Heller, Kurt A.

Misumi, J.

Motoaki, M.

Wilpert, Bernhard

English

Open Access LMU

22nd International Congress of Applied Psychology Kyoto, Japan, 22-27 July 1990 Proceedings Volume 2 GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Editors: B. Wilpert H. Motoaki J. Misumi LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS Hove (UK) Hillsdale (USA) Contents Organising Committee vii Foreword — Japanese Editors ix General Psychology Keynote Addresses 3 Symposia 71 Poster Contributions 129 Psychological Assessment Keynote Addresses 223 Symposia 251 Poster Contributions 281 Environmental Psychology Keynote Addresses 311 Symposia 351 Poster Contributions 389 National Development/Cross-cultural Psychology Keynote Addresses 403 Symposia 429 Poster Contributions 453 Workshop and Audiovisual Presentations 457 Author Index 459 ν ISSUES AND PRACTICES OF THE DIAGNOSIS OF GIFTEDNESS Organizer & Chair: K. A. Heller, University of Munich, FRG Contributors: Κ A. Heller, University of Munich, FRG Issues and practices of the diagnosis of giftedness: Introduction C. J . Mills, CTY-John Hopkins University, U.S.A. Issues of diagnosis and programming with students who are intellectually gifted and learning disabled U. Schaarschmidt, D. Häuser, Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, GDR Diagnosis of giftedness in preschool and early school: Experiences and problems G. Trost, Institute for Test Development and Talent Research, FRG Problems of determining the validity of programs for the identification of the gifted Discussant: T. Hidano, University of the Air, Japan This symposium included contributions by researchers from different cultures and political backgrounds. All were concerned with problems of identifying gifted and talented children and adolescents. Central Topics in the diagnosis of giftedness were discussed. I t was argued that 266 SYMPOSIA 267 the concepts of giftedness and talent should be conceptualized not only as a disposition but also as a dynamic potential. Prior to the discussion of methodological problems of the diagnosis of giftedness, K. Heller specified some preconditions for clarification of the theoretical framework. The first one was related to the problem of conceptualization of giftedness as the focal point of diagnosis. Generally, giftedness can be defined as the individual potential for outstanding achievements. Within the psychometrical paradigm, the concept of disposition is usually employed. In other words, giftedness is conceived as an ability construct. Corresponding operational definitions would be, for example: "A person is highly gifted i f his/her overall score on a group intelligence test is above the 95th percentile" (general giftedness), or "A person is mathematically gifted i f his/her score on an exacting test for mathematical performance is in the top 2%" (specific giftedness or talent). The instruments (tests) and the criteria must be verified as having adequate validity. Psychometric data, however, can only be used to conduct product analyses or to make statements about the individual state of achievements or development. Such data may be helpful in many ways (e.g., in school counseling, in the assignment of students to special courses, and for prognoses of success), but often they do not represent a sufficient informational basis for explaining learning achievements or difficulties. This is valid for gifted individuals, too, as far as they are the reason for intervention or counseling. Thus, in practical counseling, in the scientific lab, and in field studies for the exploration of giftedness-specific learning and thinking competencies, status-related diagnostic findings must be supplemented with process-related diagnostic approaches. Diagnoses of giftedness in concrete usage depend not only on the goals of intervention or prognosis but also on the theoretical reference basis of the object of the investigation. I t is necessary to find an adequate balance between the tendency to inflationary versus unidimensional concepts of giftedness and integrative approaches concerning trait-orientated models of intelligence as opposed to cognitive models. G. Trost's presentation entitled "Problems of determining the validity of programs for the identification of the gifted," focused on the difficulties in validating procedures for identifying the gifted, especially in the absence of control groups. I n programs for identifying the gifted, the principle that educational assessment procedures should be subject to evaluation is rarely practiced. I f evaluation studies are carried out at all, they usually consist of follow-up investigations on those individuals who were identified as "gifted" and who then took advantage of special enrichment or acceleration programs and the like. Thus the validity of 268 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT the measures of identification, the effects of the selection for the special programs, and the effects of the programs themselves are confounded. In this presentation, Trost discussed designs for validity studies that overcome this deficiency and the methodological problems implicit in them. Different definitions of giftedness call for different procedures of identification and different ways of determining the validity of these procedures. Whether giftedness is operationalized by outstanding achievement or defined as potential superior performance, the deficiency pointed out above can only