ASSESSMENT in Gifted Education the RESOURCES at TAMS HELPED ME START MY NONPROFIT

V o l u m e XXXVI, I s s u e 1, 2015

Journal of the Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented • Member, National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) TEMPOISSN 2168-4731 (Print) • ISSN 2168-4774 (Online)

ASSESSMENT in Gifted Education THE RESOURCES AT TAMS HELPED ME START MY NONPROFIT.

“TAMS steered me toward my goal of setting up self-sustaining clinics to improve health around the globe. Through the College of Business and the UNT community, I was able to donate more than $3,000 in medical supplies to a clinic in Venezuela and explore my interest in medicine there.”

— ALBERTO HIM TAMS STUDENT AND CEO, EVERCARE MEDICAL FOUNDATION

UNT’s Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science — the nation’s ﬁ rst residential program for gifted teens to complete their ﬁ rst two years of college while earning high school diplomas — launches research careers for exceptionally talented students. tams.unt.edu

IN EVERY ISSUE

From the Editor TEMPO 4 Krystal Goree, Ph.D. Interesting Times for Assessment 5 Mary Christopher, Ph.D. C.P.’s Corner 33 Clyde Peterson

COLUMNS

Spotlight on Students: Girls and STEM: The Lady 15 Cans Robotics Team Lacy Compton

Tips for Teachers: Kahoot! 24 and Google Digital Tools: Efficient and Effective Joyce E. Kyle Miller, Ph.D. and Raine Maggio

FEATURES

Promoting Excellence and Continuous Progress 6 With Products Tracy Ford Inman, Ed.D. & TEMPO EDITOR Julia Link Roberts, Ed.D. Krystal Goree, Ph.D. DESIGN EDITOR TAGT PRESIDENT Relating Identification Marjorie Parker Mary Christopher, Ph.D. 17 Standards to Best Practices COPY EDITOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR and Student Outcomes Jennifer Robins, Ph.D. JJ Colburn, CAE Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D.

The Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented (TAGT) is a nonprofit organization of parents and educators promoting appropriate education for gifted and talented students in the state of Texas. What the Research Says About TEMPO is the official journal of the Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented. It is published quarterly. The subscription is a benefit for TAGT members. the Assessment of Advanced Material appearing in TEMPO may be reprinted unless otherwise noted. When copying an 26 Products and Performances article please cite TEMPO and TAGT as the source. We appreciate copies of publications containing TEMPO reprints. Kimberly A. Hardin, Corina R. Kaul, Yara Address correspondence concerning the Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented (including subscription questions) to TAGT, 5920 W. William Cannon Drive, Building 7, Suite 102, Austin, N. Farah, and Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D. TX 78749. Call TAGT at 512/499-8248, FAX 512/499-8264. ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED: Please notify TAGT if you are moving or if your mailing address has changed. TAGT publications are sent via third-class mail and are not forwarded by the post office. Be sure to renew your membership. You will not receive TAGT publications or mailings after your membership expiration date. Opinions expressed by individual authors do not necessarily represent official positions of TAGT. from the editor by Krystal Goree, Ph.D.

Dear TAGT Members, cians, and humanitarians are in our midst, and TEMPO is TheTEMPO Editorial Board would like to extend a the perfect place to showcase their talents and accomplish- personal invitation to you! We invite you to share your ideas ments in the Student Spotlight column. Lacy Compton, an for best practice, tips that will help teachers and parents, Editorial Board Member, is waiting for you to send infor- and examples of the excellent work of your gifted students mation about gifted young Texans and their work to her. in TEMPO! She can be reached at [email protected]. See page 15 in this issue of TEMPO to get a glimpse of the accomplish- ARTICLES ments of a group of talented young women who wanted to make a difference. This group is just one shining example Some of the best ideas we get for effective teaching of myriad bright, young talent in our great State! and parenting come from our friends, colleagues, and neighbors. Don’t keep those great ideas to yourself! Do you use teaching strategies in your classroom that engage TIPS FOR TEACHERS students in higher level thinking, encourage them to create Educators are the some of the most ingenious and ded- professional-level products and performances, or address icated individuals around. If you are a teacher or admin- their affective needs? As a parent, have you learned ways istrator who has discovered strategies for organization, to help your child deal with perfectionism, discovered pos- instruction, assessment, collaboration, or technology, let itive approaches to take in collaborating with teachers to others know about them! By sharing tips and ideas with ensure that your child is challenged in the classroom, or one another, we can become more effective and efficient. found resources to help your child choose an institution of Raine Maggio and Dr. Joyce Miller welcome your ideas and higher education that is a good fit? If so, do not be bashful! look forward to sharing them with others through the new And, these are just a few questions to get you thinking. column, Tips for Teachers. Technology is the focus of the Articles submitted to TEMPO do not have to be column in this issue of TEMPO as ideas for using Kahoot! lengthy, and you do not need to be an expert or renowned and Google Technology are presented on page 24. Please researcher in the field of gifted education to submit an Tips for Teachers article. You will find Writers Guidelines on page 35 of this send your to me, at Krystal_Goree@baylor. issue of TEMPO. On the same page, you will also find a edu, and I will pass them on to our column editors. listing of upcoming issue themes. The themes are included Advocating for gifted students can sometimes feel like a to give readers an idea of topics that will be addressed in lonely journey. In many cases campuses (and even districts) upcoming issues. This does not mean that articles address- have few educators to champion gifted kids. We can join ing themes other than those listed will not be considered hands and hearts through TAGT! Even if you feel like you for publication. Just sharpen your pencil or charge your are walking solo, know that you are not! There are many laptop and start writing. educators and parents who share your passion for ensuring In addition to articles, there are other ways that you can that gifted students receive the educational and emotional contribute to TEMPO. We have recently added two new support they need and deserve. TEMPO is one way that columns to the journal that offer even more opportunities we, as advocates for gifted students, can support and learn for you to share! from one another. Consider sharing your ideas, successes, celebrations, and the work of your students by contributing to TEMPO! We look forward to hearing from you! STUDENT SPOTLIGHT With warm regards and best wishes, Young budding and accomplished artists, poets, musi- —Krys

4 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 interesting times for assessment by Mary Christopher, Ph.D.

ccording to Popham (2014), educa- programs. Beginning with the nomination of gifted children tors live in interesting times in relation for screening and identification, educators rely on prior knowl- to educational assessment. After several edge of definitions and characteristics of gifted learners as they decades of national and state account- consider gifted potential in their students. Districts use a variety ability focused on annual tests built on of tests, surveys, portfolios, and interviews to determine the best federal or state standards, assessment per- educational fit for gifted learners. Throughout the school year, Ameates curriculum and instruction in most schools. The teachers formally and informally assess educational experiences recent redesign of Texas teacher evaluation places a greater of gifted students to determine students’ knowledge of content, emphasis on holding teachers accountable for their students’ skills, thinking processes, products, learning styles, and social/ test scores. In the last Texas legislative session, House Bill 5 emotional needs. Various assessment instruments, including called for reports of annual evaluation of school programs, Texas Performance Standard Program (TPSP), Advanced including gifted and talented programs. TAGT actually Placement (AP), and International Baccalaureate (IB) tests, proved instrumental in assuring that gifted and talented allow districts to ultimately assess student learning and deter- programs were included in the programs that must report mine program effectiveness. Although the Texas State Plan results from annual evaluations each year. for the Education of Gifted/Talented Students (TEA, 2009) Assessment and evaluation permeates educators’ lives, both personally and professionally. Either formally or infor- requires schools and districts to evaluate programs annually, mally, we constantly assess the world around us. Whether House Bill 5 reinforces that requirement by requiring an annual assessing the environment, trying to determine the best buy, report of assessment. TAGT created a sample evaluation tool or selecting the best person to fill an open position, individuals and collected several samples from Texas districts that are pro- use specific criteria and processes to make the best decision. vided on the TAGT website to assist districts in this process. If the temperature in the room seems too cold, we begin by The development of robust assessment instruments, noticing behaviors and physical characteristics that exhibit a evaluation tools, and processes supports effective curricu- chilly environment. Then, we ask those around us if they feel lum, instruction, and programming for gifted and talented cold, measuring our assessment against others to develop a children and adolescents. As opposed to the test-driven consensus before adjusting the thermostat. Purchasing a new curriculum that often results from state and national car requires several types of assessment. Using prior knowl- accountability, gifted programs should use assessment and edge, shoppers compare various brands and models to past evaluation to authentically assess gifted students’ abilities experience with those products. Consulting other assessment and learning experiences as well as the gifted program’s results, consumers review reports related to product specifi- design and delivery. Rather than merely ensuring that all cations, durability, and gas mileage. Gathering input from students meet minimal standards, this process will guaran- others, they ask about others’ experience with the particular tee that schools will hold themselves accountable for help- model and their evaluation of the characteristics of the car. ing gifted learners reach their full potential as they look Then, they take a test drive to determine if the car provides a for alternative methods to determine students’ growth over good feel and fit. In a similar way, employers assess the exper- longer periods of time (Popham, 2014). tise, knowledge, skills, and personality of each applicant to determine the best candidate for a particular position. Using assessment strategies that include review of prior work experi- REFERENCES ence, consultation with references, interview of the candidate, Popham, W. J. (2014). Classroom assessment: What teachers need and administration of a strengths test, a committee attempts to know. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Personal Education. to match the best applicant to the particular job description. Texas Education Agency. (2009). Texas state plan for the education In the same way, assessment and evaluation drive gifted of gifted/talented students. Austin, TX: Author.

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 5 Promoting Excellence

and Continuous Progress With Products Tracy Ford Inman, Ed.D. 6 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 & Julia Link Roberts, Ed.D. ravel agencies and tourist purposes to authentic audiences” ucts. The DAP Tool simplifies both bureaus produce colorful, (Roberts & Inman, 2015a, p. 2). They product differentiation and assessment engaging brochures enticing are engaging for students to plan differentiation. people to explore new places. and complete. Products motivate Museum curators design detailed students to learn since products are INNOVATIONS OF exhibits showcasing Impressionist varied in type (such as technological THE DAP TOOL painters or the habitat of the polar bear. or visual). Students are interested in Advocates give speeches encouraging various types of products, often find- The DAP Tool differs from other listeners to action, while architects cre- ing one kind more appealing to create rubrics in three innovative ways: the ate blueprints that guide construction than others. They are a practical way standard components, the grading of new buildings. Almost every profes- for teachers to match learning expe- scale, and the tiering system. Each sional in today’s world creates products riences to students’ strengths and warrants a bit more discussion; but, that communicate specific ideas to spe- preferred ways of learning, yet they before dissecting its parts, first con- cific audiences whether that be in the also provide ongoing opportunities sider Figure 1, which shows a sample form of a scientific article, a Prezi, or a to build new skills and develop new DAP Tool (i.e., Poster) to get a frame vodcast. But in the world of P–12 edu- areas of interest Products encourage of reference. cation, students are often resigned to pen-and-paper avenues to show educators what they have learned. Very few professionals are called upon in real life . . . products provide teachers with options for differentiating learning experiences to use multiple choice and true-false measures to communicate ideas. Why then, do educators steer away from based on student experience with the product, level of readiness with the content, authentic products when planning formative and summative assessments? and interest in both the content and the product choice. Reasons why educators hesitate to offer a variety of authentic products creativity, self-expression, high-level Consistent Components for assessment are straightforward: thinking, and problem-solving skills. The DAP Tool sets expectations educators do not have time to create Additionally, products provide teach- for students creating products, as all new rubrics for each product, nor do ers with options for differentiating DAP Tools include the same four they necessarily have the expertise to learning experiences based on student components—content, presentation, know what makes a product authen- experience with the product, level of creativity, and reflection. The wording tic and exemplary (i.e., What does a readiness with the content, and inter- for content, creativity, and reflection professional engineer really look for in est in both the content and the prod- remain the same for all DAP Tools, a model or a software company seek uct choice. and general language is used so that in a computer program?). An English The Developing (D) and Assessing the criteria apply to all content areas teacher may feel very comfortable (A) Product (P) Tool (Roberts & across all grade levels. Presentation is grading essays, poetry, or reports; Inman, 2015a, 2015b) is a protocol the only component that differs. but he may shy away from a dance, that may well be the answer to teach- Content. The DAP Tool utilizes monologue, or mask because he does ers’ concerns. DAP Tools guide stu- products to gauge student learn- not really know what the components dents as they develop a product and ing whether the educator is using of a dance are or what makes a mask teachers as they assess the product. As assessment for learning (formative professional in quality. As far as differ- a protocol, the DAP Tool eliminates assessment) or assessment of learning entiating products or the assessment of the need to design a rubric or multiple (summative assessment). Content, then, products, most educators fear inequity rubrics with each new assignment. The is always the first component. The key in grading or being unfair since all DAP Tool can be used across grade considerations guiding students as they students are not required to complete levels and in all content areas, saving develop the content for any product the same assignment. valuable planning time for the teacher. include accuracy, organization, and What are products, and why are It also makes it easy for teachers to level of understanding. Is the content they important to the learning expe- accommodate students who suggest accurate? Is it well organized? Has it rience? Products are simply “vehicles a different product from the product been thought about in a way that goes for communicating information and/ choices assigned since the DAP Tool beyond a surface understanding? Note or demonstrating skills for specific is ready to use for a variety of prod- the lack of specificity to content. This

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 7 POSTER TIER 2—DAP TOOL

CONTENT •• Content is accurate and complete. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Content has depth and complexity of thought. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Content is organized. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRESENTATION •• Title, clearly reflecting purpose, is strategically placed. Text highlights TEXT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 most important concepts. •• Graphics (e.g., illustrations, photos, etc.) add information and are GRAPHICS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 relevant for the topic. •• Layout design clearly emphasizes graphics in an organized and attractive LAYOUT manner. Text is placed to specifically describe/ explain all graphic images. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Spacing is carefully planned with consideration of space not used. •• The poster is free from usage, punctuation, capitalization, and spelling CORRECTNESS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 errors. Sources, when used, are thoroughly cited. CREATIVITY •• Originality is expressed in relation to the content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Originality is expressed in relation to the presentation. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 REFLECTION •• Reflections include connections to previous learning and questions CONTENT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 raised for future learning. •• Reflections include improvements made over other times the product PRODUCT was created as well as suggestions for improvements when creating the 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 same product in a future learning experience. •• Reflections include analysis of self as a learner, including effort, work LEARNING 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 habits, and thought processes.

