Colecciones de ESTs y Micromatrices de cDNA en especies agronómicas

Steps in the Gifted Placement Process

In Step 1, students are referred to the school psychologist for a gifted screening. Referrals were made by any of the following: teachers, parents, counselors, or the students (self-reporting). Referrals were based on evidence of

gifted characteristics, classroom performance, grades, California Achievement Test (CAT) scores, and creativity.

The gifted screening is the second step. A Pupil Appraisal Team member (such as the school psychologist or educational diagnostician) scheduled a day and time when the referred students could be given a brief group screening for gifted. The screening involved the use of an IQ test. Each student’s IQ score was placed on a matrix along with his/her reading and mathematics achievement test scores. Students had to score at least five points on a matrix (see Table 8) before being referred to the next step.

Table 8

Gifted Screening Matrix

Points 1 2 3

Aptitude (IQ) 115-122 123-129 130+ Reading 84-92% 93-97% 98% Mathematics 84-92% 93-97% 98% Note. % represents percentile.

The IQ tests used in the screening were the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) and the Kaufman-Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT). According to Richert, Alvino, and McDonnel (1982), the Slosson was appropriate for large group screenings, but was not appropriate for diagnosis and placement because it assessed a very limited aspect of mental ability. Because it was normed on a

small population, it was not appropriate for use with culturally different populations or with any population with English language deficiencies.

The achievement tests used in the screening were the California Achievement Test (this was the primary screening test), Wide Range

Achievement Test - Revised (WRAT-R), Test of Cognitive Ability (TCA, a state- mandated test), Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP, the state proficiency test), and Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA).

According to Frasier (1989), the Kaufman was considered to be a culture-fair test due to its assessment of a broader range of mental functions than was usually associated with IQ tests.

The students who scored at least five points on the Gifted Screening Matrix (see Table 8) were referred to the School Building Level Committee (SBLC), which is the third step in the placement process. The purpose of the SBLC meeting was to compose a case file of additional information about each student. This information described the strengths, weaknesses, and traits of each student. If a student had health problems or social adjustment problems, these could be addressed as a part of the evaluation process. The SBLC team at each school was made up of the principal, the student’s teacher, the school counselor, and a member of the Pupil Appraisal Team. Information discussed at the SBLC meeting included screening results, current grades and test scores, social adjustment, health history, and observed behavioral characteristics (a

questionnaire completed by the student’s teacher to determine gifted characteristics).

The fourth step, the full evaluation, involved the use of an IQ test administered to individual students instead of to a group of students. The IQ score was placed on a matrix along with reading and mathematics achievement test scores. This individual administration allowed the school psychologist to identify particular strengths and weaknesses during the testing process and in the IQ test results. These strengths and weaknesses were added to the student’s case file. If the student successfully completed the full evaluation, the case file was used to compose an individual education plan (IEP) for the student. The IEP formed the student’s instruction in the gifted program. Table 9 shows the matrix used for kindergarten and preschool gifted identification.

On the matrix shown in Table 9, students had to (a) obtain at least 3 standard deviations above the mean on an IQ test, and (b) obtain at least 10 points on the matrix, at least 4 points of which were earned on the IQ test in order to be placed in the gifted program. The IQ tests used were the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) and Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI). The achievement tests used were the Woodcock-Johnson Revised (WJ-R) subtests (word/letter recognition, applied mathematics), Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), Test of Early Reading Ability, and Differential Abilities Scale (DAS). According to Hicks and Bolen (1990),

Table 9

Preschool and Kindergarten Evaluation Matrix

Points 1 2 3 4 5 Areas 1 .0 -1.5 SD 1.5-2.0 SD 2 .0 -2 .5 SD 2 .5 -3 .0 SD 3.0+ SD IQ 115-122 123-129 130-137 138-144 145+ 116-123 124-131 132-139 140 -1 4 7 148+ Reading 84-92% 93-97% 98% 99% Achievement Mathematics 84-92% 93-97% 98% 99% Achievement

Note. SD is an abbreviation for Standard Deviations,

the Woodcock-Johnson is one of a few tests that is based on the theory of

multiple intelligences. It was normed using a sample of individuals from ages two through 90, and the sample included gender, geographic region, community size, race, and socioeconomic variables.

A separate matrix (see Table 10) was used to identify gifted students in grades one through twelve. To qualify for gifted placement, the students were required to obtain at least 2 standard deviations above the mean on an

intelligence test, or obtain a score of at least 7 on the matrix, at least 2 of which are intelligence, or obtain a score of at least 6 on the matrix and have a strong recommendation from a Pupil appraisal team based on performance on an additional test and a review of all educational and screening data with the

student’s teacher. The IQ tests used were the Slosson, the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI), and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-III). The WISC-III, according to Post and Mitchell (1993, p. 541), is “arguably the best instrument currently available for assessing students’ intelligence.” Its norms were updated in the early 1990’s to fairly assess the intelligence of culturally disadvantaged and minority children due to the inclusion of an additional scale. The achievement tests used were the Woodcock-Johnson Revised, the Differential Abilities Scale (DAS), and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (WIAT).

The Louisiana State Department of Education permitted individual school districts to determine screening criteria at the school level. During the 1995-1996 Table 10