Screening for the Identification of Gifted Students: Requirements, Considerations and Tools

1. Screening for the Identification of Gifted Students: Requirements, Considerations and Tools Timothy J. Runge, Ph.D., NCSP Assistant Professor Director, IUP Center for Gifted Education

2. When to Screen

3. PA Definition of Giftedness Pennsylvania regulations state that a child is mentally gifted if the child: • Has an IQ of 130 or higher (and other commensurate skills commensurate) OR • Has an IQ below 130 when multiple criteria strongly indicate gifted ability. So what are these MULTIPLE CRITERIA? : (PDE, Chapter 16; Santoro, 2011)

4. Multiple Criteria • Pennsylvania’s multiple criteria include the following: • The student is a year or more above grade achievement level for the normal age group in one or more academic subjects as measured by nationally-normed and validated achievement tests able to accurately reflect gifted performance. • The student has an observed or measured rate of acquisition/retention of new academic content or skills that reflect gifted ability • The student has demonstrated achievement, performance or expertise in one or more academic areas as evidenced by excellence of products, portfolio or research, as well as criterion-referenced team judgment. • The student has demonstrated early and measured use of high level thinking skills, academic creativity, leadership skills, intense academic interest areas, communication skills, foreign language aptitude or technology expertise. • There are not intervening factors such as English as a second language, disabilities, gender or race bias, or socio/cultural deprivation masking gifted abilities. (PDE, Chapter 16; Santoro, 2011)

5. Remember Two-Pronged Eligibility • To be declared eligible for gifted education services: • Child must be IDENTIFIED as mentally gifted • IQ of 130 or multiple criteria AND • Child must NEED gifted support services

6. At What Age Can Eligibility Testing Be Requested? • Early elementary school – Preschool/Kindergarten • Whenever the child is suspected of being gifted by a teacher or parent • As with special education, request must be informed and in writing

7. Time of Year • (§16.21(a)) Each school district is required to develop and implement a system to locate and identify all students within the district who are thought to be gifted and in need of specially designed instruction. • (§16.22(b)) Referral for gifted multidisciplinary evaluation shall be made when the student is suspected by teachers or parents of being gifted and not receiving an appropriate education under Chapter 4 (relating to academic standards and assessment) and one or more of the following apply: • A request for evaluation has been made by the student’s parents under subsection (c). • The student is thought to be gifted because the school district’s screening of the student indicates high potential consistent with the definition of mentally gifted or a performance level which exceeds that of other students in the regular classroom. • A hearing officer or judicial decision orders a gifted multidisciplinary evaluation.

8. Referral Sources • Teachers • Parents • Peers • Self • IQ tests • Achievement tests • Creativity tests • Product and performance assessments

9. Identification Procedures • Districts should have an evaluation request form readily available (must be provided within 10 days of an oral request) • Evaluation must be completed within 60 calendar days after written parent consent received (summer doesn’t count) • “Deficits in memory or processing speed cannot be the sole basis for determining that a student is ineligible for gifted education services.” • “…a person who has an IQ of 130 or higher or when multiple criteria as set forth in this chapter and in Department Guidelines indicate gifted ability.”

10. But Before We Conduct an Eligibility Evaluation….. • Remember, §16.21(a) requires LEAs to establish a method by which to screen and identify students for gifted education • So, what screening options are available? • Before we look at screening options….

11. Psychometric Considerations for Screening and Diagnostic Measures

12. Reliability • Accuracy or consistency of a test, rating scale, inventory, or other selection procedure • 4 kinds: • Internal • Test-retest • Alternate forms • Inter-rater • If test reliability is low, then test results and decisions based on test results will not be valid

13. Validity • Degree to which an inventory or test actually measures what it is supposed to measure • Using several identification criteria will help compensate for a rating scale measure or test which has borderline validity • Always consider both reliability and validity of a procedure or test

14. Huge Caveat • Don’t assume a screener (or a diagnostic tool) is RELIABLE or VALID • Critically evaluate the technical manual • Theoretical framework for development • Representativeness in standardization sample? • Ceiling / Floor effects? • (Screeners) False positives / False negatives • (Diagnostic tools) Diagnostic sensitivity?