COMMENTS: ______

MEANING OF PERFORMANCE SCALE: 6—PROFESSIONAL LEVEL: level expected from a professional in the content area 5—ADVANCED LEVEL: level exceeds expectations of the standard 4—PROFICIENT LEVEL: level expected for meeting the standard 3—PROGRESSING LEVEL: level demonstrates movement toward the standard 2—NOVICE LEVEL: level demonstrates initial awareness and knowledge of standard 1—NONPERFORMING LEVEL: level indicates no effort made to meet standard 0—NONPARTICIPATING LEVEL: level indicates nothing turned in

Figure 1. Poster Tier 2. From Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation (2nd ed., p. 182), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Copyright ©2015 by Prufrock Press. Used with permission.

general wording can apply to a high Presentation. Presentation is the ing their product. Students creating school student explaining the causes second of the four components of a Prezi, however, must attend to the of the Russian Revolution, the middle a DAP Tool, and the only one that text, multimedia, canvases, delivery, school student extrapolating on the changes. The expected aspects or char- and correctness, while a sculpture parts of the cell, or the fourth grader acteristics inherent in a specific prod- should include key elements such as advocating for an increased allowance uct differ from product to product, so concept, craftsmanship, and elements in a persuasive writing assignment. It the DAP Tool must mirror the prod- of design. The guiding characteristics is up to the educator to specify the uct-specific language. For example, as for an essay are structure, elaboration, expectations in the actual assignment, noted in Figure 1, students developing support, style, and correctness. The which should be distributed alongside a poster should consider text, graphics, presentation portion of the DAP Tool the DAP Tool. layout, and correctness when design- is customized to explain the criteria

8 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 of the product itself letting the stu- Meaning of Performance Scale: dent realize not only what constitutes a poster (or blog or …) but also what 6—PROFESSIONAL LEVEL: level expected from a professional in the content area is necessary to create an exemplary poster (or blog or…). 5—ADVANCED LEVEL: level exceeds expectations of the standard Creativity. The third component 4—PROFICIENT LEVEL: level expected for meeting the standard of a DAP Tool is creativity, and just 3—PROGRESSING LEVEL: level demonstrates movement toward the like content and reflection, stays con- standard sistent with each DAP Tool regardless 2—NOVICE LEVEL: level demonstrates initial awareness and knowledge of of the product. The need to highlight standard creativity is great for the individual as 1—NONPERFORMING LEVEL: level indicates no effort made to meet well as for the good of society: standard The world depends on creative peo- 0—NONPARTICIPATING LEVEL: level indicates nothing turned in ple for contributions in all areas of Figure 2. Meaning of performance scale. From Assessing life, from technology, travel, and Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and medicine, to movies, music, and Evaluation (2nd ed., p. 33), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, literature. If that were not reason Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Copyright ©2015 by Prufrock Press. Used enough, the most compelling with permission. motive for our attention is that we are committed to enabling individ- •• product (i.e., In what ways could use that product. However, the goal uals to live fulfilled lives. Parents you improve your product when should be to improve each aspect of and teachers need to know that completing this product with a the product, honing and fine tuning they have a powerful influence different assignment?), and as they strive to create authentic prod- on the development of creativ- •• learning (i.e., How did the ucts at increasingly higher levels. Of ity. (Robinson, Shore, & Enersen, amount of effort you put into the course, students’ grades should not 2007, p. 77) development of the product affect be gauged by this level; an A should When developing a product, creativ- your learning about the content fall in the proficient or advanced levels ity can be shown by how students and creating the product?). depending on educator opinion, not view and develop the content as well the professional level. The professional as by how they approach and create Rating Scale level will serve as incentive to those the product itself. Therefore, ques- A second innovation of the students who are accustomed to pro- tions in this component are twofold: DAP Tool is the rating scale itself; ducing A-level work by only meeting Is the content seen in a new way? Is it removes the learning ceiling that the basic requirements for the grade. the presentation done in a new way? can be so detrimental, especially to Originality and innovation prove key learners with gifts and talents. The Tiers for this component. seven-level scale includes two levels In addition to the rating scale Reflection. The fourth and final past proficiency, sending the critical that removes the learning ceiling and component of all DAP Tools is reflec- message that improvement is always the four consistent components, DAP tion, the metacognitive piece of the possible—and necessary for learners Tools also include three distinct tiers DAP Tool. Metacognition allows to be globally competitive. Figure 2 for every product. These tiers become students to think about their learn- outlines the levels and their meanings. hierarchically more sophisticated ing in the process of developing the The word standard (in five of the seven both in wording and expectation as product and completing the learning tiers) must be defined before using is noted in Figure 3. Expectations for experience. The goal is to make think- the DAP Tool, and that definition content progress from being thought ing about one’s thinking a habit that must be shared with students so that about in a way that goes beyond the promotes learning related to a single they understand the goal. It is also surface (i.e., Tier 1) to having depth learning experience as well as through- important that students understand and complexity of thought (i.e., Tier out one’s lifetime. Questions relate to: the meaning of professional level. 2) to showing complex understanding •• content (i.e., What connections Rarely, if ever, will students create and manipulation of content and deep can you make between what you a product that reaches the standard probing of the content (i.e., Tier 3). have learned by completing this level expected and evaluated by pro- A student who has very little experi- project and previous learning?), fessionals in the field who create and ence with content (as determined by

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 9 POSTER—DAP TOOL CONTENT

TIER ONE CONTENT •• Is the content correct? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Has the content been thought about in a way that goes beyond a surface understanding? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Is the content put together in such a way that people understand it? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 TIER TWO CONTENT •• Content is accurate and complete. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Content has depth and complexity of thought. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Content is organized. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 TIER THREE CONTENT •• Content is accurate and thorough in detail. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Product shows complex understanding and manipulation of content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Product shows deep probing of content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Organization is best suited to the product. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 3.DAP Tool content. From Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation (2nd ed., p. 44), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Copyright © 2015 by Prufrock Press. Used with permission.

a preassessment) may not be ready for to Figures 4 and 5 to see how the file so that students have easy access a Tier 3 assignment regardless of the three innovations of consistent com- to them, allowing extended choice student’s age or grade level. Likewise, ponents, grading scales, and tiering in products. If product choice is a primary student who has a passion system function within each tier of approved by the teacher, the students for a subject and enters the classroom the DAP Tool. Note the specificity then know they can go to this rubric with a strong understanding should of language in the presentation of the warehouse to find the tool that will not use a Tier 1 assignment to create poster. Experts in the areas that use assist them in creating the product her product; she should be given the products provided guidance on these of their choice. For example, a sixth- opportunity to work at a level com- criteria and word choice. grade teacher may create a menu (or mensurate with her knowledge and Think-Tac-Toe—they go by many ability. names) to provide appropriately chal- USES OF THE DAP TOOL The three tiers encourage dif- lenging learning experiences for her ferentiation of assessment. A single On the most basic level, DAP students as they study Maniac McGee. high school classroom exploring the Tools are rubrics. Educators could use She may list nine learning choices, Constitution, for example, could uti- one DAP Tool with the whole class. each with a different product. Not lize all three tiers of the Document- For instance, a language arts teacher only does the student have choice of Based Question (DBQ) DAP Tool. may use the Tier 1 Poetry DAP Tool the learning experience on the menu, Those students who have never writ- with all of her third graders as they but, ideally, he would also be able to ten a DBQ would use Tier 1; those learn how to write poetry. Another swap out one product for another. He with experience would use a Tier 2 in example would be an eighth-grade would simply visit the warehouse for order to improve skills; and those with class studying biomes that will con- the appropriate DAP Tool. The edu- extensive experience would use a Tier struct models to show what they have cator would not hesitate because (a) 3. Again, the preassessment (this time learned. Each student will be given a she is interested more in the what assessing experience with the specific tier appropriate DAP Tool before they the student is learning than how the product) dictates which tier to use. Of begin the model. The DAP Tool then student is demonstrating what he has course, educators may discover that all guides them in their creation of the learned, and (b) she knows that the students are ready for the same tier. model. DAP Tools will provide the necessary Product differentiation provides guidance for a high-quality product. more sophisticated use of the DAP The most sophisticated use of SAMPLE DAP TOOLS Tools. DAP Tools could be housed the DAP Tool is assessment differ- Now look at Figure 1 in relation in a single file drawer or a computer entiation. A single classroom may

10 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 POSTER TIER 1—DAP TOOL

CONTENT •• Is the content correct? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Has the content been thought about in a way that goes beyond a surface 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 understanding? •• Is the content put together in such a way that people understand it? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRESENTATION •• Is the title easy to see, clear, and well placed? Do labels explain the TEXT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 graphics? •• Are the graphics (e.g., illustrations, photos, etc.) important and GRAPHICS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 appropriate to the topic? •• Are the images carefully selected and emphasized? Is the labeling LAYOUT linked to the graphic? Is it pleasing to the eye? Is the spacing deliberate 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 to draw attention to the main parts of the poster? •• Is the poster mostly free from usage, punctuation, capitalization, and CORRECTNESS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 spelling errors? If sources are used, are they cited correctly? CREATIVITY •• Is the content seen in a new way? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Is the presentation done in a new way? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 REFLECTION •• What connections can you make between what you have learned by CONTENT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 completing this project and previous learning? •• In what ways could you improve your product when completing this PRODUCT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 product with a different assignment? •• How did the amount of effort affect your learning about the content LEARNING 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 and creating the product?

COMMENTS: ______

Figure 4. Poster Tier 1. From Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation (2nd ed., p. 181), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Copyright ©2015 by Prufrock Press. Used with permission.

have students using Tier 1, Tier 2, teacher could design a preassessment GRADING and Tier 3. The preassessment may that includes content as well as prod- DAP Tools work beautifully as focus on the level of experience stu- uct. By matching tier to experience both a formative assessment tool and dents have in creating the products. If level and expertise of the students, the product is brand new to the stu- a summative assessment tool. When the educator differentiates expecta- dent, for example, the teacher would students receive feedback during the tions and, consequently, assessments. use a Tier 1 learning experience. If process of creating the product (i.e., the student has created the product Because students are familiar with formative assessment), they are able numerous times, a Tier 1 would the structure, vocabulary, and grad- to modify, enhance, and hone that provide no challenge. A Tier 2 or 3 ing scale of DAP Tools, the assess- product—whether that feedback is experience would be in order. The ment is equitable and appropriate. content-related or presentation-related.

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 11 POSTER TIER 3—DAP TOOL

CONTENT •• Content is accurate and thorough in detail. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Product shows complex understanding and manipulation of content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Product shows deep probing of content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Organization is best suited to the product. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 PRESENTATION •• Title enhances the poster’s purpose and is well placed. Text highlights TEXT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 most important concepts in clear, concise manner. •• Graphics (e.g., illustrations, photos, etc.) enhance meaning and are best GRAPHICS 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 suited for the purpose. •• Successful composition of graphic images and design concepts LAYOUT communicates the purpose. Text is strategically placed to enhance the 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 message of the poster. Negative space is used to highlight key points. •• The poster is error free, with correct usage, punctuation, capitalization, CORRECTNESS and spelling used. All sources are cited correctly with the citation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 placed appropriately. CREATIVITY •• Innovation is evident in relation to the content. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 •• Innovation is evident in relation to the presentation. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 REFLECTION •• Reflections analyze and evaluate connections to previous learning and CONTENT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 project insightful future connections. •• Reflections analyze and evaluate the product components in light of PRODUCT 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 past and future creations of the same product. •• Reflections include analysis of self as a learner and project how changes LEARNING 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 to the process would increase capacity as a learner.

COMMENTS: ______

Figure 5. Poster Tier 3. From Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation (2nd ed., p.183), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Copyright © 2015 by Prufrock Press. Used with permission.

