Su búsqueda
Resultados 2 recursos
-
Students who simultaneously show evidence of high performance or potential in a talent or ability and have a disability that impacts on their ability to achieve and learn are often referred to as "twice exceptional" and require attention in the academic setting. Recognition that twice-exceptional students exist in U.S. classrooms was articulated over three decades ago by Maker (1977) who referred to these students as "gifted handicapped." Initially, educators viewed twice exceptionality as paradoxical, as it seemed implausible that intellectually gifted children could concomitantly have a learning disability. However, based on Maker's contention that intellectual giftedness and learning disabilities can and do coexist, researchers began to investigate the characteristics, identification, and curriculum needs of students with dual exceptionalities. The National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) (2010) recognizes this population and advocates finding mechanisms for identifying twice-exceptional children so that educators can serve both their gifts and disabilities, and thereby prevent them from falling through the academic cracks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)
-
The use of norm-referenced, standardized tests of intelligence and achievement in the process of identifying gifted students has a long tradition. Indeed, use of these tests continues to dominate the identification of giftedness in most states and school districts. Proponents of the use of intelligence tests contend that they are objective, valid means of assessing intellectual ability and the single most reliable predictors of academic achievement. However, reliance on traditional assessment intelligence and achievement tests—as the sole data sources in identifying gifted students has received scrutiny. Critics question the validity of these tests for measuring giftedness and argue that an emphasis on traditional assessment tools reflects outdated conceptions of giftedness. They further contend that traditional assessments contribute to the under-identification of minority, low socioeconomic status (SES), and twice-exceptional students, as well as students with creative talents. Still others note that relying solely on traditional test scores results in an arbitrary and indefensible use of cut-off scores for inclusion in gifted programs. These criticisms have led to expanded conceptions of giftedness along with new paradigms for identifying more diverse populations for gifted programs and services. New paradigms call for the use of multiple criteria for identification, including a combination of portfolios, authentic and dynamic assessments, performance tasks, teacher rating scales, and other non-traditional assessments in combination with traditional assessments. While moving the role of traditional assessment tools from center stage in the decision- making process has been encouraged, few argue that they have no place in conceptions of intellectual giftedness' or identification of students gifted in specific academic domains, and they remain a prominent data source in identification procedures in most school districts. However, in order to evaluate the advantages, and limitations, of using traditional assessment tools for identifying gifted students, one must understand what these instruments purport to measure and for what purposes they are valid and reliable instruments. This understanding will aid educators in determining how and under what circumstances it is appropriate to use traditional assessment tools to identify gifted students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)
Explorar
Tipo de recurso
Año de publicación
-
Entre 2000 y 2026
(2)
-
Entre 2010 y 2019
(2)
- 2013 (2)
-
Entre 2010 y 2019
(2)