This study analyzes the standardization sample of a new teacher rating scale designed to assist in the identification of gifted students. The Gifted Rating Scales–School Form (GRS-S) is based on a multidimensional model of giftedness. Results indicate no age or race/ethnicity differences on any of the scales and small but significant differences in favor of females on three of the six scales: Artistic Ability, Motivation, and Leadership Ability. Diagnostic efficiency statistics and receiver operating curve analysis support the validity of the Intellectual Ability scale in identifying intellectually gifted students. The Intellectual Ability scale was successful in both correctly identifying students with high IQ scores (test sensitivity) and correctly identifying students without high IQ scores (test specificity). The present findings extend the analysis of the standardization sample reported in the test manual and provide additional support for the psychometric qualities of the GRS-S as a valid gifted screening tool.
Barona, A., & Pfeiffer, S. I. (1992). Effects of test administration procedures and acculturation level on achievement test scores. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 10, 124-132.
2.
Borland, J. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 129-147.
3.
Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304-1312.
4.
Flanagan, D. P., McGrew, K. S., & Ortiz, S. O. (2000). The Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Gf-Gc theory: A contemporary approach to interpretation. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
5.
Ford, D. Y. (1998). The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. Journal of Special Education, 32, 4-14.
6.
Ford, D. Y. (in press). Serving gifted minority group children. In S. I. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of serving the gifted and talented: A psychological approach. New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers.
7.
Gallagher, J. J. (2003). Issues and challenges in the education of gifted students. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 11-23). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
8.
Gilliam, J. E., Carpenter, B. O., & Christensen, J. R. (1996). Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales. Waco, TX: Prufrock.
9.
Hsu, L. M. (2002). Diagnostic validity statistics and the MCMI-III. Psychological Assessment, 14, 410-422.
10.
Jarosewich, T., Pfeiffer, S. I., & Morris, J. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 322-336.
11.
Jensen, A. (1974). How biased are culture-loaded tests?Genetic Psychology Monographs, 90, 185-244.
12.
Jensen, A. (2004). The mental chronometry of giftedness. In D. Boothe & J. L. Stanley (Eds.), In the eyes of the beholder: Critical issues for diversity in gifted education(pp. 157-166). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
13.
Kerr, B. (1997). Developing talents in girls and young women. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 483-497). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
14.
Kerr, B., & Nicpon, M. F. (2003). Gender and giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 493-505). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
15.
Kessel, J. B., & Zimmerman, M. (1993). Reporting errors in studies of the diagnostic performance of self-administered questionnaires: Extent of the problems, recommendations for standardized presentation of results, and implications for the peer review process. Psychological Assessment, 5, 395-399.
16.
Margulies, A. S., & Floyd, R. G. (2004). Test review: The Gifted Rating Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22, 275-282.
17.
McCarney, S. B., & Anderson, P. D. (1989). Gifted Evaluation Scale, second edition. Technical manual. Columbia, MO: Hawthorne Educational Services.
18.
Meehl, P. E., & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 194-216.
19.
Naglieri, J. A., & Ford, D. Y. (2003). Addressing underrepresentation of gifted minority children using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT). Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 155-160.
20.
Newton, R. R., & Rudestam, K. E. (1999). Your statistical consultant: Answers to your data analysis questions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sagens.
21.
No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). P.L. 107-110. Available at http://www.nochildleftbehind.gov/
22.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2001). Professional psychology and the gifted: Emerging practice opportunities. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 32, 175-181.
23.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2002). Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 1, 31-50.
24.
Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 161-169.
25.
Pfeiffer, S. I., & Jarosewich, T. (2003). Gifted Rating Scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
26.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184, 261-261.
27.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., Hartman, R. K., & Westberg, K. I. (1997). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
28.
Robins, P. M., Schoff, K. M., Glutting, J. J., & Abelkop, A. S. (2003). Discriminative validity of the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Parent Rating Scales in children with recurrent abdominal pain and matched controls. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 145-154.
29.
Ross, P. O. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
30.
Sattler, J. M. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive applications (4th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler Publisher.
31.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). The gifted and the extraordinary. APA Monitor, 29,2-2.
32.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Czikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.
33.
Sprinthall, R. C. (2000). Basic statistical analysis. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
34.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). The sound of silence: A nation responds to its gifted. Roeper Review, 18, 168-173.
35.
Streiner, D. L. (2003). Diagnosing tests: Using and misusing diagnostic and screening tests. Journal of Personality Assessment, 81, 209-219.
36.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2000). Current population survey, October 2000: School enrollment supplement file [CD-ROM]. Washington, DC: Author.
37.
Winner, E. (1997). Exceptionally high intelligence and schooling. American Psychologist, 52, 1070-1081.
38.
Zigler, A., & Heller, K. A. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 3-21). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