This feedback then actually becomes ance on how to do better in future The DAP Tool can also be used forma- feed forward: work. A combination of the two tively by the student as he or she objec- ensures that assessment has an tively examines each bullet on the DAP Feed forward is equally import- effective developmental impact Tool in relation to the product being ant to learners’ progress: while on learning (provided the student created. Ideally, the student would feedback focuses on current per- has the opportunity and support determine strengths along with areas formance (and may simply justify to develop their own evaluative for improvement. DAP Tools can also the grade awarded), feed forward skills in order to use the feedback be used by peers for formative assess- looks ahead to the next assign- effectively). (Gray & Ferrell, 2014, ment. In these instances of formative ment, offering constructive guid- para. 8) assessments, grades are not typically

12 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 recorded in the grade book, since the logic rule: “look at the descriptions have not created the product emphasis is on assessment for learning. of the various levels and decide on before. This consistency saves Assessment does not equate with direct conversions from rubric scores valuable learning time. grading: “Assessment is the process of to grades without first converting to •• The learning ceiling is removed finding out where students are rela- percentages” (p. 116). So, for instance, with the grading scale, thus tive to key goals at a particular time. take the earlier example where the encouraging all students, espe- Grading is the periodic, somewhat DAP Tool had 12 descriptors, and cially those with gifts and talents, public statement about a student’s suppose the average score for those to strive for continuous improve- performance at designated intervals” descriptors on the five-point scale was ment and growth. (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010, p.145). 3.75. The percentage would be 75%, a •• The three tiers make differentia- Summative assessment of learning C by most standards. But in the DAP tion of assessment possible. does result in grades in the grade book. Tool language, this is just .25 from •• Students hone metacognitive When utilizing DAP Tools in this reaching the standard, which is an A. skills via the Reflection compo- manner, the educator can approach it Logic and common sense indicate that nent. This promotes independence analytically or holistically. For exam- a 3.75 is more in the B to B- range. and responsibility for learning. ple, if using the DAP Tool in an ana- See Creating and Recognizing Quality •• A completed DAP Tool can serve lytical way, the teacher might take the Rubrics (Arter & Chappuis, 2006) as a preassessment in any or all of total number of descriptors (e.g., 12), or Assessing Differentiated Student the four components. and, considering that there will hardly Products (Roberts & Inman, 2015a) ever be a Level 6 Professional marked for more detailed examples. Although there is a time and place on a DAP Tool, multiply that by 5, for pen-and-paper assessments, prod- which equates with Level 5 Advanced. BENEFITS OF USING uct development can help students This means that the total possible score THE DAP TOOL develop 21st century skills, including would be a 60. If the goal is meeting critical and creative thinking. Adults the standard, then 48 (based on Level The benefits to using a protocol create products in their work, so devel- 4 which is the proficient) would be the that assists students in developing oping high-level products in school pre- lowest A. The beauty of approaching products as well as educators in assess- pares students for life beyond school. the grade this way is that the teacher ing them are numerous: Products promote excellence and con- can emphasize important compo- •• DAP Tools can be used across all tinuous progress in school and beyond. nents—such as counting the con- content areas and grade levels. tent section double or doubling the •• DAP Tools were created with graphics portion on pamphlet because input from experts who create the REFERENCES that has been an area of concern or products professionally in order Arter, J. A., & Chappuis, J. (2006). Cre- emphasis. to ensure authentic, 21st century ating and recognizing quality rubrics. Use caution when transferring workplace demands. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. any rubric to a grade book. Arter •• Students have a reliable guide Gray, L., & Ferrell, G. (2014). Feed- and Chappuis (2006) argued the to create a product by authentic back and feed forward: Using tech- importance of logic in this endeavor, industry standards. nology to support learner longitudi- especially when approaching rubrics •• Teachers can branch out from nal development. Retrieved from using percentages: “Percentages don’t their typical product offerings http://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/ accurately represent level of learning to better meet student interests feedback-and-feed-forward as measured by a rubric” (p. 116). For and strengths. See Figure 6 for a Roberts, J. L., & Inman, T. F. (2015a). example, if a 3 is circled on one com- Product List. Assessing differentiated student prod- ponent, the student is making progress •• Students can readily have choice ucts: A protocol for development and evaluation toward the standard (according to the in which products they wish to (2nd ed.). Waco, TX: Pru- frock Press. meaning of the performance scale). To make. Roberts, J. L., & Inman, T. F. (2015b). simply divide 3 by 5 (not a 6 since it •• The language is the same Strategies for differentiating instruc- is rarely ever possible), the percentage for Content, Creativity, and tion: Best practices for the classroom is 60%. For most traditional scales, Reflection for all tiers. Because (3rd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. a 60% is a D—and that grade cer- Presentation is the only one that Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enersen, tainly does not reflect someone who changes, it is the only component D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted has almost reached the standard. Arter that needs to be taught, and that education: An evidence-based guide. and Chappuis (2006) suggested the is only the case when students Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 13 Advertisement (online) Greeting Card Play Advertisement (print) Illustrated Story Podcast Advertisement (radio) Interview (live) Poem Advertisement (television) Interview (recorded) Political Cartoon Biography Interview (written) Poster Blog Invention PowerPoint Blueprint Journal Presentation Board Game Lesson Prezi Book Cover Letter (business) Press Release Bulletin Board Letter (friendly) Public Service Announcement Cartoon Letter to Editor (radio) Case Study Mask Public Service Announcement Chart Matrix (television) Children’s Book Mathematical Formula Puppet Choral Reading Mentorship Puppet Show Collage Mime Questionnaire/Survey Collection Mock Trial (attorney) Research Paper Column Mock Trial (defendant) Review (Film, Book, etc.) Commercial Mock Trial (judge) Science Fair Project Computer Graphic Mock Trial (plaintiff) Sculpture Computer Program Model Scrapbook Costume Monologue Script Dance Movie Service Learning Project Debate Mural Short Story Demonstration Museum Exhibit Simulation Diagram Musical Skit Dialogue News Article Song Diorama Newscast Speech (oral) Document-Based Question Newsletter Speech (written) Documentary Op Ed Article Story Telling Dramatic Presentation Open Response Technical Report Drawing Oral History Timeline Editorial Oral Presentation Venn Diagram Essay Outline Video Game Exhibit/Display Painting Volunteer Activity Experiment Pamphlet Web Page Feature Article Peer Evaluation Wiki Game Photo Workshop Graph Photo Essay Written Report Graphic Organizer Plan

PRODUCT LIST

Figure 6. Product List. From Assessing Differentiated Student Products: A Protocol for Development and Evaluation (2nd ed., p. 12), by J. L. Roberts and T. F. Inman, 2015, Waco TX. Prufrock Press. Copyright ©2015 by Prufrock Press. Used with permission.

Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. (2010). has co-authored three books with Julia Roberts and Science in Kentucky and The Center for Leading and managing a differentiated through Prufrock Press. They received the Gifted Studies. Dr. Roberts is on the Executive classroom. Alexandria, VA: Associa- Legacy Book Award from the Texas Association Committee of the World Council for Gifted and for the Gifted and Talented for Strategies for Talented Children and past president of The tion for Supervision and Curriculum Differentiating Instruction: Best Practices for Association for the Gifted. Her writing focuses Development. the Classroom. Tracy co-edited the Legacy on differentiation, gifted education, and advo- Award winning Parenting Gifted Children: cacy. She received the 2011 Acorn Award as the Tracy Ford Inman, Ed.D.., is associate director The Authoritative Guide From the National outstanding professor at a Kentucky 4-year uni- of The Center for Gifted Studies at Western Association for Gifted Children. versity, the first NAGC David Belin Advocacy Kentucky University. She has taught English Julia Link Roberts, Ed.D., Mahurin Award, the 2012 NAGC Distinguished Service at the high school and collegiate levels, as well Professor of Gifted Studies at Western Kentucky Award, and the 2011 William T. Nallia Award as in summer gifted programs. In addition to University, is Executive Director of the Carol for innovative leadership from the Kentucky writing and co-writing several articles, Tracy Martin Gatton Academy of Mathematics Association for School Administrators.

14 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 SPOTLIGHT ON STUDENTS CANs—in terms of design strategy BY LACY COMPTON and business development.) Because the turn-around process between receiving a challenge and pre- senting a design is so short, the Lady Cans have discovered that teamwork is essential. As sixth-year team member Caroline (also a senior at Anderson GIRLS AND High School) told me, this dependence on your team members comes in two forms. First, during the brainstorming and development stage, girls must be STEM: willing to “accept all ideas, no matter how outrageous they must seem.” Once the ideas are more in place and the work begins, communication is THE LADY CANS key for the girls, both between members and with their mentors. Because girls from different parts of Central ROBOTICS TEAM Texas come to work on the robot at different times, they must rely on notes and other communication from ne of the most The Lady Cans, which started their teammates to help guide them fascinating (and in 2009 with six girls, now compete as to what still needs to be completed underresearched, annually in the FIRST Robotics and what progress has already been in my opinion) competition, which aims to involve made. Finally, because the girls are topics in gifted middle and high school students in working on transitioning the team to education today engineering principles as they design be led more by the team members (and is the long-term impact of gifted a robot to complete a game challenge. O less by adult mentors), the communi- programs on girls. Although more The details of the competition are cation needs have increased along with girls are being encouraged in science, released to teams each January, and the demands, with Caroline adding technology, engineering, and math teams then have 6 weeks to complete that the girls are now responsible for (STEM) areas in K–12 programs, their robot, plus write a business plan additional tasks such as “finding spon- there are still huge gender dispari- and prepare for presentation of both ties at the postsecondary levels, with aspects. Since its inception (one of “Part of our core values is to make women receiving far fewer degrees in the team members, Claire1, a senior sure that every girl learn the skills computer science, engineering, and at Austin’s Anderson High School and necessary to be confident in a STEM mathematics/statistics fields than their a 5-year member of the team, notes field and in the FIRST community.” that the team came about when one male peers, according to a study by the sors, designing the robot, inventory- of its founding members “wanted to National Science Foundation (see the ing parts and creating shopping lists, participate in a robotics program that full compilation of statistics on girls among many other important roles.” was separate from her big brother’s and STEM from the National Girls Although these girls love what team”), the team has been supported Collaborative Project at http://www. they do with the engineering of their wholeheartedly by the Girl Scouts of ngcproject.org/statistics). robots, I learned that their work on the Central Texas, which provides “an How do we ensure that girls’ inter- team goes beyond such skills. Last year, environment where [girls] can explore ests in STEM areas transcend what the Lady Cans not only competed in their skills and fulfill and go beyond they learn in the K–12 classroom? the FIRST Robotics Competition, but their potential,” Claire adds. (Claire Perhaps the answer lies in extracur- also took on the “Leave Your Legacy also mentioned that the girls continue ricular pursuits, especially in commu- Business Plan Challenge” sponsored to collaborate with the team they nity involvement and outreach for this by Dell, where they were required to spun off from—Anderson’s AusTIN population. It’s a theory that seems to develop a business plan focused on

be working well for the 25 girls on The 1 The girls’ last names have been omitted in following the girls’ community impact initia- Lady Cans FIRST Robotics Team. with Girl Scout policy. tives. The team also created a video to

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 15 Claire, Caroline, Ariana, and their teammates pose with their robot at the FIRST Robotics competition.

convince Dell to invest in its business the encouraging welcome they found get involved in STEM areas—can you plan. And three of Dell’s top execu- with the Lady Cans team, suggesting see the powerful impact such a message tives, including Michael Dell himself, that girls wanting to get started with could have on your students?) ultimately met with the girls, agreeing such a team or other group not be By coupling the robotics team to invest $3,000 in the team’s plan to afraid to jump right in and ask ques- with the community outreach prin- expand its robotics camp to local Boys tions or share their ideas. They told me ciples central to the Girl Scouts’ mis- and Girls Clubs after the Girl Scouts they hope girls take on the mantra of sion, the Lady Cans have truly seen won the overall competition. “Just do it” and get “involved as early the value of STEM beyond their text- Arianna, a junior from Austin’s as possible,” and more importantly, books and classroom experiments. McCallum High School, suggests that realize the many chances out there for Arianna puts it best: “FIRST has really the group encourages girls to tackle any developing one’s passions: “Being part allowed me to use what I learned in skill sets they’re wanting to develop: of the millennial generation, we have an school in a real-world application. I “Part of our core values is to make sure opportunity that not as many women can now take the math and physics that every girl learn the skills neces- have faced recently—an opportunity that previously made no sense and sary to be confident in a STEM field to do what we want to do while still make it relate to what I’m doing. It’s and in the FIRST community. If a girl wants to learn programming, computer continuing to change societal stigmas extremely fulfilling to see the ideas aided design, business skills, designing facing women.” (And yes, those are the that come out of my brain evolve into websites, managing our social media girls’ words to me when I asked what a 3-dimensional object that can be or running a business, we really make advice they’d give other girls wanting to used in the industry.” sure that they get the opportunity to do so. We pride ourselves on our inter- Teachers and parents, I know I’m not alone in noticing the amazing work team education.” Claire adds that she’s of young Texans. We really do have some of the best and the brightest seen how her early passion for writ- right here at home! The TEMPO board wants to see the fantastic things ing could be adapted to fit different your gifted students are doing, too! Please submit your students’ out- activities, growing her written skills standing work (and get creative—artwork, poems, stories, essays, or “exponentially.” personal narratives are all welcome!) to me at [email protected]. I’d love All three girls are passionate about to help feature your students in a future issue of TEMPO!

16 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 Relating Identification Standards to Best Practices and Student Outcomes Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D.

ince the 1987 mandate in Texas to identify and serve gifted students at all grade levels, school Sdistricts have implemented a variety of practices to address the identification standards outlined in the Texas State Plan for the Education of Gifted/Talented Students (TEA, 2009). In brief, the Texas State Plan identifies these 10 identification standards for districts to be in compliance (TEA, 2009, pp. 3–7): •• Written Board-approved identification policies are disseminated to parents (1.1C); •• Provisions in the Board-approved policies regarding transfers, furloughs, reassessments, exiting, and appeals are included (1.2C); •• Annual identification of students showing potential in each area of giftedness is conducted (1.3.1C, 1.3.2C); •• Students in grades K–12 should be identified (1.4C); •• Data are collected from multiple sources for each area of giftedness (1.5.1C); •• Assessments are in a language students understand or are nonverbal (1.5.2C); •• At least three criteria are used to identify K–12 students for services in each area of giftedness offered by the school district (1.5.3C, 1.5.4C, 1.5.5C); •• Qualitative and quantitative measures need to be included within the criteria (1.5.4C); •• Access to assessment is available to all students in the school district (1.6C); and •• A committee of at least three district or campus educators who have training in nature and needs of gifted and talented students review data (1.7C).