be overcome by including control groups in the validity studies. Trost used the example of a large-scale longitudinal study and attempted to solve some of the methodological problems of validity studies in this context. This study has been running since 1973 on both a highly selected group of academically gifted students and a nationally representative sample of West German high school graduates using the same predictors (e.g., grades, test scores, study habits) and criteria for both groups. After 5 and 11 years, criterion data on their progress and success in higher education, job performance, and satisfaction with the subjects' academic and professional careers were assessed. C. S. Mills dealt with issues of diagnosis and programming with students who are both intellectually gifted and learning disabled. These people are in need of special services that are often denied them because of their "double exceptionality." The coexistence of both conditions, as well as the manifestations of the interaction between the two, can be confusing to parents, teachers, and other professionals. "Learning disabilities" is a general term that refers to a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, reasoning, or mathematical abilities. These disorders are intrinsic to the individual and presumably due to central nervous system dysfunction. Although learning disabilities may occur concommitantly with other handicapping conditions or with extrinsic influences such as insufficient or inappropriate instruction, they are not the result of those conditions or influences. A further definition provided in this presentation was an operationalization of a "gifted and learning-disabled child": A student who has an overall IQ score in the superior range or a superior score on one section of individually administered IQ test or an exceptional ability in one area and who exhibits a significant discrepancy (not due to emotional or motivational problems) between achievement and identified intellectual potential. SYMPOSIA 269 Some gifted and learning-disabled children are easily identified as gifted (high abilities, high achievements, or high IQs). However, the discrepancy between expected and actual performance increases with age. Students who are identified as learning disabled who are also gifted may be failing or struggling in school. With attention focused on their deficiency, their gifts may be ignored. Mills listed characteristics that should be utilized by the educator in the identification of gifted and learning-disabled children. Special attention should be paid to (a) wide discrepancies in test scores from one test session to another or from one type of test to another (ability vs. achievement or verbal vs. quantitative) and to unexplained differences between standardized test scores and actual classroom performance, and (b) exceptional reasoning ability with a simultaneous inability to memorize numerical facts, or exceptional mathematical reasoning ability appearing together with inconsistent or nonexistent ability to compute. Mills concluded that programming for the gifted learning-disabled student should be based on a qualified experts specific diagnosis of the underlying problem. The program should focus on the child's strengths and successes. Compensatory strategies should be developed where necessary, and classroom instruction may need to be modified. Above all, the programming should be creative and flexible. I n the paper provided by M. Schaarschmidt & Häuser, the topic was a research project focused on the identification of giftedness in preschool children, and on the development of these children in a longitudinal study. The contribution at the symposium referred to the former topic. On the basis of results from studies conducted to date, including the comparison of early readers and early calculating children as well as children in contrast to their age norms, the following questions were discussed: (a) Can giftedness be identified at preschool age? I f so what are the indicators? (b) Are differentiations in giftedness already identifiable at preschool age? How are they expressed? (c) What should diagnostic methods for the early identification of giftedness look like? On the basis of a preliminary answer to this question, the future research procedure was specified and preliminary consequences of pedagogical relevance were suggested. Unfortunately, the colleagues from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and from the Chinese Academy of Sciences were not able to come to Kyoto for financial reasons. Their lectures on "Problems of Identifying High Intellectual Potential" (by E. Gefferth & M . Herskovits) and "Identifying the Gifted in China: Idea and Practice" (by Z. Zixiu) had to be cancelled. 270 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT After the presentations a very lively discussion with the audience took place. T. Hidano (the discussant) concluded the symposium by summarizing the contributions. He stressed 6 points: (a) validation, (b) concepts of giftedness, (c) the Japanese point of view on special education for gifted children, (d) cross-cultural perspectives, (e) the need for identification of the gifted in early childhood, (f) diagnosis: how to use it? Al l participants agreed that the exchange of information and experiences concerning diagnosis of giftedness was very useful and stressed the necessity of more cross-cultural studies i n this field. 

