high school demonstrated a relationship between athletic participation and grade point average (GPA)

(Bucknavage & Worrell, 2005, p. 75). Specifically, 123 high school student-athletes were studied. The athletes selected were those who participate only in a fall sport, specifically soccer. “The results indicated that, during the soccer season, soccer players had higher GPAs than out of season.” (Bucknavage

& Worrell, 2005, p. 75)

Another study looked at the effects of dance on problem solving ability (Giguere, 2006, p. 41). The results were similar to those reported by Bucknavage and Worrell. “By giving children opportunities to create dances,…we are also giving them an opportunity to challenge and refine their abilities to solve many kinds of problems.” (Giguere, 2006, p. 47).

While the above two studies attempt to show a cause-effect relationship between athletic participation and academic achievement, another study shows a cause-effect relationship between giftedness and athletic participation. Bucknavage and

Worrell found that more than half of gifted students studied participated on athletic teams (2005, p. 84). In addition,

“this rate is much greater than the rates [of participation] for any other activity, including academic clubs and study government.” (Bucknavage and Worrell, 2005, p. 84) Intellectual Giftedness 13

Based on the above three studies, there is reason to believe that there may be a connection between the Intellectual

Domain and the Sports Field. However, the lack of research currently makes this connection unproven (Martindale, 57) and can lead to the waste of the “most precious and valued resources that societies have at their disposal.” (Bailey 2004)

If said connection could be found to exist, it would contribute to knowledge available in the processes described above: intellectual gifted identification, athletic gifted identification, and athletic talent identification. It may provide motivation for schools to start testing and tracking giftedness of all types. Those organizations concerned with athletic talent development may widen their searches to include intellectual giftedness as a criterion for finding potential elite athletes.

This knowledge could also be a starting point for studies exploring the connectivity between all of the domains and fields in the DMGT. Gagné’s work represents the most clear and defined framework for the discussion and study of gifted and talented individuals (Trankle and Cushion, 2006, p. 267). If the DMGT can be enhanced by a further refined structure, it will become an even more valuable tool for educational and athletic psychologists. Intellectual Giftedness 14

With the above citations showing a basic connecting between intellectual and athletic endeavors, this study will show a statistical connection between intellectually gifted high school students and athletic talent. More specifically, this study hypothesizes that there will be a greater number of talented athletes among a group of intellectually gifted students than among the same number of students who aren’t identified as intellectually gifted. Students will be identified as athletically talented by three of the measures mentioned above: physical traits related to their sport, statistical results, and coaches’ input.

METHOD

Participants

The sample for this study will be a convenience sample, comprised of 200 total student athletes from public high schools in the southern Lancaster County (Pennsylvania) area. One hundred of these athletes will be those identified by their respective school district as “gifted,” using the identification methods set by the Pennsylvania Department of Education and the school districts. The second set of one hundred athletes will be students who have not been identified as gifted. Before any participants are recruited, permission will be obtained from Intellectual Giftedness 15 school administrators to enter schools for the purpose of research (Appendix B).

Each set of athletes will be selected on a volunteer basis and asked to complete a consent form before the study begins

(Appendix C). This consent form briefly describes the process, as well as noting that participants are free to leave the study at anytime. Following the study, participants will have the opportunity to attend a debriefing session. During this session, the process will be explained in detail, along with any significant results. For those identified as athletically talented (top 10%), further skill development and collegiate options may be recommended by coaches and guidance counselors.

It is important to note that in this initial study, there will be no set number of participants from either gender group.

Each gender will be treated equitably. Because all of the statistical data is based on respective peer percentile (for either female or male peers), there should be no advantage or disadvantage based on participants’ gender. In other words, female athletes will only be assessed based on their performance as compared to other female athletes. The same applies to male participants.

Materials Intellectual Giftedness 16

While the procedures for identifying students are established by the PA Department of Education, there exists no comprehensive athletic talent inventory that addresses the biological, statistical performance, and coaches’ input. The

Athletic Talent Number (Appendix D) is a tool that has been generated for this study that combines all three of the researched aspects of athletic talent identification.