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 17 MOSTLY A GOOD PRACTICE OR Although most of us are very MOSTLY A BAD PRACTICE? familiar with these identification standards, I believe it is important to Mostly review them from time to time and Good Poor Practice consider how they might be imple- Practice Practice mented in your school and how they ❏ Good ❏ Poor 1. The school district uses a standardized, norm-referenced creativity test to identify students for the might relate to student outcomes. On gifted math program. the chart to the left, check yourself by ❏ Good ❏ Poor 2. Using curriculum-based and dynamic assessments, identifying the following examples teachers nominate students for the gifted educa- as mostly good or poor practices to tion program. Students are then administered an see how your thinking aligns with achievement and an ability test. ❏ Good ❏ Poor 3. Because 90% of students in the school district come researchers in the field of gifted edu- from poverty, all students are given a nonverbal cation regarding the best practices in intelligence test. Those who meet the criterion are the identification of gifted and tal- tested further. ented students. ❏ Good ❏ Poor 4. Teachers, parents, and students nominate students for the gifted program annually. ❏ Good ❏ Poor 5. If students pass the STAAR test, they are eligible to be ANSWERS TO MOSTLY A nominated for the gifted program. GOOD PRACTICE AND ❏ Good ❏ Poor 6. Students must perform in the top 2% or 130 on standardized, norm-referenced assessments to be served MOSTLY A POOR PRACTICE in the gifted education program. ❏ Good ❏ Poor 7. The school district uses a portfolio of products and 1. Poor other work, parent and teacher checklists, and an ability test to identify kindergarten students for ser- The assessments that are used in vices in different subject areas. the identification process need to be ❏ Good ❏ Poor 8. The school district uses different criteria for admission aligned to the talent domain and to to the gifted education program depending on the the goals of the program (Johnsen, campus demographics. 2012). Within the context of school- ❏ Good ❏ Poor 9. The same set of assessments is administered to all students during the identification process. ing, creativity is best examined within ❏ Good ❏ Poor 10. Parents appeal the decision of the campus com- the academic domain itself (Wai, mittee regarding their child’s lack of placement in Lubinski, & Benbow, 2005) because the gifted program to the School Board as outlined of the difficulty in establishing a in the Board Policy Handbook. relationship between creativity tests ❏ Good ❏ Poor 11. Scores from each of the five identification instruments are entered on a common form where each score is and their prediction of substantial given a rating from 1 to 5. A five represents a score of accomplishments (Renzulli, 2005). 124 or above or within the 95th percentile or above, a For example, with domain-based cre- four represents a score of 121 to 123 or within the 91st to ativity a teacher might collect products 94th percentile range and so on. If a student scores a 16, he or she is admitted to the program. that show the many different ways a ❏ Good ❏ Poor 12. Students need to meet a minimum intelligence student solves a math problem or the test score to be admitted to the gifted education variety of metaphors used in writing program. an essay. If schools are interested in ❏ Good ❏ Poor 13. Because the elementary school’s program focuses examining creativity beyond the aca- on general intellectual ability, students are reeval- uated before they transition to the middle school demic domains such as in the arts, program because it is more focused on core subject then a consensual assessment approach areas. appears to have the most research sup- ❏ Good ❏ Poor 14. A school-based committee comprised of the princi- port (Amabile, 1982, 1996). In this pal, the counselor, the gifted education coordinator, approach, experts in a particular field and gifted, general, and special education teachers reviews all of the information for each student and such as art, music, or theater use their makes decisions for identification and/or for exiting judgment and experience to evaluate services. creative products and performances. ❏ Good ❏ Poor 15. The school district has developed gifted education Even at the elementary level strong services in the four core subject areas and has identi- agreement exists among raters in judg- fied different instruments to identify students for each service. ing students’ performances (Baum, Owen, & Oreck, 1996).

18 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 2. Poor While both camps would support the all sources of information should have In this example, the teacher is use of nonverbal tests with English training to increase their understand- used as the sole source of referral for language learners, any test needs to ing of gifts and talents and have check- additional testing and acts as a gate- be supplemented with other data and lists that assess observable behaviors keeper for the identification process. matched to student characteristics in different domains to increase their Research studies indicate that teach- (Worrell & Erwin, 2011). In this way, reliability across observers. ers’ perceptions may be influenced by students are able to demonstrate their preconceived notions of giftedness talents in areas that are not assessed 5. Poor such as gender stereotypes (Siegle by one measure. Moreover, when the In this example, similar to the & Powell, 2004), academic achieve- majority of students are in populations teacher nomination and the nonver- ment (Hunsaker, Finley, & Frank, that are traditionally underrepresented bal assessment above, a single source is 1997), socioeconomic background in gifted programs, the school district used. Moreover, the STAAR test is not (Hunsaker et al., 1997), verbal ability may need to consider the develop- intended to identify students for gifted and social skills (Speirs Neumeister, ment of local norms. National norms and talented programs and will most Adams, Pierce, Cassady, & Dixon, are built on the assumption that all likely have a ceiling effect for advanced 2007). Although dynamic (e.g., test- students are afforded a similar educa- students. In other words, there are not ing, teaching, and retesting) and tional opportunity (Lohman & Lakin, enough items on a grade-level test to curriculum-based assessments (e.g., 2008). Since this is not the case, local examine above-level performance observations of problem solving or norms are able to account for differ- (Swiatek, 2007). Another weakness curricular tasks) can help with iden- ences in socioeconomic status, race/ is that students whose language and ethnicity, and parental education academic skills differ from those on tifying students from traditionally (Worrell & Erwin, 2011). the state’s high-stakes test may be underrepresented groups (Borland, regarded as academically deficient and 2014), teachers will still need profes- 4. Good not suited to high levels of academic sional development to understand all This example uses multiple sources challenge (Gallagher, 2004). While aspects of giftedness (Briggs, Reis, & (e.g., teachers, parents, and students) achievement tests are certainly good Sullivan, 2008). to nominate students for the gifted sources of information, they assess program. Similar to the need for pro- what a student has already acquired 3. Poor fessional development of teachers in in or outside of school. Schools need In this example, similar to the understanding all aspects of gifted- to consider whether or not the goal of teacher nomination above, a sin- ness, parents also need to understand the program is to serve students who

gle source is used. In this case, the the characteristics of gifted and tal- already are clearly more advanced gatekeeper is a quantitative measure ented students and receive nomination than their peers or those who have instead of a qualitative assessment. forms that list observable behaviors the potential (Lohman, 2005a). Nonverbal tests have been viewed (Worrell & Erwin, 2011). Parents do Remember that the state’s definition as reducing linguistic, cultural, or provide important information about clearly states, “gifted and talented economic obstacles that keep under- behaviors that might not be observed students mean a child or youth who represented groups from accessing at school such as interests and com- performs at or shows the potential for gifted and talented services (Naglieri pleting academic work at home (Lee performing at a remarkable high level & Ford, 2003). On the other hand, & Olszewski-Kubilius, 2006). When of accomplishment” (Texas Education some researchers have challenged this trained, teachers are reliable sources of Code, 29.121.Definition, TEA, 1997, assumption by suggesting that nonver- identification information and are best p. 18). bal tests do not predict performance in for providing information about psy- academic domains (Lohman, 2005b). chosocial aspects of high functioning 6. Poor Although data are mixed regarding the such as student motivation, self-regula- Setting a cutoff within the top predictive validity of various nonver- tion, and task commitment (Borland, 2% or a 130 standard score does not bal assessments, the Test of Nonverbal 2014). Although some researchers have consider the standard error of mea- Intelligence (TONI), for example, was supported the reliability of peer nom- surement (SEM). Since all tests have able to predict Hispanic children’s cog- inations (Cunningham, Callahan, some error, a single test score should nitive development (Gonzalez, 1994) Plucker, Roberson, & Rapkin, 1998; be viewed as an estimate of a stu- and was also able to predict scores on Johnsen, 2011), others suggest that dent’s actual performance. For exam- achievement tests (Mackinson, Leigh, peers may be influenced by popular- ple, suppose that Kori scored 125 on Blennerhassett, & Anthony, 1997). ity (Blei & Pfeiffer, 2007). Therefore, an intelligence test with an SEM of

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 19 5 points—missing the school dis- but also students’ interests and talents lessons and student work portfo- trict’s cutoff by 5 points. One would within and outside of the school set- lios (Briggs et al., 2008), expect that 68%of the time her true ting (Briggs et al., 2008) •• Emphasizing informal assess- score would be within the range of ments versus formal assessments 120–130 (adding and subtracting 8. Poor (Briggs et al., 2008), and one SEM from 125); 95% of the time, Setting different criteria for dif- •• Using multiple indicators of gifted within the range of 115–135 (adding ferent schools raises access concerns behaviors (Frasier & Passow, and subtracting two SEMs from 125); according to the Office for Civil 1994). and 99% of the time, within the range Rights (Trice & Shannon, 2002). All of 110–140 (adding and subtracting aspects of the identification process 9. Poor three SEMs from 125). In interpreting should be applied in a nondiscrimina- The assessments need to be Kori’s score, if she were to take the tory manner. In addition, researchers aligned to the program and to each test again, she might conceivably score suggest that differences among eth- student’s characteristics. For example, within the above average (e.g., 110) to nic/racial groups on intelligence tests ability might be measured differently very superior (e.g., 140) range 99% are manifestations of an achievement for students who are non-English speakers versus those who are fluent in English. Multidimensional assess- Foundations such as the ments need to address appropriately diversified services and the diversity of school district’s definition students (Robinson, Shore, & Enersen, of gifted and talented, its 2007). array of services in the core 10. Good In this example, the Board has areas, student characteristics outlined its policies and the parents within the district, and board are following them (TEA, 2009). policies will influence both 11. Po o r This approach has a number of practices and outcomes. problems. First, combining scores doesn’t identify the strengths of indi- of the time (Johnsen, 2011). Given gap, not bias (Frisby & Braden, 1999; vidual students. Examining each crite- the SEM and errors associated with rion separately allows the committee to Reynolds & Carson, 2005; Worrell, any test’s ability to predict long-term look for the student’s best performance 2005). To increase the inclusion of performance, a school district’s goal and provides information for pro- underrepresented populations, these should be to set cut offs that serve the gramming (Johnsen, 2011). Second, practices are recommended: largest number possible, not restrict as mentioned previously, rigid cutoff •• Training teachers in multicultural students whose potential needs to be numbers do not consider measurement recognized and developed. awareness so that they recognize error, neither do ratings from 1 to 5. Is diverse talents (Briggs & Reis, there really a true difference in point 7. Good 2004; Ford, Moore, & Milner, values when considering a student who This example uses multiple 2005), scored at the 94th percentile versus the sources (student, parent teacher), and •• Implementing talent development 95th percentile? Third, the approach varies the formats (portfolio, check- opportunities prior to identifica- is statistically unsound. Standard or lists, tests), which can identify indi- tion (e.g., front-loading; Briggs et index scores can be manipulated (e.g., vidual student strengths within a al., 2008), added together) but ratings cannot (see specific domain. Portfolios are able •• Assessing pre-skills—those that Johnsen, 2011). Case study approaches to showcase skills and are predictive would lead to advanced skills are much better in identifying stu- of future performance (Johnsen & within a domain (Worrell & dents’ strengths and needs. Ryser, 1997; VanTassel-Baska, 2008). Erwin, 2011), Educators should be cautious, how- •• Using performance and alterna- 12. Poor ever, that items within the portfolios tive assessments such as observa- Intelligence tests are a good pre- represent not only classroom projects tions of students during enriched dictor of school performance but

20 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 are just one source of information. Multiple sources and criteria should be used in making decisions regarding a Foundations for Identification: student’s gifts and talents. Intelligence Definition, Services, Student Characteristics, tests are also not sufficient in predict- Professional Development, Policies ing outstanding achievement or emi- nence and should be used along with domain-specific assessments (Terman, 1925; Worrell & Erwin, 2011). Student Outcomes

13. Poor This example is primarily a pro- Quality gram services problem. The program Equal Access to Inclusive Procedures and needs to provide a learning contin- Services Interpretation Evidence uum of service options (TEA, 2009). They need to be comprehensive and cohesive so that students’ talents can be developed beginning in kindergar- Figure 1. Relationship of best practices to student outcomes ten through grade 12. If a continuum is present, then there is no need for work for identification procedures specialties to ensure the identifica- reevaluating students as they transi- and due process; tion of twice-exceptional students; tion from the elementary to the mid- •• all involved in the identification •• special attention needs to be paid dle school. process should receive profes- to underrepresented populations; sional development, which should and 14. Good include multicultural awareness; •• cutoff scores should consider the Assuming that the commit- •• identification procedures are con- standard error of measurement tee members have received training ducted consistently and reliably and should not be rigidly applied in gifted education (TEA, 2009), across the school district so that because of various contextual fac- this example is an excellent practice all students have equal access to tors—case studies are best. because it involves educators with dif- services; ferent perspectives who review all of •• assessments need to be specific to LEARNER OUTCOMES the assessment information. Including each student and matched to pro- special educators also assists the com- gram services; Implementing these best practices mittee in identifying twice-exceptional •• multiple sources are important in should lead to the desired student out- students—those with gifts and disabil- providing a comprehensive picture come of identifying all students who ities. Twice-exceptional students may of the student’s gifted behaviors; need gifted education services. Desired be overlooked because their deficits •• along with standardized tests, student outcomes might include may hide their gifts and vice versa multiple forms of assessments whether or not equal percentages of (Pereles, Baldwin, & Omdal, 2011). should be used (e.g., portfolios, students are being nominated, identi- dynamic, performance, curricu- fied, and selected across schools; how 15. Good lum-based, checklists); identified students’ succeed and are The school district in this example •• technically sound instruments retained in the programs; and/or the has aligned its assessments to services should have sufficient ceiling to how the program reflects the school and to students. They understand that assess the advanced knowledge district’s demographics (see NAGC, students have different strengths that and skills of gifted students; 2010, and TEA, 2009). The school’s need to be recognized and developed •• the interpretation of assessments annual evaluation (see 5.3C in TEA, through appropriate services. should be conducted by individ- 2009) might examine how the founda- In reviewing all of the examples, uals knowledgeable about gifted tions for identification influence prac- these best practices emerged as those education and tests and measure- tices and how both of these influence most often supported by researchers ment (e.g., reliability and validity); student outcomes (see Figure 1). and the Texas State Plan (TEA, 2009): •• the selection committee needs to Foundations such as the school •• policies should provide a frame- be comprised of educators across district’s definition of gifted and tal-