15. Screening Approaches

16. Screening Approaches • Traditional • RenzulliTalent Pool Strategy

17. Traditional Screening Measures • Top 3-5% of students are selected as gifted • Committee reviews data from many sources (e.g., ability and achievement scores, nominations) for candidates • Use of point systems and cutoffs – Example matrix (next slide) • Identification process ends at beginning of school year

18. Example – Screening Matrix

19. Screening Approaches • Traditional • RenzulliTalent Pool Strategy

20. Renzulli'sTalent Pool Strategy • Most popular programming model • Liberal approach • 15-20% of school population is identified as being gifted according to ability, achievement, or rating or nomination information • In professional communities with a large number of high-ability students, Talent Pool may consist 25% of school population or even 100% • Intent is to be inclusive

21. Renzulli'sTalent Pool Strategy • 5 Main identification related attractions: • Students identified by multiple criteria – test and non-test • More students have access to opportunities, resources, and encouragement • Teachers are continuously identifying students for independent projects, not just at the beginning of the school year. • Reduced charges of elitism • Problem of deciding who should be admitted and who should not be is eliminated. When in doubt, admit the student into the gifted program.

22. Renzulli’s Strategy

23. Renzulli'sTalent Pool 5 StepIdentification Plan • Step 1 – Test Score Nominations • Selected through standardized IQ tests and/or achievement tests • Students who score above the 92nd percentile are automatically admitted • Will select about 50% via this Step • Step 2 – Teacher Nominations • Teachers nominate other students who display characteristics of high motivation, high creativity, unusual interests or talents, or special areas of potential or superior performance.

24. Renzulli'sTalent Pool 5 StepIdentification Plan (continued) • Step 3 – Alternate Pathways • For those students not nominated in Steps 1 or 2… • Includes: self-nominations, parent nominations, peer nominations, creativity test results, product evaluations, etc. • Admission decided by screening committee which interviews the students, teachers, and parents as well as previous school records • Students can be admitted for a trial bases

25. Renzulli'sTalent Pool 5 StepIdentification Plan (continued) • Step 4 – Special Nominations (safety valve #1) • List of students nominated circulates to all teachers • Allows previous-year teachers to nominate students who are not on the list • Allows resource teachers to make recommendations • Step 5 – Action Information Nominations (safety valve #2) • Students can pursue a topic, idea, or area of study which they are extremely interested in or excited about • May be used to nominate non-Talent Pool students for projects • Nominations reviewed by screening committee

26. Advantages of Renzulli'sTalent Pool Approach • More students have opportunity to participate • Identification flexible and multidimensional • Identification is year around • Motivated students self-select • Reduced charges of elitism • Need for hard-and-fast decisions eliminated • Altered identification criteria can not eliminate a student from being considered gifted • No need for IQ or multiple criteria

27. Gifted Identification in PA • Gifted education is regulated by Chapter 16 of the PA Code, not federal regulation • Chapter 16 requires: • Full assessment of those suspected of being gifted which includes a school psychologist • Time limits from date of permission to date of assessment & date of writing of GIEP (Gifted Individual Education Plan)

28. So, what does a teacher look for? Some characteristics of students likely to be found eligible in PA: • Quality of work (not amount of work) • Enthusiasm for learning (maybe just some things) • Intensity of special interest • Reasoning ability • Sensitivity to current events & moral/social issues • Signs of leadership ability (even if not appropriately applied)

29. Some Characteristics of Giftedness • Sense of humor • Wide interests • Ability to interact with adults • Attraction to older children • Better attention to intellectually challenging rather than rote activity • Strength in verbal or written expression • Knows or can do what has not been taught (technique or approach may be uncommon) • Uneven development

30. Students may not be excluded because of: • Grades (although they may be considered) • Failure to perform • Disciplinary issues • Presence of a disability • Scores on a screening instrument

31. Reminder about GIEP services • GIEP carries force of requirement • Includes PLEP (present levels of educational performance) • GIEP is NOT limited to any one educational location such as a resource room • GIEP must be individualized for child & can not be a generic program • Acceleration must be one of the options considered by the district

32. Appropriate Diagnostic Measures

33. Areas of Individual Assessment • Intellectual • Academic • Personal Characteristics • Parent/Teacher Impressions • Degree of Need