The first portion of the Athletic Talent Number tool assesses the participants’ raw skill in one of two physical tests: a forty-yard sprint or a timed (30 seconds) push-up test.

A participant’s sport and position will determine which of the assessments will be completed.

The second segment of the Athletic Talent Number tool assesses the participants’ statistical performances during the course of a season. Again, a participant’s sport and position will determine which statistics will be tracked for the purpose of this study. The statistics will be gathered from schools using their official statistician, manager, or scorekeeper’s records.

The final portion of the Athletic Talent Number tool values the coach’s input into the talent identification process. Each participant’s coach will be given a 10-item questionnaire to complete, based on his/her experience with the athlete (Appendix

F). The questions correlate to the aspects of talent Intellectual Giftedness 17 identification noted in the literature review. Questions 1, 2, and 3 relate to observed natural characteristics, including raw ability, weight, and height. Game-time performance is addressed in questions 4, 5, and 6. Questions 7, 8, 9, and 10 cover items that the participant’s coach would have the ability to assess.

Procedures

Once the sample group has been established and consent forms signed, each participant will be given a randomly generated identification number that will be used throughout the course of the study. This ensures that the data collected stays confidential, yet is accessible to participants and their families.

Before the start of each participant’s sport season, each participant will complete the Raw Skill Assessment under the guidance of a research assistant. Again, a participant’s sport and position will determine if he/she completes the speed (40- yard sprint) or strength (30 second push-up test) assessment.

Each participant can complete the Raw Skill Assessment up to three times, albeit during the same session. The best recorded time or number of push-ups will be converted to a percentile, based on Pennsylvania scholastic statistics for the Intellectual Giftedness 18 participant’s peers. The percentile becomes the first recorded measure on the participant’s Athletic Talent Number sheet.

During the course of the participant’s season, three statistics will be tracked, again based on sport and position.

These statistics will also be compared with those of his/her peers, and converted to percentiles. These statistical percentiles make up the Statistical Performance portion of the

Athletic Talent Number tool.

Finally, at the conclusion of a season, the participant’s coach will be asked to complete the Coach’s Questionnaire.

Instructions for completing the questionnaire will be included via a cover letter (Appendix E). The coach will complete this questionnaire anonymously, and his/her responses complete the final segment of the Athletic Talent Number tool. This questionnaire should take approximately five minutes to complete.

Again, for the first two assessment areas (Raw Skill,

Statistical Performance), percentiles’ will be found using peer results; that is, gender and age similar performers.

Once all three assessments have been inserted into the

Athletic Talent Number tool, the participant’s Athletic Talent

Number can be calculated.

Data Analysis Intellectual Giftedness 19

Again, the hypothesized outcome of this study is that there will be a direct connection between intellectual giftedness and athletic talent, resulting in a higher mean Athletic Talent

Number for the group of intellectually gifted participants.

However, because this study is comparing two groups

(intellectually gifted athletes and athletes who aren’t intellectually gifted) the most appropriate means for data analysis would be a t-test.

The primary piece of data gathered for the t-test would be each group’s mean Athletic Talent Numbers. While a higher mean

Athletic Talent Number might indicate more athletic proficiency in a certain group, until processed through a t-test, this might simply be an apparent difference. In other words, the hypothesis of intellectual giftedness correlating to athletic talent cannot be proven by merely looking at the mean Athletic

Talent Numbers. Utilizing a data analysis consultant will make the t-test accurate and the process of data analysis much smoother.

Limitations

As with every study, this proposal is bound by limitations that are not easily overcome. The first limitation is the lack of study on this specific research problem, and, concurrently, no pre-existing data-gathering tool. While the Athletic Talent Intellectual Giftedness 20

Number tool reflects the current research on athletic talent identification--biological aspects, statistical performance—I am by no means a statistician or trained data consultant. If this research proposal were being funded by a grant or outside organization, a professional specializing in data analysis would be consulted to help create said tool.