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 21 ented, its array of services in the core fication standards for school districts studies of exemplary gifted programs. areas, student characteristics within to be in compliance. Although school In C. A. Tomlinson, D. Y. Ford, S. the district, and board policies will districts may select the ways that they M. Reis, C. J. Briggs, & C. A. Strick- influence both practices and out- implement these standards, research- land (Eds.), In search of the dream: comes. For example, an emphasis on ers have identified best practices for Designing schools and classrooms that work for high potential students from “potential” as opposed to “achieve- the identification of gifted and tal- diverse cultural backgrounds (pp. ment” within the definition may influ- ented students. These practices relate 5–32). Washington, DC: National ence the types of assessments that are to policies, professional development, Association for Gifted Children. used to identify students. Teachers equal access to services, alignment of Briggs, C. J., Reis, S. M., & Sullivan, E. may use more talent development assessments to each student and to E. (2008). A national view of prom- activities in their observations, assess program services, underrep- ising programs and practices for cul- resented populations, quality turally, linguistically, and ethnically When educators sources and types of assess- diverse gifted and talented students. ments, inclusive interpre- Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 131–145. work together tations of assessments, and Cunningham, C. M., Callahan, C. M., professional development Plucker, J. A., Roberson, S. C., & Rapkin, A. (1998). Identifying His- of educators involved in the and embrace best panic students of outstanding talent: identification process. School Psychometric integrity of a peer nom- practices, students districts need to evaluate the ination form. Exceptional Children, foundations for their identi- 64, 197–209. who need services in fication procedures and prac- Ford, D. Y., Moore, J. L., III, & Milner, tices annually to ensure that H. R. (2005). Beyond colorblindness: gifted education will desired student outcomes are A model of culture with implications be identified. achieved. When educators for gifted education. Roeper Review, work together and embrace 27, 97–103. best practices, students who Frasier, M. M., & Passow, A. H. (1994). pre-skills within a domain, and collect need services in gifted education will Toward a new paradigm for identifying talent potential (RM9412). portfolios over a semester to determine be identified. each student’s potential for advanced Storrs: University of Connecticut, programming. This focus on potential, The National Research Center on in turn, might influence the student REFERENCES the Gifted and Talented. outcome of increasing the percentage Frisby, C. L., & Braden, J. P. (Eds.). Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology (1999). Bias in mental testing [Spe- of students from poverty identified. of creativity: A consensual assessment cial issue]. School Psychology Quar- Similarly, practices related to a more technique. Journal of Personality and terly, 14(4). inclusive interpretation of assessment Social Psychology, 43, 997–1013. Gallagher, J. J. (2004). No Child Left information, such as considering Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in con- Behind and gifted education. Roeper the standard error of measurement text. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Review, 26, 121–123. when making decisions and using Baum, S., Owen, S. V., & Oreck, B. A. Gonzalez, V. (1994). A model of cogni- case studies as opposed to matrices, (1996). Talent beyond words: Identi- tive, cultural, and linguistic variables will influence the professional devel- fication of potential talent in dance affecting bilingual Hispanic chil- opment of educators who are on the and music in elementary students. dren’s development of concepts and selection committee and school dis- Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 93–101. language. Hispanic Journal of Behav- trict policies—foundations for identi- Blei, S., & Pfeiffer, S. I. (2007). Peer rat- ioral Sciences, 16, 396–421. fication. In summary, foundations for ings of giftedness: What the research Hunsaker, S. L., Finley, V. S., & Frank, suggests? Unpublished monograph, identification and best practices work E. L. (1997). An analysis of teacher Gifted Research Center, Florida State nominations and student perfor- together in influencing each school’s University, Tallahassee, FL. mance in gifted programs. Gifted desired student outcomes. Borland, J. H. (2014). Identification of Child Quarterly, 41, 19–24. gifted students. In C. M. Callahan, Johnsen, S. K. (Ed.). (2011). Identifying SUMMARY & J. A. Plucker (Eds.), Critical issues gifted students: A practical guide (2nd and practices in gifted education: What ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. The Texas State Plan for the the research says (2nd ed., pp. 323– Johnsen, S. K. (2012). School-related Education of Gifted/Talented Students 342). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. issues: Identifying students with (TEA, 2009) has identified 10 identi- Briggs, C. J., & Reis, S. M. (2004). Case gifts and talents. In. T. L. Cross &

22 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 J. R. Cross (Eds.), The handbook for CEC-TAG educational resource (pp. ally precocious youths: An age 13 to school counselors serving gifted stu- 63–86). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. age 33 longitudinal study. Journal of dents: Development, relationships, Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The Three-Ring Educational Psychology, 97, 484–492. school issues, and counseling needs/ Conception of Giftedness: A devel- Worrell, F. C. (2005). Cultural variation interventions (pp. 463–475). Waco, opmental model for promoting cre- TX: Prufrock Press. ative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg within American families of Afri- Johnsen, S. K., & Ryser, G. R. (1997). & J. E. Davidson (Eds.) Conceptions can descent. In C. L. Frisby & C. The validity of portfolios in predict- of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 246–279). R. Reynolds (Eds.), The comprehen- New York, NY: Cambridge Univer- ing performance in a gifted program. sive handbook of multicultural school Journal for the Education of the Gifted, sity Press. psychology (pp. 137–172). Hoboken, 20, 253 –267. Reynolds, C. R., & Carson, D. (2005). Lee, S.-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. Methods for assessing cultural bias in NJ: Wiley. (2006). Comparison between talent tests. In C. L. Frisby & C. R. Reyn- Worrell, F. C., & Erwin, J. O. (2011). Best search students qualifying via scores olds (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook practices in identifying students for of multicultural school psychology (pp. on standardized tests and via par- gifted and talented education pro- Roeper Review, 28 795–823). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. ent nomination. , grams. Journal of Applied School Psy- 157–166. Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enersen, chology, 27, 319–340. Lohman, D. F. (2005a). An aptitude per- D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted spective on talent: Implications for education. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. identification of academically gifted Siegle, D., & Powell, T. (2004). Explor- Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D., is a professor in the minority students. Journal for the ing teacher biases when nominating Department of Educational Psychology at Baylor Education of the Gifted, 28, 333–360. students for gifted programs. Gifted University in Waco, TX, where she directs the Child Quarterly, 48 Lohman, D. F. (2005b). The role of non- , 21–29. Ph.D. program and programs related to gifted Speirs Neumeister, K. L., Adams, C. verbal ability tests in the identifica- and talented education. She is editor of Gifted M., Pierce, R. L., Cassady, J. C., & tion of academically gifted students: Child Today and coauthor of Identifying Gifted Dixon, F. A. (2007). Fourth-grade An aptitude perspective. Gifted Child Students: A Practical Guide, the Independent teachers’ perceptions of giftedness: Quarterly, 49, 111–138. Study Program, RTI for Gifted Students, Using Implications for identifying and serv- Lohman, D. F., & Lakin, J. (2008). Non- the National Gifted Education Standards for ing diverse gifted students. Journal verbal test scores as one component of University Teacher Preparation Programs, Using for the Education of the Gifted, 30, an identification system: Integrating the National Gifted Education Standards for 479–499. ability, achievement, and teacher rat- Swiatek, M. A. (2007). The talent search PreK–12 Professional Development and more ings. In J. L. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), model past, present, and future. than 250 articles, monographs, technical reports, Alternative assessments for identifying Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 320–329. and other books related to gifted education. gifted and talented students (41–66). Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of She has written three tests used in identifying Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. genius: Vol. I. Mental and physical gifted students: Test of Mathematical Abilities for Mackinson, J. A., Leigh, I. W., Blenner- traits of a thousand gifted children. Gifted Students (TOMAGS), Test of Nonverbal hassett, L., & Anthony, S. (1997). Stanford, CA: Stanford Press. Intelligence (TONI-4), and Screening Assessment Validity of the TONI-2 with deaf Texas Education Agency. (2009). Texas Gifted Students (SAGES-2). She serves on the Ameri- and hard of hearing children. state plan for the education of gifted/ Board of Examiners of the National Council can Annals of the Deaf, 142, 294–299. talented students. Austin, TX: Author. for Accreditation of Teacher Education and is a Naglieri, J. A., & Ford, D. Y. (2003). Trice, B., & Shannon, B. (2002, April). reviewer and auditor of programs in gifted edu- Addressing underrepresentation of Office for Civil Rights: Ensuring equal cation. She is past president of The Association gifted minority children using the access to gifted education. Paper pre- for the Gifted (TAG) and past president of the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test sented at the annual meeting of the Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented (NNAT). Gifted Child Quarterly, Council for Exceptional Children, (TAGT). She has received awards for her work 47, 155–160. New York. in the field of education, including NAGC’s National Association for Gifted Children VanTassel-Baska, J. (2008). Using per- President’s Award, CEC’s Leadership Award, (2010). NAGC Pre-K–grade 12 gifted formance-based assessment to doc- programming standards: A blueprint ument authentic learning. In J. L. TAG’s Leadership Award, TAGT’s President’s for quality gifted education programs. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), Alternative Award, TAGT’s Advocacy Award and Baylor Washington, DC: Author. assessments with gifted and talented University’s Investigator Award, Teaching Pereles, D., Baldwin, L., & Omdal, S. students (pp. 129–146). Waco, TX: Award, and Contributions to the Academic (2011). Addressing the needs of stu- Prufrock Press. Community. She may be reached at Department dents who are twice-exceptional. In Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. of Educational Psychology, Baylor University, M. R. Coleman & S. K. Johnsen (2005). Creativity and occupational One Bear Place #97301, Waco, TX 76798, USA (Eds.), RtI for gifted students: A accomplishments among intellectu- or [email protected]/.

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 23 TIPS FOR TEACHERS BY JOYCE E. KYLE MILLER, PH.D., AND RAINE MAGGIO Kahoot! and Google Digital Tools: Efficient and Effective

Kahoot! and Google are favorite digital tools of many classroom teachers, and are viewed by teachers as effective and efficient. These tools provide students opportunities to engage with the same tool simultaneously. All students may access the tools at different times addressing varied issues and topics all in one class period. Students receive immediate feedback from the teacher, and teachers are able to monitor and provide timely feedback to their students.

ahoot! is a website that allows teachers to create quizzes that students take in a game-like format using their mobile devices as a response system. K Kids absolutely love it! Teachers sign up for a free account at getkahoot. com. Once an account has been created, the fun begins! Kahoot! provides for the creation and sharing of quizzes and products with educators throughout the country. Creating a Kahoot! is very simple; just add multiple-choice questions and answer choices. Questions can include images or graphs as well. Teachers may add as many or as few questions as they like and may choose to use a quick 5-question warm-up or a full 50-question review; it’s entirely up to the teacher. Once the Kahoot! is created and finished, the teacher simply hits PLAY. A game room pin is displayed via the data projector and students will log in using that game pin. Students can use any device that connects to the Internet to join the game. Some devices that can be used are iPhone, iPad, Android, Chrome books, Kindle Fire, laptops, or any personal computer (PC). Students go to Kahoot!. it on their device and enter the game pin and their name, which will appear on the teacher’s page. This page can then be projected on a screen for viewing by the teacher’s class. As the students join, the teacher chooses a video or an image to show in the background. When all the students have joined the room, the teacher clicks on the “start” icon and the quiz begins. Questions and answer choices are displayed while fun game-show type music plays. Students use their device to tap on the correct answer choice and earn points, not only for answering correctly but also for how quickly they answer. When time runs out for a question, a bar graph is displayed showing how the class answered and which choice is correct. It also shows the top 5 players and their scores. The game continues, as well as the excitement, as students progress to the end of the quiz. After the final question, the winner, score, and correct question responses are displayed. In addition, the teacher can download all the answer responses for each student. Kahoot!s that have been shared by other educators are also available on the website. A teacher can search topics and find matching Kahoot!s. Teachers can use these shared Kahoot!s exactly like they are, or they can be duplicated and edited by the teacher and saved as their own Kahoot!. There are a wide variety or Kahoot!s on the site and it grows daily. Students can also create their own account and make Kahoot!s. Kahoot!s may be created by gifted and talented students as a differentiation activity that can then be experienced by the class. Kahoot! is easy, fun, and free. What a great tool for engaging student learning!

