Su búsqueda
Resultados 2 recursos
-
In the first part of this chapter, differences and similarities between static and dynamic measures of intelligence are presented and analyzed. Static measures of intelligence are generally obtained by testing either a ratio of mental age to chronological age or a score of deviation from age norm. Dynamic measures of intelligence are generally obtained by administrating novel problem solving tasks to the subjects, supplying them with gradual and balanced assistance that progressively disclose the solution of the problem, and determining the amount of aid the learner needs to be able to solve the problem. The amount of aid is inversely proportional to the modifiability index. The modifiability index is the general propensity to change, and can better measure intelligence. In the second part of this chapter it is hypothesized that some subjects can obtain a normal score with static test measures and a giftedness score with dynamic test measures. Two experiments were conducted to examine the relationship between dynamic measures and static measures of intelligence in low socio-economic background subjects and in ADHD subjects. In the first experiment 24 subjects with either high (12) or low (12) level of socio-economic background were trained to master problem solving tests with dynamic and static measures of intelligence. In the second experiment 57 subjects, 10 with ADHD-IA, 10 with ADHD-HI, 10 with ADHD-C and 27 controls were trained to master problem solving tests with dynamic and static measures of intelligence. The results showed that subjects with ADHD-C and Controls scored similarly on dynamic and static measure, but subjects with ADHD-HI and subjects with a low level of socioeconomic background had lower scores with static test measures and higher scores with dynamic test measures. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for intelligence tests. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)
-
The United States' commitment to gifted education, and the relative importance the government has placed on it, has fluctuated throughout its compulsory education history. The presiding political and societal beliefs of the times have been reflected in how the construct of "giftedness" was defined and how this definition influenced both the identification process and the specialized education for gifted children and adolescents. The U.S. population is becoming increasingly diverse and is projected to increase by 50% among culturally and linguistically diverse groups in the year 2050 (U.S. Census Bureau, 1996). Therefore it is imperative to advance our understanding of giftedness and culture to develop procedures that will facilitate the identification of special gifts and talents among culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) children and adolescents. The goal of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive review of identification methods used with gifted and talented CLD children and adolescents. A historical background is provided to illustrate the evolution of the definition of giftedness from one that was unitary in nature toward a multidimensional construct based on theory and research, as well as the challenges faced when identifying CLD children and adolescents. This is followed by a review of culturally sensitive approaches and alternative assessment procedures and their implications on the interdisciplinary practices of school psychologists, teachers, and parents. Finally, the authors provide suggestions for a comprehensive multicultural identification model of giftedness and its implications for future research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: create)