Multigroup Construct Validity Evidence of the Hope Scale: Instrumentation to Identify Low-Income Elementary Students for Gifted Programs

Gifted Child Quarterly

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 298-313

  Peters, Scott J ^a   Gentry, Marcia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN WHITEWATER   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

assessment; factor analysis; identification; low income; quantitative methodologies; special populations undeserved gifted; teacher nominations

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956470444     PISSN: 00169862     EISSN: 19349041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0016986210378332     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Borland, J.H. (2008). Identification. In J. A. Plucker & C. M. Callahan (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 261-280). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
2. Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
3. Byrne, B.M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Callahan, C.M. (2007). What can we learn from research about promising practices in developing the gifts and talents of low-income students? In. J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (pp. 53-56). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
5. Comrey, A.L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods for scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761.
6. Crowley, S.L. & Fan, X. (1997). Structural equation modeling: Basic concepts and applications in personality assessment research. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 508-531.
7. Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299.
8. Fan, X., & Silvo, S.A. (2007). Sensitivity of fit indices to model misspecification and model types. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 509-529.
9. Finney, S.J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269-314). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
10. 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.
11. Frasier, M.M., Martin, D., Garcia, J., Finley, V.S., Frank, E., Krisel, S., & King, L.L. (1995). A new window for looking at gifted children (Research Monograph RM955222). Storrs: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
12. Frasier, M.M., & Passow, A.H. (1994). Toward a new paradigm for identifying talent potential (Research Monograph RM94112). Storrs: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
13. French, B.F., & Finch, W.H. (2006). Confirmatory factor analytic procedures for the determination of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 378-402.
14. Gagné, F. (1994). Are teachers really poor talent detectors? Comments on Pegnato and Birch's (1959) study of the effectiveness and efficacy of various identification techniques. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 124-126.
15. Gilliam, J.E., Carpenter, B.O., & Christensen, J.R. (1996). Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
16. High, M.H., & Udall, A.J. (1983). Teacher ratings of students in relation to ethnicity of student and school ethnic balance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 6, 154-166.
17. Hodge, R.D., & Cudmore, L. (1986). The use of teacher-judgment measures in the identification of gifted pupils. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2, 181-196.
18. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
19. Hunsaker, S.L., Finley, V.S., & Frank, E.L. (1997). An analysis of teacher nominations and student performance in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 19-24.
20. 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.
21. Joint Committee on Testing Practices. (2005). Code of fair testing practices in education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
22. Kenny, D.A., & McCoach, D.B. (2003). Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 333-351.
23. Kieffer, K.M. (1999). An introductory primer on the appropriate use of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Research in the Schools, 6, 75-92.
24. Kingore, B. (2001). The Kingore Observation Inventory (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Professional Associates.
25. Kleinbaum, D.G., Kupper, L.L., Muller, K.E., & Nizam, A. (1998). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.
26. Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
27. Kranz, B. (1981). Kranz talent identification instrument. Moorhead, MN: Moorhead State College.
28. Lohman, D.F. (2006). Identifying academically talented minority students (Research Monograph RM05216). Storrs: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
29. Lohman, D.F., Korb, K.A., & Lakin, J.M. (2008). Identifying academically gifted English-language learners using nonverbal tests: A comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 275-296.
30. McBee, M.T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 2, 103-111.
31. McCarney, S.B., & Anderson, P.D. (1989). Gifted Evaluation Scale, second edition, technical manual. Columbia, MO: Hawthorne Educational Services.
32. Montanelli, R.G., & Humphreys, L.G. (1976). Latent roots of random data correlation matrices with squared multiple correlations on the diagonal: A Monte Carlo study. Psychometrika, 41, 341-347.
33. Muthén, B. (1994, August). Latent variable modeling of longitudinal and multilevel modeling. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
34. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 599-620.
35. National Association for Gifted Children. (2007). State of the states 2006-2007. Washington DC: Author.
36. National Center for Educational Statistics. (n.d.). Number and percentage distribution of public elementary and secondary students, by percentage of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and locale: 2003-04. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ruraled/tables/table1_8.asp?referrer=report.
37. Osterlind, S.J., & Everson, H.T. (2009). Differential item functioning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Pegnato, C.W., & Birch, J.W. (1959). Locating gifted children in junior high schools: Comparison of methods. Exceptional Children, 25, 300-304.
39. Peterson, J.S. (1999). Gifted-through whose cultural lens? An application of the Postpositivistic mode of inquire. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 354-383.
40. Peterson, J.S., & Margolin, L. (1997). Naming gifted children: An examination of unintended reproduction. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 82-100.
41. Pfeiffer, S.I., & Jarosewich, T. (2003). Gifted Rating Scales. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
42. Plata, M., & Masten, W. (1998). Teacher ratings of Hispanic and Anglo students on a behavior rating scale. Roeper Review, 21, 139-144.
43. Popham, W.J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator's call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
44. Renzulli, J.S., Smith, L.S., White, A.J., Callahan, C.M., Hartman, R.K., & Westberg, K.L. (2002). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students (Rev. ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
45. Rogers, K.B. (1996). What the bell curve says and doesn't say: Is a balanced view possible? Roeper Review, 18, 252-255.
46. Siegle, D., & Powell, T. (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 21-29.
47. Stambaugh, T. (2007). Next steps: An impetus for future directions in research, policy, and practice for low-income promising learners. In J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (pp. 83-88). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
48. Swanson, J.D. (2006). Breaking through assumptions about low-income, minority gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 11-25.
49. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
50. Thompson, M.S., & Green, S.B. (2006). Evaluating between-group differences in latent variable means. Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 119-169). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
51. United States Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
52. Valencia, R.R., & Suzuki, L.A. (2001). Intelligence testing and minority students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. VanTassel-Baska, J.L. (2008). Epilogue: What do we know about identifying and assessing the learning of gifted students? In J. L. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), Alternative assessment with gifted and talented students (pp. 309-319). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
54. Viadero, D. (2006, November 8). Scholars test out new yardstick of school poverty. Education Week, 26, 1, 15. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/11/08/11poverty.h26.html.
55. Widaman, K. (1993). Common factor analysis versus principal components analysis: Differential bias in representing model parameters? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 263-311.
56. Worrell, F.C. (2007). Identifying and including low-income learners in programs for the gifted and talented: Multiple complexities. In J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (pp. 47-51). Washington, DC: National Association of Gifted Children.
57. Wyner, J.S., Bridgeland, J.M., & Diiulio, J.J. (2009). The achievement trap (Revised ed.). Washington, DC: Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.
58. Yoon, S., & Gentry, M. (2009). Racial and ethnic representation in gifted programs: Current status of and implications for gifted Asian American students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 121-136.
59. Zwick, W.R., & Velicer, W.F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432-442.