24 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 oogle technology tools afford gifted students opportu- ideas of other students. A Google Doc/Google Drive can nities to engage in asynchronous online collaboration. be created using a stimulating discussion prompt to which GGroups of students may collaboratively use Google students are asked to respond. Following time for thought Drive, Google Docs, Google Forms, and Google Slides to and recording of ideas, the teacher can then project the create products, edit, store, access, and share documents, results on the screen and lead the class in a discussion of files, and folders all at the same time. Teachers and students the shared ideas. The use of the K-W-L strategy in combi- will need to begin by registering for a free Google Gmail nation with Google Docs or Google Drive provides a brain- account. Account benefits include use of the Google dig- storming opportunity resulting in increased ideas generated ital tools and free online storage which is accessible from and immediate recognition of what the class Knows (K), anywhere there is an Internet connection. Wants to know (W), and what they have Learned (L). The Both student and teacher work together simultane- strength of the collaborative process afforded by Google ously, sharing learning and creating products that reflect Docs and Google Drive is that every student in the class different perspectives. Use of the Google Web 2.0 tools has the opportunity to contribute to the final product in a facilitate social interaction, active learning, decision mak- timely manner as ideas are recorded and saved for retrieval ing, and communication. In addition, these tools allow for at a later date. automatic saving of work; work can be archived, viewed, An almost paperless classroom can be created when and edited by anyone who has the URL. All created prod- handouts are stored using Google Drive or Google Docs. ucts can be maintained in one location. Students who are absent from class on days when certain Google Drive and Google Docs are very similar. material is discussed are able to access those materials and Students may use Google Docs to collaborate in the writ- benefit from the handouts, video clips, and other resources ing and editing process. Whether students are signing up archived in Google Drive or Google Docs. for group projects, signing up for potluck dinner items, Google Forms can be used to create surveys, rubrics,

or scheduling a conference time with the teacher, Google opinion polls, and auto-graded quizzes. A survey can be Drive is a great tool to use. There are no papers to pass developed to assess student perceptions of a variety of issues; around, no papers to lose, or work that’s lost forever because the results are tabulated, compiled, and graphed for mean- it was not saved. Contributions to Google Drive or Google ingful and immediate classroom discussion. In addition, Docs are always automatically saved and can be retrieved reading records, volunteer hours, and word walls can be any time after being created. Students may create jour- initiated, added to, and maintained over time. nals using Google Docs and, instead of taking home loads Using Google Slides, presentations can be created and of journals, the teacher can access student journals saved edited to accompany group presentations, and members in Google Docs. Students are able to add photos, videos, of the groups can work on the presentation at the same and online links to books, articles, and other resources to time. Students who have investigated assigned portions of make their journals more interactive and personalized. In an overall project are able to work on their section of slides addition, Google Docs makes collecting and compiling simultaneously online. No longer do students, separated by brainstormed lists, feedback, thoughts, and reflections a distance and time, need to struggle with how to complete quick process involving all students at the same time. a group, out-of-class project. Teachers and students can Class discussion can be enriched with the use of Google create products, maintain and access documents, surveys, Docs and Google Drive as a central place for students to and slide presentations at one central location. Time is saved record their ideas while viewing and piggy-backing on the and work is made so much manageable.

Kahoot!, Google Docs, Google Drive, Google Forms, and Google Slides enable students to work online collaboratively on projects at any time while teachers are able to monitor student progress and provide feedback for improvement as the projects progress. The use of these tools results in gifted students being empowered as independent, engaged learners, and teachers being able to accomplish the goal of increasing student-student collaboration effectively and efficiently.

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 25 by Kimberly A. Hardin, Corina R. Kaul, Yara N. Farah, and Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D.

variety of formative and summative assessments are needed when appraising gifted students’ learning and when differentiating the curriculum. These include standardized achievement and benchmark tests, portfolios, and product and performance assessments. Each has its purpose. Standardized A achievement and benchmark tests are developed to measure the mastery of a particular set of knowledge and skills; portfolios generally include student work that assesses a student’s progress and accomplishments in a given area; and product and performance assessments assess more complex thinking such as problem solving, creativity, and research.

26 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 Because most standardized assessments do not have 2007; Kaplan, 2008; VanTassel-Baska, 2014). In addition, enough ceiling to measure gifted students’ growth (Ryser & Kaplan (2008) suggested that the assessments represent Rambo-Hernandez, 2014) and do not have sufficient items authentic work of the discipline, extend the understanding to assess the depth of gifted students’ learning (VanTassel- of the subject matter, relate to the student’s interests, foster Baska, 2008), more and more educators are looking to personal and social goals, and reinforce the skills of both other types of assessments to differentiate their curricu- productivity and presentation. lum and identify the effects of their instruction on gifted A variety of instruments are useful when assessing students’ outcomes. These alternative assessments have advanced products and performances (Jolly & Kettler, been described as authentic and performance and/or prod- 2004; Feng, VanTassel-Baska, Ouek, Bai, & O’Neill, 2004; uct-based. Frey and Schmidt (2007) have further defined Kim, Van Tassel-Baska, Bracken, Feng, & Stambaugh, authentic assessments as the measure of ability on tasks that 2014). Jolly and Kettler (2004) assessed leadership abil- represent real-world problems and performance assessments ities through standardized instruments, self-assessment, as measures of skills or abilities. These researchers suggest peer-assessment, and adult observations. They reported a that quality formative assessments should provide feedback relationship between students’ self-report of ability and to the teacher for the purpose of improving instruction, and the observations of others (Jolly & Kettler, 2004). Feng et feedback to students about their al. (2004) were able to assess not quality of learning. Therefore, only academic growth but also the assessments need to be aligned A variety of formative students’ views of the curriculum not only to above-level content when using multiple assessments. standards but also to the quality and summative In addition, researchers found of learning expected from gifted that traditional assessments, such and talented students. assessments are as standardized tests, were effec- To identify effective methods tive for measuring reasoning skills for assessing advanced products needed when appraising and content-area achievement but and performance in gifted pop- that nontraditional methods, such ulations, this review included gifted students’ as performance-based assessments articles published since 2004 and tests of critical thinking, were in Gifted Child Today, Gifted needed to measure more complex Child Quarterly, Journal for the learning and when thinking (Kim et al., 2014). Education of the Gifted, Journal of Including students in the Advanced Academics, and Roeper differentiating assessment process was studied Review. To be included, articles in three of the articles included needed to examine the assess- curriculum. in this review of the literature ment of advanced products and (Newman, 2004; Sriraman, performances in K–12 classrooms. Articles that included 2004; Thompson & McDonald, 2007). Newman (2004) university-level assessments and studies conducted outside found that when students were involved in self-assessment of the United States were excluded. Using these criteria, 16 during the creative process their products were of higher articles were identified and summarized. quality. Likewise, Sriraman (2004) discovered that when The type of articles found included empirical studies n( mathematically gifted students were asked to reflect upon = 11) and recommendations for the development and imple- and analyze their own thinking processes they were able mentation of performance and product assessments (n = 5). to produce at a level characteristic of professional math- Populations studied were diverse and included elementary, ematicians. Being given the opportunity to create both middle, and high school students as well as teachers. assignments and assessments for their own products has Advocates for alternative product and perfor- also proven motivating to gifted learners (Thompson & mance-based assessments suggest that students represent McDonald, 2007). The most creative and expressive prod- learning in multiple and creative ways (Duggan, 2007). ucts resulted from student-constructed assignments. Because most state assessments are developed for typical An additional theme found in our examination of the students, other types of assessments need to be used to assess product assessment literature was the evaluation of written student growth (Ryser & Rambo-Hernandez, 2014). These products, which was discussed in three of the reviewed assessments need to be related to the learning outcome articles (Hall, 2007; Kaufman, Gentile, & Baer, 2005; and include advanced, higher level thinking and open- Olthouse, Edmunds, & Sauder, 2014). The authors found ended problem-solving tasks that challenge gifted learn- that students use written products to reflect their ideas, ers to demonstrate deep meaningful learning (Duggan, identities, emotions, and intellectual understandings in

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 27 one concrete package (Hall, 2007; thinking, use multiple formats and solutions?, (e) How can artistic repre- Olthouse et al., 2014). In evaluating approaches, involve students in the sentations of concepts promote col- written products, researchers reported assessment process, align the learning laboration between students?, and (f) that creative writers rate student com- activities with the learning outcomes, What significant and specific benefits positions similarly to experts in the and carefully interpret the results for gifted students may be gained from field using the consensual assessment when differentiating the curriculum the process of representing school-en- technique (Kaufman, Gentile, & Baer, for gifted students. countered concepts artistically? 2005). This technique supports the practice of review, feedback, and col- Feng, A. X., VanTassel-Baska, J., laboration in the writing process with REFERENCE Quek, C., Bai, W., & O’Neill, gifted learners. VanTassel-Baska, J. L. (2008). Alternative B. (2004). A longitudinal assess- Product and performance assess- assessments with gifted and talented ment of gifted students’ learning ments were used to show student students. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. using the Integrated Curriculum growth in five intervention studies Model (ICM): Impacts and per- Duggan, T. J. (2007). Ways of know- (Feng et al., 2004; Hertzog, 2007; ceptions of the William and Mary ing: Exploring artistic represen- Kim et al., 2014; Newman, 2004; language arts and science curric- tation of concepts. Gifted Child Powers, 2008). Researchers (Feng et ulum. Roeper Review, 27, 78–83. Today, 30(4), 56–63. al., 2004; Kim et al., 2014) found that doi:10.1080/02783190509554294 the use of the Integrated Curriculum The author described three examples This mixed-methods study investigated Model (ICM) resulted in increases in of using artistic representation of con- the effects of implementing William & grammar, persuasive writing, literary cepts across classroom curriculum—a Mary’s Integrated Curriculum Model analysis and scientific content knowl- ninth-grade science classroom, a (ICM) in science and language arts edge, concept mastery, and research South Dakota scholarship contest, courses for gifted students. The sample skills. Newman (2004) reported and a summer program. In each of included 973 gifted students from one that Talents Unlimited resulted in these examples, students were given northeastern suburban school district. more highly rated, quality products the opportunity to choose a product Participants had been instructed using than the control group. Moreover, from a list of creative representations the ICM curriculum for 1 year (35%), Power (2008) found that indepen- such as photography, art, poetry, song 2 years (21%), or 3 years (44%) during dent study increased students’ moti- lyrics, musical compositions, skits, third to fifth grade. Using pre- and vation and fostered critical thinking. posters, brochures, and films. The postperformance-based assessments, On the other hand, Hertzog (2007) author suggested that when students participants’ growth in language arts reported a number of internal and demonstrated their understanding of and science were examined. In grades external barriers when implementing concepts through creative products 3–5, statistically significant gains a project approach in two first-grade they increased their sense of agency were demonstrated in grammar, per- classrooms. These included the loss of and were able to teach the content to suasive writing, literary analysis, and control, development and implemen- others. When deciding on content to scientific research skills as measured tation time, and district curriculum use for artistic products, the author by pre-post Diet Cola Test*, pre-post and state mandates. Administrative suggested that teachers use either literary analysis instruments, and pre- support therefore is crucial when specific text content or broad con- post writing assessments. Performance implementing more problem- and cepts and should ask themselves the data demonstrated steadily increasing project-based learning. following questions: (a) How many academic growth from third to fifth A review of the recent literature in options do we currently give students grade with large effect sizes (from .52 the area of differentiated product and to demonstrate their understanding of to 1.38), which reflected its practical performance assessments suggests the what they learn in school?, (b) How educational importance. Increasing need for establishing criteria for the can we benefit from broadening the achievement was demonstrated with evaluation of learning through student possibilities for the representation of repeated exposure over 2 to 3 years. production. Many instruments and concepts in the school setting?, (c) Additional survey data collected models have been established in the How do we foster and develop our stu- from relevant stakeholders, including field of gifted education for the assess- dents’ creativity through our assign- 367 parents, 110 educators, and 732 ment of products and performances. ments and assessments?, (d) How can students, found that the majority of When using these assessments, edu- our students benefit from examining respondents viewed the curriculum as cators need to clarify the purpose or the different perspectives from which challenging, promoting peer interac- learning outcomes, target high-level they encounter problems and develop tions, and well organized. Limitations

28 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 from the research included a lack of a authors provided a summary of the lit- their problems in a physically and comparison group of gifted students eral definitions, components, formats, psychologically safe environment. In within the school district. Since ongo- and intentions for authentic and per- one session, the topic of discussion ing growth can be demonstrated by formance assessments, and they sug- was related to stereotypical images of the use of assessments, suggestions for gest this categorization scheme: people of color in society and in mass future research included replication •• The purpose of performance media. The students in the program studies and investigating of long-term assessment is to measure a skill or showed increased engagement in group outcomes on other standardized tests ability. dialogues, which led the facilitator to like the AP or SAT. •• The purpose of authentic assess- ask the boys to bring a self-composed *The Diet Cola Test can be accessed at: https:// ment is to measure ability on tasks piece conveying their feelings towards education.wm.edu/centers/cfge/curriculum/science/ that represent real-world problems the topic. According to the author, the materials/index.php or tasks. students’ writings were an interpretive Frey, B. B., & Schmitt, V. L. (2007). •• Formative assessment should be design to better understand students’ Coming to terms with classroom used to provide feedback to the personal perspectives. However, to assessment. Journal of Advanced teacher to assess the quality of have a complete understanding of the Academics, 18, 402–423. instruction or improve teaching students’ mindset, additional data were doi:10.4219/jaa-2007-495 behaviors. collected through social interaction •• Assessment for learning should with the participants and non-struc- The authors of this article sug- be used to provide feedback to tured interviews. The use of creative gested that the difficulty of judging students to assess the quality of written expression provided a unique the theoretical benefit of modern learning and to improve learning direction to develop awareness about assessment approaches, such as per- behaviors. the strategies and resources needed to formance-based assessment, relates assist the adolescent in facing negative to the lack of common definitions Hall, H. R. (2007). Poetic expres- sions: Students of color express psychological forces. The product of of terms being used by researchers, each of the young men illustrated his advocates, and practitioners. Although resiliency through metaphors and similes. Journal of Advanced Aca- identity, contrary to the stereotypically researchers and teacher educators portrayed image of being helpless and emphasize the importance of using demics, 8, 216–244. doi:10.4219/ jaa-2007-355 dysfunctional. The analysis showed performance-based assessment, that students used familial as well as authentic assessment, and formative In order to study and unravel the non-familial resources, such as peers, assessment, teachers do not receive sys- multilayer nature of resilience among mentors, or church activities, for sup- tematic training in using assessment young men of color, this qualitative port and reducing stressful moments. strategies. This lack of training, as well study used performance-based prod- The author of this article highlighted as the absence of common definitions, ucts. Through creative writing such the importance of using shared expe- makes it harder for teachers to apply as poetry, spoken word, and hip-hop riences as a source of understanding the findings and recommendations of rhymes, three teenage males were able how youth of color utilize their skill research to assessments in their class- to voice their individual realities and and talents to be resilient. room. After their review of the litera- responses to their social and cultural ture and a discussion of the differences worlds. The three adolescents in this Hertzog, N. B. (2007). Transport- in conceptualizing and using authen- study attended an all-boys program ing pedagogy: Implementing tic and performance assessments, the designed for students to talk about the project approach in two