Secondly, my contacts within the field of gifted education are located primarily in Lancaster County. This creates the need for a convenience sample—the estimated number of gifted athletes in the county represents a small number. Again, with more time and funding, the sample population could be extended to a larger area, perhaps multiple counties or even the entire state.

This localization of participants also reflects a sample group that is perhaps not as racially or economically diverse as one that includes a major metropolitan area. Additionally, the schools in the area are also less diverse because of their locale. Ideally, schools would be chosen from areas with more economic, populous, and geographical diversity.

Another limitation is the use of school’s statisticians for data reporting. While the statisticians may be paid, they may also be volunteers; regardless, there is no guarantee that they are trained other than a basic knowledge of the sport. Unlike professional or collegiate sports, there is no agency or private Intellectual Giftedness 21 company collecting statistics for every high school in the state of Pennsylvania. This use of volunteers or untrained professionals could cause errors in the statistical data collected for the Athletic Talent Number tool.

Additionally, some statistics gathered for athletes may be representative of the quality of the team in addition to individual play. Even though Gagné might argue that statistics are a tool to measure talent, there is no question that the quality of an athlete’s team has some impact on his/her individual statistics. For example, a very talented quarterback may have the skills to compile impressive statistics, but they might be hard to achieve without competent receivers.

Similarly, a quarterback with poor skills may achieve inflated statistics with the help of outstanding receivers. This is true of all sport statistics, and is the reason the Athletic Talent

Number tool uses three measures. However, this chance of statistical variance still marks a limitation for this study.

Another variance that could occur comes in the initial Raw

Skill screening. Because of time and resources, it is currently impractical to repeat this screening multiple times. The repetition limit is set at three, but is still restrained to the same session to reduce the amount of visits to a school a research assistant needs to make. While this works for convenience, it does not allow for variances in the Intellectual Giftedness 22 participant’s mood, physical status, or focus. A participant who had an emotional or frustration day at school may perform more poorly on the assessment. Similarly, a late night or long practice the day before may reduce a participant’s scores.

With these limitations revealed, it is my hope that, prior to formally conducting this proposal, funding and manpower could be achieved to reduce the chance of statistical variance.

Additionally, a review of this proposal by peers or faculty may produce other ideas to escape these limitations.

That said if this study were to be carried out, I believe that it would be beneficial to those studying gifted children and those working with talented athletes. It could contribute to ever-growing base of knowledge on genetic gifts and acquired skills. Intellectual Giftedness 23

REFERENCES

Australian Institute of Sport, (2007). National Talent Search

Program. Retrieved December 7, 2007, Web site:

http://www.ais.org.au/talent/index.asp

Bailey, R., Tan, J. E. C., & Morley, D. (2004). Talented pupils

in physical education: Secondary school teachers'

experiences of identifying talent within the 'excellence in

cities' scheme. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 9(2)

Baker, J., & Cote, J. (2003). Resources and commitment as

critical factors in the development of "gifted" athletes.

High Ability Studies, 14(2), 139.

Brody, L. E. (2005). The study of exceptional talent. High

Ability Studies, 16(1)

Bucknavage, L. B., & Worrell, F. C. (2005). A study of

academically talented students' participation in

extracurricular activities. The Journal of Secondary

Gifted Education. XVI, 74-86.

Dixon, F. A. & Moon, S. M. (Ed.). (2006). The handbook of

secondary gifted education. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.

Ellis, C. J., Riley, T. L., & Gordon, B. (2003). Talented female

athletics: Are they going for gold? Journal of Secondary

Gifted Education, 14(4), 229. Intellectual Giftedness 24

FIBA (International Basketball Federation), (2007). Retrieved

December 7, 2007, from Coach corner: Talent identification

Web site:

http://www.fibastore.com/pages/eng/fc/expe/coac/olymSoli/p/

openNodeIDs/1263/selNodeID/1263/TaleIden.html

Gagne, F. (2000). A differentiated model of giftedness and

talent. year 2000 update

Giguere, M. (2006).Thinking as they create: Do children have

similar experiences in dance and in language arts?. Journal

of Dance Education. 6, 41-47.