34. Initial assessment must include: • Individual test of intellectual ability • Assessment of academic achievement • Multiple sources of information Does not have to include: • Artistic or music ability • “Multiple intelligences” approach

35. Intellectual Ability • Wechsler Scales (WISC-IV; WAIS-IV) • See Technical Report #4 on use of GAI over FSIQ • See Technical Report #7 on extended norms • Stanford-Binet Scales (SB 5) • Woodcock-Johnson Cognitive (WJ-III: Cog) • Ravens Progressive Matrices • Comprehensive Test of Non-Verbal Intelligence (CTONI-2) • NaglieriNonverabl Abilities Test (NNAT) • Bilingual Verbal Abilities Test (BVAT) LATER

36. Academic Achievement • Woodcock-Johnson Achievement (WJ-III: Ach) • Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT – III) • Curriculum Based Measures

37. The Role of IQ • Very relevant to eligibility in PA • Tells how different a child is from others • Can point to general strengths • Can be part of the decision to accelerate or enrich • Does not provide PLEP • Does not relate directly to curriculum • A Standard Score of 131 or higher on the Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Cognitive Abilities is equivalent to a Percentile Rank Range of 98 to 99.9

38. Role of Standardized Achievement Tests • Relevant to eligibility in PA • Compare children to national sample • Results fairly easily understood and applied • Include only a few items at each academic level (small sample of student behavior) • May have little relation to your school’s curriculum

39. Curriculum-Based Achievement Measures • Provide more items at any one level • Relate to your school’s curriculum • Are PLEP • Are easily translated into next steps in a GIEP

40. Basic Rules of Assessment • At least annually • Specific enough to inform decision making • Valid/reliable • Curriculum based • In keeping with legal requirements • Understood by all parties • Results available to those who need them

41. Less Traditional Assessment Tools • Scales for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS) • Gifted Evaluation Scale • Gifted Rating Scale • IOWA Acceleration Scales – 2 • SAGES 2: K-3 & 4-8 • TOMAGS

42. Scales for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS) • Ages: 5-18 • Raters: School rating scale form and home rating scale form • Length: 7 scales; 12 items per scale • Domains assessed: general intellectual ability, language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, creativity, and leadership • Product information link: http://www.prufrock.com/productdetails.cfm?PC=170

43. Gifted Evaluation Scale • Ages: 5-18 • Raters: anyone familiar with the student (e.g. classroom teacher, clinical personnel, other school personnel) • Length: 48 items; 20 minutes • Domains assessed: intellectual, creativity, specific academic aptitude, leadership ability, performing and visual arts • Product information link: http://www.hawthorne-ed.com/images/gifted/samples/swf_files/h04150sb.pdf

44. Gifted Rating Scale • Ages: 4:0- 6:11 & 6:0-13:11 • Raters: teachers • Length: 5-10 minutes • GRS-P: 60 items • GRS-S: 72 items • Domains assessed • GRS-P: intellectual, academic readiness, motivation, creativity and artistic talent • GRS-S: intellectual, academic, motivation, creativity, leadership and artistic talent • Product information link: http://www.pearsonassessments.com/HAIWEB/Cultures/en-us/Productdetail.htm?Pid=015-8130-502&Mode=summary

45. IOWA Acceleration Scales – 2 • Grades: K-8 • Raters: Child study team consisting of child’s parents, teachers, counselor or school psychologist, an administrator, and a gifted teacher or coordinator • Length: 1.5 - 2 hours • Domains assessed: assesses whether a child should be accelerated • Product information link: http://www.giftedbooks.com/productdetails.asp?id=92

46. SAGES 2: K-3 & 4-8 • Ages: 7-12 • Length: 30-45 minutes • Domains assessed: aptitude and achievement in mathematics, science, language arts, social studies, and non-verbal reasoning • Product information link: http://www.prufrock.com/productdetails.cfm?PC=128

47. TOMAGS • Grades: K-6 • Length:30-60 minutes • Domains assessed: mathematical reasoning and mathematical problem solving • Product information link: http://www.prufrock.com/productdetails.cfm?PC=84

48. Recent Developments – Eligibility Matrices • To objectively assess IQ and multiple criteria, LEAs are increasingly developing eligibility matrices

49. Example Eligibility Matrix

50. Multicultural Issues