Proud to announce giftedandtalented.com as a sponsor of:

c o r p o r a t e p a r t n e r p r o g r a m

Sponsor:

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 29 first-grade classrooms. Journal of also required more preparation time. specific behaviors most attributed to Advanced Academics, 18, 530– Staying in compliance with the reward the emergent leaders were the ability 564. doi:10.4219/jaa-2007-559 and punishment system required by to: (a) keep their group focused, (b) In this qualitative case study, the author school policies, both teachers realized offer compromises satisfactory to the that extrinsic rewards were in opposi- identified the issues and strengths of group, (c) garner respect for his or her tion to children being in charge of their using a project-based approach in two opinion, and (d) obtain frequent agree- learning as well as motivated to learn. first-grade, low-achieving classrooms. ment from the group members. Half of For that reason, rewarding intrinsic val- The project approach used in these two the emergent leaders scored relatively ues such as hard work, critical think- classrooms mirrored Renzulli’s Type higher on their self-assessments than ing, creativity, and independent work III enrichment, where students pursue their peers. Limitations of the research should be used during project-based answers to their own questions through included lack of interrater reliability approaches. Although both teachers three phases. In Phase I, children exam- and observations that were limited believed that students learned more ine their prior knowledge and deter- only to the conference setting. The through projects, they expressed wor- mine the areas in which they are most authors concluded that gifted leaders ries and difficulties in assessing students knowledgeable and the areas they need can be identified in a relatively short in meeting the district curriculum and to learn more about. During the next amount of time though observation of state mandates. phase, students do field work and col- leadership characteristics. Expanded lect data through different means such Jolly, J., & Kettler, T. (2004). Authen- services to students gifted in leader- as observations, surveys, and inter- tic assessment of leadership in ship may be a resulting implication of views. After data analysis, students in problem-solving groups. Gifted this research. *Both leadership self-assessments and the Leadership Phase III will share their findings and Child Today, 27(1), 32–39. Observation Survey can be accessed at: http://files.eric. new knowledge with parents, other stu- The purpose of this descriptive ed.gov/fulltext/EJ682653.pdf dents, and teachers. This instructional research was to ascertain observable approach involves students in devel- Kaplan, S. N. (2008). Projects: Yay or behaviors to identify emergent leaders nay. Gifted Child Today, 31(2), 47. oping a variety of products including in problem-solving scenarios and to poems, songs, role-playing, drawings, or investigate if a relationship between The author described criteria for three-dimensional models. Throughout these identified observable leadership designing project-based learning. She the academic year, the teachers imple- behaviors and leadership self-reports suggested the effectiveness of strategies mented two enrichment projects. The existed. Participants included 83 used with gifted students should be author collected data using field notes, identified gifted students in eighth based on practice rather than inclusion observations, interviews, and docu- through twelfth grades who attended or omission of such activities. When ments related to the teaching activities Baylor University’s Interdisciplinary designing projects that will act as prod- and student products. The data analy- Creative Problem Solving (CPS) ucts of learning, she recommends that sis showed that teachers faced external Conference. At the onset, participants teachers should ask themselves sev- and internal barriers in implementing a completed two leadership self-assess- eral guiding questions: Is the project project approach. Although the teach- ments* including one based on the aligned with standards and learning ers perceived researchable questions in Renzulli-Hartman Scales for Rating goals? Does it develop the potential of small group as authentic to learning, Behavioral Characteristics of Superior the learner? Do student explanations both teachers were worried about los- Students and another founded on the of their projects reflect deep learning? ing control of the topic and hence pur- Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales How can students define their role as sued the activities as a whole class. In (GATES). After completion of the CPS well as the role of others in the creation addition, teachers found it hard to let process, participants and counselors of the project? The author suggested students just work on their projects. In recorded a member from their group that projects used with gifted learners fact, they felt the need to teach them who most exhibited each one of the should (a) represent authentic work of basic skills and provide constant sup- 12 leadership behaviors outlined on the discipline; (b) reinforce established port. Since a project-based approach the Leadership Observation Survey.* content standards; (c) support and to instruction requires at least 3 weeks, Observations obtained from students extend understanding of the subject both teachers decided to implement and adults reflected agreement on rec- matter and mastery of skills; (d) relate only two projects, worrying that they ognized group leaders. Although each to the student’s academic and personal could not cover the required curriculum emergent leader exhibited a greater interests; (e) foster academic, personal, with more projects. Furthermore, proj- number of leadership behaviors com- and social goals; ects not only required more time but pared to the peers in the group, the (f) reinforce the acquisition of the

30 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 skills of productivity as well as pre- Kim, K. H., VanTassel-Baska, J., of the study showed that the use of sentation skills, and (g) be displayed Bracken, B. A., Feng, A., & Stam- ICM increased all students’ learning in a context that underscores their rel- baugh, T. (2014). Assessing science in concepts and content. Using the evance for students and their academic reasoning and conceptual under- PBA the analysis further showed that contributions. standing in the primary grades ICM has benefits for all students, using standardized and perfor- regardless of their initial achieve- Kaufman, J. C., Gentile, C. A., & mance-based assessments. Journal ment level, gender, and ethnicity. The Baer, J. (2005). Do gifted student of Advanced Academics, 25, 47–66. authors explained that the reasoning writers and creative writing experts doi:10.1177/1932202X14520946 skills and science achievement could rate creativity the same way? Gifted be measured by using standardized In this study, the authors examined Child Quarterly, 49, 260–265. tests, however, the more advanced, (a) whether the use of the Integrated doi:10.1177/001698620504900307 complex science concepts and content Curriculum Model (ICM) with stu- This study was conducted using the needed PBA to be measured. Hence, dents increased their science content consensual assessment technique measuring student learning should be knowledge and reasoning and (b) where an expert in the field rates the conducted using both traditional and whether the use of ICM increased con- work of an individual. The authors non-traditional assessment. tent and concept mastery in science were interested in seeing whether or not the ratings given by gifted writers as measured by pre-post Performance Newman, J. L. (2004). Talents and were similar to those given by creative Based Assessment (PBA). Schools were Type IIIs: The effects of the Tal- writing experts. A sample of 27 short assigned randomly to experimental ents Unlimited Model on creative stories and 28 poems were drawn and comparison groups. The experi- productivity in gifted young- from the 1998 National Assessment mental group included 250 students sters. Roeper Review, 27, 84–90. of Educational Progress (NAEP) who received instruction in the ICM doi:10.1080/02783190509554295 Classroom Writing Study for evalua- for 2 years, participated in the PBA The purpose of this quasi-experimental tion. Raters participating in this study for 2 years, and took the first and sec- study was to determine if instruction included eight gifted creative writers, ond year follow-up post-achievement using the Talents Unlimited Model all juniors in high school, from the tests. The units in the curriculum would affect the quality and quan- New Jersey Governor’s School of the intervention aimed at developing an tity of completed Type III products, Arts and 13 expert judges. Experts understanding of macro-concepts, which are produced for an authentic represented middle school teachers scientific reasoning, and investigative audience to address a real-world prob- (N = 4), published creative writers (N skills. In addition, the unit content lem. Research participants included = 4), and psychologists in the field of was aligned with the national and 147 students in third to sixth grade creativity (N = 5). Raters were asked to state standards. Teachers who were from three Birmingham, AL, subur- read the short stories and poems and implementing ICM were trained in ban school districts. Cluster sampling assign them a rating of 1 to 6 with the teaching models used in the unit, was used to randomize students and 1 being the lowest level of creativity science content, concept development, teachers by schools into the treat- and 6 being the highest. Participants and assessments. Both standardized ment or control groups. Students in were asked to assign ratings based tests and nontraditional assessments the treatment group (n = 59) received on their own personal definition of were used to assess the learning of stu- Talents Unlimited instruction, and creativity. The authors found that dents. The Metropolitan Achievement control group students (n = 45) were ratings reported within and across Test was used as standardized measure instructed using Renzulli’s Schoolwide both groups were closely related to of science achievement, the Test of Enrichment Model. Each completed each other, meaning that novices and Critical Thinking was used as a mea- Type III products. The quality of the experts rated the writing similarly. sure of critical thinking, and PBA products were measured using the Using this information, the authors was used to assess conceptual under- Student Product Assessment Form suggested that evaluations of creativ- standing and content attainment. (SPAF)* of the Schoolwide Enrichment ity by gifted novices in a field may be Conceptual understanding was shown Model that assesses 15 factors related similar to evaluations given by experts. in students’ responses to open-ended to the product, problem-solving pro- They also suggested that the findings question including examples, features cess, and content on a Likert-scale of this study supported the use and of macro-concepts, and generalization. from 1 to 5, resulting in a maximum benefits of peer review, feedback, and Content attainment was shown in stu- score of 75. The experimental group’s collaboration between gifted writers dent’s drawing of concept maps about products were more highly rated than in the classroom. the topics being studied. The findings the control group’s products overall

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 31 (M = 63 vs. M = 53) and had higher In the stories and poems, detachment a notebook to collect their research average quality ratings on each indi- from teachers and curriculum were findings, reflections, and ideas during vidual factor. Statistically significant depicted showing that the relevance the IS process and presented their differences were also reported in the of academic content is dependent on invention along with a PowerPoint number of finished Type III products the students’ proactive involvement at the end of the unit. Students were as well as specific measures of state- with the content. The authors sug- graded on their IS using a rubric and ment of purpose, problem focusing, gested that teachers need to identify then participated in an interview and logical sequence, audience, originality, ways of connecting students’ personal responded to a questionnaire about the beyond grade-level quality, attention values and experiences with the con- IS process. The author found that stu- to detail, demonstrated effort, and tent. In addition, the findings showed dents (a) valued the freedom of choice advanced subject familiarity. Most that the school should be a place where given to them through the IS process, participants (87%) in the treatment talent is celebrated instead of a place (b) understood the topic to a greater group reported that they “maybe where one’s abilities need to be hid- depth, and (c) enjoyed participating improved” or “definitely improved” on den. The struggle between academic in what felt like real-world tasks. Data all six areas listed on the questionnaire. achievement and social acceptance from the interviews and question- In conclusion, the researchers asserted needs to be addressed by counselors. naires showed that all students were that educators have the responsibility In addition, academic competition motivated (and challenged) by the IS to provide students with opportunities may have negative consequences and experience and all said they would like and instructional guidance in integrat- may be more positive when individuals to do it again. Teachers involved in ing real-world products for authentic compete against their own standards. the study said that IS fostered criti- audiences so that students can foster According to the authors, the writ- cal thinking skills, provided personal research inquiry, problem identifica- ten products were tools that reflected choice and subject depth, and allowed tion, implementation management, ideas, identity, emotions, and intellect students to use research and computer presentation, and evaluation skills. in one concrete package. skills that they would not otherwise *The Student Product Assessment Form (SPAF) can be have the opportunity to develop. accessed at: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/pdf/spaf.pdf Powers, E. A. (2008). The use of independent study as a viable dif- Ryser, G. R., & Rambo-Hernandez, K. Olthouse, J. M., Edmunds, A. L., ferentiation technique for gifted E. (2014). Using growth models & Sauder, A. E. (2014). School learners in the regular classroom. to measure school performance: stories: How do exemplary teen Gifted Child Today, 31(3), 57–65. Implications for gifted learners. writers portray academics? Roeper Researchers in this study addressed the Gifted Child Today, 37(1), 17–23. Review, 36, 168–177. doi:10.1080 following questions: Does the use of The current focus on high-stakes testing /02783193.2014.919622 independent study foster motivation has led to an accountability movement In this study, 23 creative writings by and achievement for gifted students? in American education. Assessment talented writers were analyzed to iden- Does student choice motivate student data and growth modeling are used tify their everyday school experience participation and achievement in inde- to measure student academic growth and academic identity. According to pendent study? How does the partner- and to show adequate yearly progress the authors, creative writing is viewed ship of social studies and real-world (AYP). The problem with most current as fabricated, but captures the tone, tasks motivate historical thinking growth models is that they are designed voice, and metaphor of the writers. and achievement? While a group of for measuring proficiency in typically For that reason, hermeneutic inquiry 20 gifted seventh graders were chosen developing children, not gifted learners. was used in which the researchers to participate in independent studies The authors discussed the introduction explored the meanings in the words, tied to inventions in social studies, 16 of the No Child Left Behind Growth expression, and metaphors that tal- finished their projects. The indepen- Model Pilot Program (GMPP) in 2001, ented writers used in their products. dent study (IS) was designed using which used status models to demon- With this approach to analysis, the the Powers Plan, which included the strate AYP. These models looked at a researchers felt that they honored steps of preparation, planning, prob- school’s overall level of student profi- the role of the writer and captured ing, product, presentation, and port- ciency at one point in time but failed a more authentic perspective. Using folio. Students spent time researching to recognize improvement in individ- this methodology the researchers inventions throughout history and ual scores. In 2005, the GMPP was found four emerging themes across then creating their own invention modified to include multiple growth the writings: competition, intellec- that would solve a problem existing models including transition models, tualism, geekdom, and detachment. now or in the future. Students used trajectory models, and projection mod-