Hoare, D.G., & Warr, C.R. (2000). Talent identification and

women's soccer: An Australian experience. Journal of Sports

Sciences. 18, 751-758.

Kulka, D.A. (2003).Long-term athlete development: Systematic

talent identification. Kennesaw State University printing.

Kwang-Han Song, & Porath, M. (2005). Common and domain‐specific

cognitive characteristics of gifted students: An integrated

model of human abilities. High Ability Studies, 16(2)

Martindale, R. J. J., Collins, D., & Daubney, J. (2005). Talent

development: A guide for practice and research within

sport. Quest (00336297), 57(4), 353.

McGregor, B. (2007).The use of gene-based technologies for

talent identification in high-performance sport. Bond Intellectual Giftedness 25

University (12895049). 1-21.

Memmert, D., & Roth, K. (2007). The effects of non-specific and

specific concepts on tactical creativity in team ball

sports. Journal of sports sciences, 25(12)

Pennsylvania Department of Education, Gifted Guidelines. (2004).

Harrisburg, PA

Richards, R. (1999).Talent indentification and development.

ASCTA Convention. 1999, 1-22.

TRACS, Inc., (2007). Coaching and talent identification.

Retrieved December 7, 2007, from TRACS, Inc. Web site:

http://www.tracs.net/cti.html

Tranckle, P., & Cushion, C. J. (2006). Rethinking giftedness and

talent in sport. Quest (00336297), 58(2) van Rossum, J.H.A., & Gagne, F. (2006). Talent development in

sports. Secondary Gifted Education. 281-316. Intellectual Giftedness 26

Appendix A: Gagné’s Differentiate Model of Giftedness and Talent

(DMGT) (Gagné, 2000) Intellectual Giftedness 27

Appendix B: Letter Seeking Permission to Complete Research in a Public School

Caley Roark, Graduate Student Wellness and Sports Sciences Dept. PO Box 1002 Millersville, PA 17551 (717)-666-0128

2018 年 6 月 6 日

Superintendent Lancaster Public School Lancaster, PA

Dear Mr. Superintendent

I am a graduate student at Millersville University conducting a study connecting intellectual giftedness and athletic talent. I would like to use students from your school district, specifically your high school. If you agree, I can contact you with more information and specifics.

Attached to this letter is a consent form that will be given to selected students and their parents. It details the procedures of the study.

I look forward to hearing from you. Please don’t hesitate to contact me with further questions that might help you make a decision.

Sincerely,

Caley Roark Intellectual Giftedness 28

Appendix C: Parent Consent Form

Informed Consent to Participate in Research

Millersville University

Your child is being asked to volunteer as a participant in a research study. The information provided here is designed to describe the study and answer questions you might have.

1. Title of Study: Connections Between Intellectual Giftedness and Athletic Talent 2. Involvement: a. Principle Investigator Caley Roark, Graduate Student Wellness and Sports Sciences Dept. PO Box 1002 Millersville University Millersville, PA 17551 (717)-666-0128 b. Faculty Sponsor Jeffrey Wimer, Ph.D., ATC Wellness and Sports Sciences Dept. PO Box 1002 Millersville University Millersville, PA 17551 (717)-871-5367 c. Funding: This study is not receiving any outside funding, nor are their any sponsoring organizations.

3. Overview: This study seeks to find a connection between intellectual giftedness and athletic talent. More specifically, this study hypothesizes that there will be a greater number of talented athletes among a group of intellectually gifted students than among the same number of students who aren’t identified as intellectually gifted.

