Identification of Underachievement: An Empirical Study on the Agreement among Various Diagnostic Sources

Gifted and Talented International

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 87-94

  Ziegler, Albert ^a   Stoeger, Heidrun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27844546047     PISSN: 15332276     EISSN: 24709565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15332276.2003.11673019     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R., (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictor of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256–274.
2. Behling, D. U., & Williams, E. A., (1991). Influence of dress on perception of intelligence and expectations of scholastic achievement. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 9, 1–7.
3. Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A., (1995). Observable attributes as manifestations and cues of personality and intelligence. Journal of Personality, 63, 1–25.
4. Butler-Por, N., (1993). Underachieving gifted students. In K. A., Heller, F. J., Mönks & A. H., Passow (Eds), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 649–668). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
5. Colvin, C. R., Funder, D. C., (1991). Predicting personality and behavior: A boundary on the acquaintanceship effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 884–894.
6. Durr, W. H., (1964). The gifted student. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Dweck, C. S., (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
8. Feldhusen, J. F., & Jarwan, F. A., (2000). Identification of gifted and talented youth for educational programs. In K. A., Heller, F. J., Mönks, R., Sternberg & R., Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
9. Funder, D. C., & Colvin, C. R., (1997). Congruence of others’ and self-judgments of personality. In R., Hogan, J. A., Johnson (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 617–647). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
10. Gagné, F., (1991). Toward a differentiated model of giftedness and talent. In N., Colangelo & G. A., Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 65–80). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
11. Gear, G. H., (1978). Effects of training on teachers accuracy in the identification of gifted children. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 90–97.
12. Hall, J. A., Bemieri, F. J., (Eds.). (2001). Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Hanses, P., & Rost, D. H., (1998). Das “Drama” der hochbegabten Underachiever: “Gewöhnliche” oder “außergewöhnliche” Underachiever? [The drama of the highly gifted underachiever: “Common” or “exceptional” underachiever?] Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 12, 53–71.
14. Hany, E. A., (1993). How teachers identify gifted students: Feature processing or concept based classification? European Journal for High Ability, 4, 196–211.
15. Heller, K. A., Finsterwald, M., & Ziegler, A., (2000). Implicit theories of German mathematics and physics teachers on gender specific giftedness and motivation. In A., Ziegler (Ed.), Antecedents of motivation and behavior. The role of implicit theories of intelligence (pp. 172–189). Lengerich: Pabst International.
16. Heller, K. A., Kratzmeier, H., & Lengfelder, A., (1998). Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM; Raven, J.C., 1958). Goettingen, Germany: Beltz.
17. Kwon, Y. H., (1994). The influence of appropriateness of dress and gender on the self-perception of occupational attributes. Clothings and Textiles Research Journal, 12, 33–39.
18. Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., & LeBeau, L. Smith, (2001). Who’s smart? Beliefs about the expression of intelligence in social behavior. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 25, 34–42.
19. Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., & C. R., Colvin (2003). Accurate intelligence assessments in social interactions: Mediators and gender effects. Journal of Personality, 71, 465–493.
20. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1984). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
21. Nicholls, J. G., (1992). The general and the specific in the development and expression of achievement motivation. In G. C., Roberts (Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 31–56). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Books.
22. Renzulli, J. S. R., (1984). The triad-revolving door system: A research-based approach to identification and programming for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28, 163–171.
23. Renzulli, J. S., (1994). Schools for talent development: A practical plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
24. Renzulli, J. R., & Park, S., (2000). Gifted dropouts: The who and the why. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 261–271.
25. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M., (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: New directions for developing high-end learning. In N., Coangelo & G. A., Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 136–154). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
26. Reynolds, D. J., & Gifford, R., (2001). The sounds and sights of intelligence: A lens model channel analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 187–200.
27. Richert, E. S., (1991). Patterns of underachievement among gifted students. In M., Bireley & J., Genshaft (Eds.), Understanding the gifted adolescent: Educational, developmental, and multicultural issues (pp. 139–162). New York: Teachers College Press.
28. Robertson, E., (1991). Neglected dropouts: The gifted and talented. Equity & Excellende, 25, 62–74.
29. Rost, D. H., & Hanses, P., (1997). Wer nichts leistet, ist nicht begabt? Zur Identifikation hochbegabter Underachiever durch Lehrkräfte, [If you are not successful, you can’t be gifted. The identification of underachievers through teachers]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie and Pädagogische Psychologie, 19, 167–177.
30. Schrader, F. W., & Helmke, A., (1990). Lassen sich Lehrer bei der Leistungsbeurteilung von sachfremden Gesichtspunkten leiten? Eine Untersuchung zu Determinanten diagnostischer Lehrerurteile, [Do teachers let other points of view influence their performance judgements? An investigation of the determinants of teachers’ diagnostic assessments]. Zeitschrift fuer Entwicklungspsychologie und Paedagogische Psychologie, 22, 312–324.
31. Stanley, J. C., (1991). An academic model for educating the mathematically talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 36–42.
32. Stephenson, R. S., (1985). A study of the longitudinal dropout rate: 1980 eighth-grade cohort followed from June, 1980 through February, 1985. Miami, FL: Dade County Public Schools Office of Educational Accountability.
33. Wheeler, R. W., Baron, J. C., Michell, S., & Ginsburg, H. J., (1979). Eye contact and the perception of intelligence. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13, 101–102.
34. Wicklund, R. A., & Gollwitzer, P. M., (1982). Symbolic Self-completion. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35. Zebrowitz, L. A., Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Rhodes, G., (2002). Looking smart and looking good: Facial cues to intelligence and their origins. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 238–249.
36. Ziegler, A., & Schober, B., (1999). Der Zusammenhang von Eltern- und Kindkognitionen bezüglich des Faches Mathematik. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 11, 72–95.
37. Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H., (2002). Motivationale Ziele im Mathematikunterricht von Mittelstufenschülerinnen am Gymnasium, [Motivational orientations of adolescent students in mathematics instruction]. Empirische Pädagogik, 16, 57–78.
38. Ziegler, A., & Stoeger, H., (2003). The ENTER Model for the Identification of Talented Persons. In A., Matison, S., Urban & R., Bulfield (Eds.), Gifted 2003: A celebration downunder. Proceedings of the 15th Biennial Conference of the World Council for Gifted and Talented Children (WCGTC). Adelaide, South Australia [CD-Rom].