32 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 C.P.’S CORNER els. Current growth model practices are expanding to include more than just proficiency measures. Interpretations of growth models now includes growth description (magnitude of growth), growth prediction (future scores), and value-added (causes of growth). The authors stressed that different growth models answer different questions so no single model gives “best results.” More statistically sound growth models are needed to accurately assess gifted students. Criteria for statistically sound growth models include (a) at least three observations or test scores, (b) compara- ble scores across time, and (c) measures of time for every test administration. In using growth models with gifted learners, educators need to be aware that assessments intended to measure proficiency in typically developing students will contain (a) error when used with gifted students, (b) ceiling effects, and (c) regression to the mean. The authors suggested the use of above-level and computer-adaptive testing options for gifted learners. Sriraman, B. (2004). Gifted ninth graders’ notions of proof: Investi- gating parallels in approaches of characteristics are paramount to the descriptive case study/action research, mathematically gifted students work of mathematicians at a profes- examined differences in preference and professional mathematicians. sional level. These findings suggest and achievement between teach- Journal for the Education of the that mathematically gifted students er-constructed and student-con- Gifted, 27, 267–292. doi:10.4219/ have the potential to think and rea- structed assignments and assessments. jeg-2004-317 son similarly to professionals within Sixth-grade participants included 53 the field. Classroom teachers should students (25 gifted and 29 advanced) In this study four mathematically be aware of the learning process and in a gifted and talented program at a gifted freshman were given the open- allow for inductive learning of math- southwest suburban school. Of these, ended “Circumscribing a Triangle Problem” and asked to prove their ematics for gifted learners rather than the teacher identified 15 underachievers answers. The author conducted one- solely delivering content using deduc- (8 gifted and 7 advanced) by compar- hour clinical interviews with the tive methods. ing academic grades, standardized test students to document their think- scores, and observed student potential. Thompson, D. D., & McDonald, D. The teacher-created assignment* (and ing processes and compare them to M. (2007). Examining the influ- those of professional mathematicians. assessment rubric*) allowed a student ence of teacher-constructed and to select from three different prompts Through the analysis of student work, student-constructed assignments interview transcripts, and the author’s to write an essay on Jacob Have I Loved on the achievement patterns of personal notes, four themes emerged by Katherine Paterson. Subsequently, gifted and advanced sixth-grade that were similar across all four of students were given an opportunity to students. Journal for the Educa- the students’ mathematical thinking: design their own project and create an tion of the Gifted, 31, 198–226. visualization, intuition, empiricism assessment to measure their achieve- (measurement and concrete exam- doi:10.4219/jeg-2007-676 ment. Data collected from written ples), and reversibility—all of these A teacher-researcher team, using open-ended questionnaires illuminated

Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented 33 student preferences and decision-mak- place in the various flexible-group- Yara N. Farah, M.Ed., is currently a Ph.D. ing. Students appreciated flexibility in ing clusters. They can also be used to candidate in the department of Educational choosing an essay prompt but selected assess higher order thinking skills and Psychology at Baylor University. Her emphasis areas of study are gifted and talented education, their topic based on various motiva- project-based curriculum. Teachers and measurement. Her research interests relate tions: underachievers considered the may use assessment data reflectively to gifted education, mathematics enrichment and ease; achievers picked the one expected because a high score on a performance instructional practices in inclusive classrooms, to earn the highest grade; and gifted assessment points to a high-function- and twice-exceptional students. Yara is author on students generally made personal con- ing classroom environment. When several of “What the Research Says” articles in nection when selecting the topic. designing performance-based assess- TEMPO, as well as other journal articles related ments, educators should clarify the to assessment and acceleration. Previously, she Students overwhelmingly pre- worked for a year as a special education teacher ferred the student-constructed assign- purpose; target high-level skills such for students in grades 3 and 4. She also worked ment. Underachievers also favored as deduction, induction, problem solv- for one year as a paraprofessional in a fully inclu- creating their own assessment, but ing, decision-making, and invention; sive school. She has a master’s degree in special the achievers were equally divided on use multiple approaches; and care- education, mild to moderate, from California their preference of student- or teach- fully consider the use of assessment State University Northridge (CSUN) and a results. Teachers may choose to use bachelor degree in elementary education, with er-created assessment. With respect to a minor in psychology and a minor in philoso- quality of products, the most creative or modify existing assessments such phy, as well as a Diploma in Special Education and expressive products resulted from as The Diet Cola Test*, International from the American University of Beirut (AUB). the student-constructed assignment. Baccalaureate assessments, and AP She may be reached at the Department of Limitations of the study included: exams* or refer to the National Educational Psychology, Baylor University, the number of participants, the lack Association for Gifted Children One Bear Place #97301, Waco, TX 76798 or [email protected]. of previous historical participant Common Core State Standards guidebooks for additional prototypes. Susan K. Johnsen, Ph.D., is a professor data, the single subject (language in the Department of Educational Psychology arts), the particular novel, the choice The author concluded that perfor- at Baylor University in Waco, TX, where of an essay as the teacher-constructed mance-based formative and summa- she directs the Ph.D. program and programs project, and the limited measurement tive assessments are indispensable in related to gifted and talented education. She of two assignments. Research impli- all subject domains because they pro- is editor of Gifted Child Today and coauthor of Identifying Gifted Students: A Practical Guide, cations for teacher-practitioners sug- vide a comprehensive understanding of student performance capability and the Independent Study Program, RTI for Gifted gest that underachieving behaviors Students, Using the National Gifted Education evidence of ongoing academic growth. may be reduced by allowing students Standards for University Teacher Preparation greater input in selection of products *AP exam sample free-response questions can be Programs, Using the National Gifted Education found at www.collegeboard.com and The Diet Cola Standards for PreK–12 Professional Development and assessment criteria to demon- Test can be accessed at: https://education.wm.edu/ and more than 250 articles, monographs, tech- strate learning as well as optimizing centers/cfge/curriculum/science/materials/index.php nical reports, and other books related to gifted their motivation and achievement for Kimberly A. Hardin, M.Ed., is a doctoral education. She has written three tests used in they are best resource for “generating student in the Department of Educational identifying gifted students: Test of Mathematical optimal, authentic, and meaningful Psychology at Baylor University. Her research Abilities for Gifted Students (TOMAGS), Test of learning” (p. 217). interests include gifted education, adult learn- Nonverbal Intelligence (TONI-4), and Screening ing, teacher preparation, and professional *The appendices of the article include the: teach- Assessment Gifted Students (SAGES-2). She serves development. She spent 9 years in the Texas er-created essay prompts, teacher-created assessment on the Board of Examiners of the National public school system where she taught third and rubric, student-created assignment instructions, and Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education fourth grades including cluster groups of gifted self-reflection questions. and is a reviewer and auditor of programs in and talented students. She earned her bachelors in elementary education (EC-4) from Abilene gifted education. She is past president of The VanTassel-Baska, J. (2014). Perfor- Christian University (ACU) and her master’s Association for the Gifted (TAG) and past pres- mance-based assessment: The road degree in educational administration from ident of the Texas Association for the Gifted to authentic learning for the gifted. Lubbock Christian University (LCU). She may and Talented (TAGT). She has received awards Gifted Child Today, 37(1), 41–47. be reached at [email protected]. for her work in the field of education, including Corina R. Kaul, M.Ed., received her NAGC’s President’s Award, CEC’s Leadership doi:10.1177/1076217513509618 B.S. degree from the University of Oregon, her Award, TAG’s Leadership Award, TAGT’s master’s from Baylor University, and is cur- President’s Award, TAGT’s Advocacy Award This article outlined the need for per- rently a doctoral student in the Department of and Baylor University’s Investigator Award, formance-based assessment (PBA). Educational Psychology at Baylor University Teaching Award, and Contributions to the The author suggested that PBA can where she is specializing in gifted education. Academic Community. She may be reached at be used as a diagnostic tool in iden- Her current research interests focus on the long- term effects of summer enrichment programs on Department of Educational Psychology, Baylor tifying what curriculum should be low-income students and addressing affective University, One Bear Place #97301, Waco, TX taught and/or which students to needs of gifted learners. 76798, USA or [email protected]/.

34 Tempo • Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, 2015 Call For Manuscripts Here is your chance to have your voice heard! If you would like to be considered for publication in an upcoming issue of TEMPO, please follow the guidelines for article submissions below. We are currently soliciting manuscripts for the following issues. The TAGT Editorial Board identifies themes for upcoming issues of TEMPO and appreciates articles that are submitted for possible publication tied to the noted themes. The Editorial Board also encourages researchers/ authors to submit articles that are not tied to a particular theme. Some issues may include more than one theme based on articles submitted. For more details, please contact TEMPO editor Krystal Goree at [email protected].

Equity in Gifted Advocating for the Gifted Underserved Populations Education due October 15, 2015 due January 10, 2016 due July 1, 2015

Guidelines for 2015 TAGT Board Article Submissions Board Officers President: Hardin Simmons University, Abilene TEMPO welcomes manuscripts from Mary Christopher, Ph.D., educators, parents, and other advocates of President-Elect: Priscilla Lurz, Boerne gifted education. Manuscripts may focus on Past President: Marilyn Swanson, Southern Methodist University, Dallas all areas of gifted/talented education including Secretary/Treasurer: D’Lana Barbay, Vidor ISD policies, applications of research, programs, and Executive Director: JJ Colburn, CAE practices. TEMPO is a juried publication and manuscripts are evaluated by members of the Board Members editorial board and/or other reviewers. K-12 Teacher: Christina Administrator: At-Large #2: Brenda Davis, Please keep in mind the following when Dearman, Ph.D., Denton Theresa Biggs, Plano ISD Bosqueville ISD, Waco submitting manuscripts: Parent: Tracy Fisher, Coppell At-Large #1: Merrill At-Large #3: Mary Lea 1. Manuscripts should be 2,000 to 10,000 University: Joyce Miller, Ph.D. words on a topic related to gifted education. Texas A&M University – Hammons, Brownsville ISD Pfenninger, 2. References should follow the APA style Commerce Region III ESC, Victoria outlined in the sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Editorial Board Members Association. Krystal Goree, Ph.D., Chair, Baylor University 3. Submit an electronic copy, typed, 12 pt. font, double-spaced manuscript. Use a 1 1/2" margin Ann Batenburg, Ph.D., Susan Johnsen, Ph.D., Baylor University on all sides and number pages. Southern Methodist University Amanda Rudolph, Ph.D., 4. In addition to the title page, a cover page Bonnie Casmer, Temple ISD Stephen F. Austin State University must be attached that includes the author’s Judy Bridges, Midland ISD Glen Teal, Ed.D., Andrews ISD name, title, school or program affiliation, Lacy Compton, Prufrock Press Inc. Suzy Thompson, Ph.D., Leander, TX home and work address, e-mail address, phone numbers, and fax number. Editorial Peer Review Board 5. Place tables, figures, illustrations, and James Bishop, Westlake, TX Connee Duran, Waco ISD Patricia Milleric, Houston Community College photographs on separate pages. Each should Lynette Breedlove, Ph.D., Gwen Frank, Ph.D., The Gatton Academy, SUNY College at Oneonta Cecily Moore, San Marcos CISD have a title and be referenced in the text. Western Kentucky University Arthur Granada, Ed.D., Qunita Ogletree, Submit electronically with manuscript. Judy Bridges, Midland ISD Wichita State University First Metropolitan IDC 6. Author(s) is fully responsible for accuracy of Dina Brulles, Ph.D., Meredith Hairell, Victoria ISD Connie Phelps, Ph.D., quotations, citations, figures, and facts. Arizona State University Karen Hassell, Ed.D., Waco, TX Emporia State University 7. Author(s) of accepted manuscripts must Paige Carpenter, Regina Hein, The School of Melissa Saphos, Pearland ISD Northwest ISD transfer copyright to TEMPO, which holds Liberal Arts & Science, Dallas, TX Rebecca Schlosser, J.D., Ed.D., Bonnie Casmer, Temple ISD Sul Ross State University copyright to all articles and reviews. Kaley Janes, Baylor University Mary Christopher, Ph.D., Patricia Smith, Ed.D., 8. Upon acceptance of a manuscript, the Ellen Lukasic, University of Texas, Hardin Simmons University University Charter Schools Prairie View A&M University author(s) submits a 50–100-word biography Alicia Cotabish, Ed.D., Bronwyn MacFarlane, Ph.D., Sandra Stocks, and a 100–150-word abstract of the University of Central Arkansas University of Arkansas, Little Rock Cypress-Fairbanks ISD manuscript. Jeff Cranmore, Ph.D., Judith Martin, Ph.D., Debra Troxclair, Ph.D., McKinney, TX Bulverde, Texas Lamar University Please send manuscripts and inquiries to: Ryan Davis, Christi McWilliams- Kimberly Tyler, Ph.D., Temple ISD/Temple College Abendroth, Ed.D., Ann Arbor Texas Wesleyan University Krystal Goree, Ph.D. Lynn Dodge, ESC Region II School of the Performing Arts Marcy Voss, Boerne ISD TEMPO Editor Lemoyne Dunn, Ph.D., Joyce Miller, Ph.D., University of Melanie Williams, [email protected] University of North Texas Texas A&M–Commerce Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD Non Profit Org. U.S. Postage PAID 5920 W. William Cannon Drive Austin, Texas Building 7, Suite 102 Permit No. 1400 Austin, TX 78749

TA GT 2015 leading conversations DECEMBER • SANANTONIO TEXASASSOCIATIONFORTHEGIFTED & TALENTED

Join the conversation to promote awareness of effective gifted education strategies and the limitless possibilities of G/T students. Connect with nearly 2,000 educators at the TAGT 2015 Annual Conference, December 2–4 at the Henry B. Gonzales Convention Center and the Grand Hyatt Hotel in San Antonio.

Opening general session speaker: Thursday, December 3rd A Nation Empowered: Evidence Trumps the Excuses Holding Back America’s Brightest Students

Nicholas Colangelo, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Education at the University of Iowa

Closing general session speaker: Friday, December 4th Breakthrough: Empowering Youth to Change the World

Jack Andraka Teen Innovator tagtconference.org