As a participant, your child will do little more than participate in a sport they are already planning on playing. Before the season, your child will complete a screening that includes either a 40-yard sprint or a timed push-up test, whichever is more relevant to the position and sport that she/he plays. During the season, statistics will be kept in three relevant areas. After the season, child’s coach will complete a questionnaire, rating your son/daughter’s ability as an athlete. Once these three pieces of data are collected, a number will be assigned to your child indicating their athletic talent. The study will continue throughout the duration of a school year, but athletes’ participation time is limited to their respective athletic season(s). Intellectual Giftedness 29

4. Risk and Benefits: a. Risks: There are no potential risks or discomforts associated with this study beyond those accepted as playing in a high school sport. b. Benefits: Participation will provide participants with a statistical overview of athletic ability and will contribute to the growing amount of knowledge related to intellectual giftedness.

5. Compensation: There will be no monetary compensation for participating in this study.

6. Confidentiality: Any data collected about athletic performances will be kept completely confidential and participants’ identities will remain anonymous. This consent form is required by Millersville University.

7. Voluntary Participation: Your child is not required to participate in this study. If he/she choses to participate, your child is free to withdraw consent and discontinue participation at anytime without penalty.

8. More information: can be obtained by calling the primary researcher or faculty sponsor. Questions or concerns about the research participants’ rights may be directed to the MUIRB, PO Box 1002, Millersville, PA 17551.

Agreement:

I have read the procedure described above and give consent for my child to participate in the procedure. I have received a copy of this description.

Parent/Guardian Name: ______Date: ______

Parent/Guardian Signature: ______Date: ______

Principle Investigator Signature: ______Date: ______

This project has been approved by the Millersville University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects Intellectual Giftedness 30

Appendix D: Athletic Talent Number Tool

Athletic Talent Number Tool

Athlete ID Number: ______

A. Raw Skill Assessment (select one)

a. 40-yard sprint percentile: ______/100

b. Push-ups (within 30 seconds) percentile: ______/100

B. Statistical Performance Assessment

a. Statistic A ______percentile: ______/100

b. Statistic B ______percentile: ______/100

c. Statistic C ______percentile: ______/100

Statistical Performance Subtotal: ______/300

Statistical Performance Total: ______/100

C. Coach’s Questionnaire Results multiplied by 2: ______/100

Total: ______/300

ATHLETIC TALENT NUMBER: ______Intellectual Giftedness 31

Appendix E: Coaching Questionnaire Cover Letter

Caley Roark Graduate Student Wellness and Sports Sciences Dept. PO Box 1002 Millersville, PA 17551 (717)-666-0128

2018 年 6 月 6 日

Coach Lancaster Public School Lancaster, PA

Dear Coach

I am a graduate student at Millersville University conducting a study connecting intellectual giftedness and athletic talent. The administrators at your school district have agreed to participate in this study, and one of your athletes has parental consent to be a subject.

Your role in this study is to take a brief ten-item questionnaire, rating various aspects of this athlete’s performance. Answer each question as best as is possible. If you don’t feel that you have enough experience to evaluate any one area, please select “No Opinion”.

You do not need to include your name on the questionnaire. The information in this questionnaire will only be made available to the athlete when your season is over, and then only at the request of the subject.

I look forward to hearing from you. Please don’t hesitate to contact me with further questions.

Sincerely,

Caley Roark Intellectual Giftedness 32

Appendix F: Coaching Questionnaire

Coaching Questionnaire

Athlete’s name: ______

1. The athlete’s natural abilities (speed, strength, etc.) place him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

Strongly Agree (5) Agree (4) No Opinion (3) Disagree (2) Strongly Disagree (1)

2. The athlete’s weight, as appropriate for his/her position, places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

3. The athlete’s height, as appropriate for his/her position, places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

4. The athlete’s technical skill places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

5. The athlete’s tactical skill (game decisions) places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

6. The athlete’s game-time performance places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

7. The athlete’s leadership skill places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

8. The athlete’s “coachability” places him/her among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

9. The athlete’s potential, as judged by you, placed him/her among the top10% of athletes you’ve coached.

10. Overall, this athlete ranks among the top 10% of athletes you’ve coached.

RESPONSE TOTAL: ______(add up selected choice values)