Theoretical and methodological problems of a 10-year follow-up program evaluation study

European Journal of Psychological Assessment

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 229-241

  Heller, Kurt A ^a   Reimann, Ralph ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Evaluation standards; Longitudinal research; Practical problems (of evaluation); Program evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036397530     PISSN: 10155759     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027//1015-5759.18.3.229     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Baltes, P.B., &Nesselroade, J.R. (1979). History and rationale of longitudinal research. In J.R. Nesselroade &P.B. Baltes (Eds.), Longitudinal research in the study of behavior and development (pp. 1-39). New York: Academic Press.
2. Bergman, L.R., &Magnusson, D. (1990). General issues about data quality in longitudinal research. In D. Magnusson &L.R. Bergman (Eds.), Data quality in longitudinal research (pp. 1-31). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3. Callahan, C.M. (1983). Issues in evaluating programs for the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27, 3-7.
4. Callahan, C.M. (1986). Asking the right questions: The central issue in evaluating programs for the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 38-42.
5. Callahan, C.M. (1993) Evaluation programs and procedures for gifted education: International problems and solutions. In K.A. Heller, F.J. Mönks, &A.H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 605-618). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
6. Callahan, C.M. (2000). Evaluation as a critical component of program development and implementation. InK.A. Heller,F.J. Mönks,R.J. Sternberg, &R.F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 537-547). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7. Capaldi, D., &Patterson, G.R. (1987). An approach to the problem of recruitment and retention rates for longitudinal research. Behavioral Assessment, 9, 169-177.
8. Colangelo, N., &Davis, G.A. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn &Bacon.
9. Cooley, W.W., &Lohnes, P.R. (1976). Evaluation research in education. New York: Irvington.
10. Davis, G.A., &Rimm, S.B. (1985). Education of the gifted and talented. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
11. Esteve, R., Godoy, A., Rodriguez-Naranjo, C., & Fierro, A. (1993). Program evaluation use: An empirical study. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9, 77-93.
12. Farrington, D.P., Gallagher, B., Morley, L., St. Ledger, R.J., & West, D.J. (1990). Minimizing attrition in longitudinal research: Methods of tracing and securing cooperation in a 24-year follow-up-study. In D. Magnusson & L.R. Bergman (Eds.), Data quality in longitudinal research (pp. 122-147). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Flynn, J.R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 171-191.
14. Hager, W., & Hasselhorn, M. (1997). Wirkungen der Testwieder-holung und entwicklungsbedingte Leistungssteigerung bei der Durchführung des CFT 1 mit Erstklässlern [Retest effects and effects of developmental changes on the CFT 1 score in testing first-grade students]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 205, 205-229.
15. Hansen, W.B., Collins, L.M., Malotte, C.K., Johnson, C.A., & Fielding, J.E. (1985). Attrition in prevention research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 8, 261-275.
16. Heller, K.A. (1997). Individuelle Bedingungsfaktoren der Schulleistung: Literaturüberblick [Individual determinants of academic performance: Literature review]. In F.E. Weinert & A. Helmke (Eds.), Entwicklung im Grundschulalter [Development in elementary school age] (pp. 183-201). Weinheim: PVU.
17. Heller, K.A. (Ed.). (2000). Begabungsdiagnostik in der Schul- und Erziehungsberatung [Diagnosis of giftedness in school counseling and child guidance] (2nd ed.). Bern: Huber.
18. Heller, K.A. (Ed.). (2001). Hochbegabung im Kindes- und Jugendalter [High ability in childhood and adolescence] (2nd ed.). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
19. Heller, K.A. (Ed.). (2002). Begabtenförderung im Gymnasium. Ergebnisse einer zehnjährigen Längsschnittstudie [Gifted education in the German gymnasium. Findings of a 10-year longitudinal study]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
20. Heller, K.A., & Hany, E.A. (1986). Identification, development, and achievement analysis of talented and gifted children in West Germany. In K.A. Heller & J.F. Feldhusen (Eds.), Identifying and nurturing the gifted (pp. 67-82). Toronto: Huber.
21. Heller, K.A., & Hany, E.A. (2001). Standardisierte Schullei-stungsmessungen [Standardized measurement of academic achievement]. In F.E. Weinert (Ed.), Leistungsmessungen in Schulen [Academic achievement measurement in schools] (pp. 87-101). Weinheim: Beltz.
22. Heller, K.A., & Rindermann, H. (1999). Hochbegabung, Motivation und Leistungsexzellenz: Aktuelle Forschungsbefunde zum achtjährigen Gymnasium in Baden-Württemberg [High ability, motivation, and achievement excellence: Findings of the 8-year German gymnasium in Baden-Württemberg]. In Th. Fitzner, W. Stark, H.P. Kagelmacher, & Th. Müller (Eds.), Erkennen, Anerkennen und Fördern von Hochbegabten [Identifying and nurturing the gifted] (pp. 81-107). Stuttgart: Klett.
23. Heller, K.A., Gaedike, A.-K., & Weinläder, H. (1985). Kognitiver Fähigkeits-Test (KFT) [Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT)] (2nd ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.
24. Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J., & Passow, A.H. (Eds.). (1993). International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
25. Heller, K.A., Osterrieder, K., & Wystrychowski, W. (1995). A longitudinal follow-up evaluation study of a statewide acceleration program for highly gifted students at the German gymnasium. In M. Katzko & F.J. Mönks (Eds.), Nurturing talent: Individual needs and social ability (pp. 269-274). Assen/Maastricht: Van Gorcum.
26. Heller, K.A., Reimann, R., & Rindermann, H. (2000). Evaluationsbefunde zum Gymnasium mit achtjährigem Bildungs-gang in Baden-Württemberg [Findings of the evaluation study on the G8 program in Baden-Württemberg]. Pädagogisches Handeln, 3, 9-15 & 33-36.
27. Heller, K.A., Rosemann, B., & Steffens, K.-H. (1978). Prognose des Schulerfolgs - Eine Längsschnittstudie zur Schulauf-bahnberatung [Prediction of school success - A longitudinal study]. Weinheim: Beltz.
28. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (1994). The program evaluation standards: How to assess evaluations of educational programs. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
29. Klann-Delius, G. (1996). Einige praktische Probleme von Lang-zeituntersuchungen und ihre methodologischen Implikationen [Practical problems of longitudinal studies and their methodological implications]. In K. Ehlich (Eds.), Kindliche Sprach-entwicklung: Konzepte und Empirie [Development of childrens' language: Conceptions and empirical findings] (pp. 17-29). Opladen: Westdt. Verlag
30. Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.-L., & Bangert, R.L. (1984). Effects of practice on aptitude and achievement test scores. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 435-447.
31. Lehwald, G. (1981). Verfahren zur Untersuchung des Erkenntnis-strebens [Measurement of strive for knowledge]. In J. Guthke & G. Witzlack (Eds.), Zur Psychodiagnostik von Persön-lichkeitsqualitäten bei Schülern [Diagnosis of students personality] (pp. 345-406). Berlin: Volk und Wissen.
32. Lubinski, D., Webb, R.M., Morelock, M.J., & Benbow, C.P. (2001). Top 1 in 10.000: A 10-year follow-up of the profoundly gifted. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 718-729.
33. Madaus, G.F., Scriven, M., & Stufflebeam, D. (Eds.), (1983). Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services education. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
34. Murphy, M. (1990). Minimizing attrition in longitudinal studies: Means or end? In D. Magnusson & L.R. Bergman (Eds.), Data quality in longitudinal research (pp. 148-156). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35. Perleth, Ch., & Heller, K.A. (1994). The Munich longitudinal study of giftedness. In R.F. Subotnik & K.D. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 77-114). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
36. Renzulli, J.S., & Smith, L.H. (1979). Issues and procedures in evaluating programs. In A.H. Passow (Ed.), The gifted and the talented: Their education and development (pp. 289-307). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Saunders, D.R. (1956). Moderator variables in prediction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 16, 209-222.
38. Schneider, W. (1989). Problems of longitudinal studies with children: Practical, conceptual, and methodological issues. In M. Brambring, F. Lösel, & H. Skowronek (Eds.), Children at risk: Assessment, longitudinal research, and intervention (pp. 313-335). Berlin: de Gruyter.
39. Schneider, W. (1991). Methodische Probleme und Möglichkeiten schulbezogener Längsschnittforschung [Methodological problems and possibilities of school-related longitudinal research]. In R. Pekrun & H. Fend (Eds.), Schule und Persönlichkeits-entwicklung. Ein Resümee der Längsschnittforschung [School and personality development. A summary of longitudinal research] (pp. 57-80). Stuttgart: Enke.
40. Shea, D.L., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C.P. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 604-614.
41. Sternberg, R.J., Ferrari, M., Clinkenbeard, P., & Grigorenko, E.L. (1996). Identification, instruction, and assessment of gifted children: A construct validation of a triarchic model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 129-137.
42. Stufflebeam, D. (1983). The CIPP model for program evaluation. In G. F. Madaus, M. Scriven, & D. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services education (pp. 117-142). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
43. Süß, H.-M., & Schmiedek, F. (2000). Ermüdungs- und Übungsef-fekte bei mehrstündiger kognitiver Beanspruchung [Fatigue and practice effects during cognitive tasks lasting several hours]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 47, 162-179.
44. Tanaka, J.S. (1987). "How big is big enough?": Sample size and goodness of fit in structural equation models with latent variables. Child Development, 58, 134-146.
45. Tucker, M.S., & Codding, J.B. (1998). Standards for our schools. How to set them, measure them, and reach them. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
46. Wieczerkowski, W., Nickel, H., Janowski, A., Fittkau, B., & Rauer, W. (1979). A-F-S. Angstfragebogen für Schüler [Anxiety Questionnaire for Students] (4th ed.). Braunschweig: Westermann.
47. Winefield, A.H., Tiggemann, M., & Winefield, H.R. (1991). Attrition bias and internal validity in a longitudinal study of youth unemployment. Australian Journal of Psychology, 43, 69-73.
48. Ziegler, 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.