Affiliation:
1. Université du Québec à Montréal
Abstract
This article reanalyses Pegnato and Birch's data in their often cited 1959 article, especially their measures of effectiveness and efficiency. The author shows that these two concepts are not independent, as usually assumed in studies examining the criterion-related validity of various identification techniques for the gifted and talented. Rather, both are related to the number of subjects singled out as a result of the cutoff value chosen to implement the method. Consequently, most comparisons made between and within methods become invalid. A simple alternative is presented: compare the correla tion coefficients of the predictors with the criterion. It is concluded that this methodological flaw, as well as some other technical limitations, invalidates the most often cited observation from that study, namely, that teacher nominations should not be relied upon as an identification technique for the gifted and talented.
Subject
Developmental and Educational Psychology,Education
Reference12 articles.
1. The effect of different types of nomination forms on teachers' identification of gifted children
2. Baldwin, L.J. & Gargiulo, D.A. (1983). A model program for elementary-age learning-disabled /gifted youngsters. In L. H. Fox, L. Brody, & D. Tobin (Eds.), Learning-disabled/gifted children: Identification and programming (pp. 207-221). Baltimore, MD: University Parks Press.
3. Freeman, J. (1985). A pedagogy for the gifted. In J. Freeman (Ed.), The psychology of gifted children (pp. 1-20). New York: Wiley .
Cited by
38 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献