Daniel A. Long, Scott J. Peters, D. Betsy McCoach, Anthony Gambino, Del Siegle
{"title":"你如何认同决定了你认同谁:天赋衡量标准、标准、界限和组合规则的选择对被认定为天才的学生的学术概况和多样性的影响","authors":"Daniel A. Long, Scott J. Peters, D. Betsy McCoach, Anthony Gambino, Del Siegle","doi":"10.1177/00169862251407628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the impact of variation in gifted student identification systems on the size, equity, and academic profiles of identified students. Utilizing data from 40,834 students across 519 elementary schools in seven districts, we modeled 64 hypothetical systems, focusing on measures (ability test scores, cognitive scores, and teacher ratings), norms (district and building), cut-off levels (5% and 10%), and data point combinations. Findings reveal that OR rules and teacher rating scales significantly increase identification rates among traditionally underrepresented groups. However, these methods lead to a gifted population with more varied abilities and lower average achievement. Also, different rules with similar average characteristics often identify markedly different student groups. No single identification system achieved complete equity in identifying gifted students from underserved racial/ethnic backgrounds or low-income families. This study provides practitioners guidance on the implications of different identification systems and an online tool to examine differences (https://id-app.shinyapps.io/id_shiny_app/).","PeriodicalId":47514,"journal":{"name":"Gifted Child Quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How You Identify Determines Who You Identify: The Implications of the Choice of Talent Measures, Norms, Cut-Offs, and Combination Rules on the Academic Profile and Diversity of Students Identified as Gifted\",\"authors\":\"Daniel A. Long, Scott J. Peters, D. Betsy McCoach, Anthony Gambino, Del Siegle\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00169862251407628\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigates the impact of variation in gifted student identification systems on the size, equity, and academic profiles of identified students. Utilizing data from 40,834 students across 519 elementary schools in seven districts, we modeled 64 hypothetical systems, focusing on measures (ability test scores, cognitive scores, and teacher ratings), norms (district and building), cut-off levels (5% and 10%), and data point combinations. Findings reveal that OR rules and teacher rating scales significantly increase identification rates among traditionally underrepresented groups. However, these methods lead to a gifted population with more varied abilities and lower average achievement. Also, different rules with similar average characteristics often identify markedly different student groups. No single identification system achieved complete equity in identifying gifted students from underserved racial/ethnic backgrounds or low-income families. This study provides practitioners guidance on the implications of different identification systems and an online tool to examine differences (https://id-app.shinyapps.io/id_shiny_app/).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gifted Child Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gifted Child Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862251407628\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gifted Child Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862251407628","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
How You Identify Determines Who You Identify: The Implications of the Choice of Talent Measures, Norms, Cut-Offs, and Combination Rules on the Academic Profile and Diversity of Students Identified as Gifted
This study investigates the impact of variation in gifted student identification systems on the size, equity, and academic profiles of identified students. Utilizing data from 40,834 students across 519 elementary schools in seven districts, we modeled 64 hypothetical systems, focusing on measures (ability test scores, cognitive scores, and teacher ratings), norms (district and building), cut-off levels (5% and 10%), and data point combinations. Findings reveal that OR rules and teacher rating scales significantly increase identification rates among traditionally underrepresented groups. However, these methods lead to a gifted population with more varied abilities and lower average achievement. Also, different rules with similar average characteristics often identify markedly different student groups. No single identification system achieved complete equity in identifying gifted students from underserved racial/ethnic backgrounds or low-income families. This study provides practitioners guidance on the implications of different identification systems and an online tool to examine differences (https://id-app.shinyapps.io/id_shiny_app/).
期刊介绍:
Gifted Child Quarterly (GCQ) is the official journal of the National Association for Gifted Children. As a leading journal in the field, GCQ publishes original scholarly reviews of the literature and quantitative or qualitative research studies. GCQ welcomes manuscripts offering new or creative insights about giftedness and talent development in the context of the school, the home, and the wider society. Manuscripts that explore policy and policy implications are also welcome. Additionally, GCQ reviews selected books relevant to the field, with an emphasis on scholarly texts or text with policy implications, and publishes reviews, essay reviews, and critiques.