Issues and Practices of the Diagnosis of Giftedness

Universität München: Elektronischen Publikationen

22nd International 
Congress of Applied 
Psychology 
Kyoto, Japan, 
22-27 July 1990 
Proceedings Volume 2 
GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY AND 
ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 
Editors: 
B. Wilpert 
H. Motoaki 
J. Misumi 
LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS Hove (UK) Hillsdale (USA) 
Contents 
Organising Committee vii 
Foreword — Japanese Editors ix 
General Psychology 
Keynote Addresses 3 
Symposia 71 
Poster Contributions 129 
Psychological Assessment 
Keynote Addresses 223 
Symposia 251 
Poster Contributions 281 
Environmental Psychology 
Keynote Addresses 311 
Symposia 351 
Poster Contributions 389 
National Development/Cross-cultural Psychology 
Keynote Addresses 403 
Symposia 429 
Poster Contributions 453 
Workshop and Audiovisual Presentations 457 
Author Index 459 
ν 
ISSUES AND PRACTICES OF THE 
DIAGNOSIS OF GIFTEDNESS 
Organizer & Chair: K. A. Heller, 
University of Munich, FRG 
Contributors: 
Κ A. Heller, University of Munich, FRG 
Issues and practices of the diagnosis of giftedness: Introduction 
C. J . Mills, CTY-John Hopkins University, U.S.A. 
Issues of diagnosis and programming with 
students who are intellectually gifted and learning disabled 
U. Schaarschmidt, D. Häuser, Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, GDR 
Diagnosis of giftedness in preschool and early school: Experiences and 
problems 
G. Trost, Institute for Test Development and Talent Research, FRG 
Problems of determining the validity of programs for the identification 
of the gifted 
Discussant: T. Hidano, University of the Air, Japan 
This symposium included contributions by researchers from different 
cultures and political backgrounds. All were concerned with problems 
of identifying gifted and talented children and adolescents. Central 
Topics in the diagnosis of giftedness were discussed. I t was argued that 
266 
SYMPOSIA 267 
the concepts of giftedness and talent should be conceptualized not only 
as a disposition but also as a dynamic potential. 
Prior to the discussion of methodological problems of the diagnosis of 
giftedness, K. Heller specified some preconditions for clarification of the 
theoretical framework. The first one was related to the problem of 
conceptualization of giftedness as the focal point of diagnosis. 
Generally, giftedness can be defined as the individual potential for 
outstanding achievements. Within the psychometrical paradigm, the 
concept of disposition is usually employed. In other words, giftedness is 
conceived as an ability construct. Corresponding operational definitions 
would be, for example: "A person is highly gifted i f his/her overall score 
on a group intelligence test is above the 95th percentile" (general 
giftedness), or "A person is mathematically gifted i f his/her score on an 
exacting test for mathematical performance is in the top 2%" (specific 
giftedness or talent). The instruments (tests) and the criteria must be 
verified as having adequate validity. 
Psychometric data, however, can only be used to conduct product 
analyses or to make statements about the individual state of 
achievements or development. Such data may be helpful in many ways 
(e.g., in school counseling, in the assignment of students to special 
courses, and for prognoses of success), but often they do not represent a 
sufficient informational basis for explaining learning achievements or 
difficulties. This is valid for gifted individuals, too, as far as they are the 
reason for intervention or counseling. Thus, in practical counseling, in 
the scientific lab, and in field studies for the exploration of 
giftedness-specific learning and thinking competencies, status-related 
diagnostic findings must be supplemented with process-related 
diagnostic approaches. 
Diagnoses of giftedness in concrete usage depend not only on the goals 
of intervention or prognosis but also on the theoretical reference basis 
of the object of the investigation. I t is necessary to find an adequate 
balance between the tendency to inflationary versus unidimensional 
concepts of giftedness and integrative approaches concerning 
trait-orientated models of intelligence as opposed to cognitive models. 
G. Trost's presentation entitled "Problems of determining the validity 
of programs for the identification of the gifted," focused on the 
difficulties in validating procedures for identifying the gifted, especially 
in the absence of control groups. I n programs for identifying the gifted, 
the principle that educational assessment procedures should be subject 
to evaluation is rarely practiced. I f evaluation studies are carried out at 
all, they usually consist of follow-up investigations on those individuals 
who were identified as "gifted" and who then took advantage of special 
enrichment or acceleration programs and the like. Thus the validity of 
268 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 
the measures of identification, the effects of the selection for the special 
programs, and the effects of the programs themselves are confounded. 
In this presentation, Trost discussed designs for validity studies that 
overcome this deficiency and the methodological problems implicit in 
them. 
Different definitions of giftedness call for different procedures of 
identification and different ways of determining the validity of these 
procedures. Whether giftedness is operationalized by outstanding 
achievement or defined as potential superior performance, the 
deficiency pointed out above can only be overcome by including control 
groups in the validity studies. 
Trost used the example of a large-scale longitudinal study and 
attempted to solve some of the methodological problems of validity 
studies in this context. This study has been running since 1973 on both 
a highly selected group of academically gifted students and a 
nationally representative sample of West German high school 
graduates using the same predictors (e.g., grades, test scores, study 
habits) and criteria for both groups. After 5 and 11 years, criterion data 
on their progress and success in higher education, job performance, 
and satisfaction with the subjects' academic and professional careers 
were assessed. 
C. S. Mills dealt with issues of diagnosis and programming with 
students who are both intellectually gifted and learning disabled. These 
people are in need of special services that are often denied them because 
of their "double exceptionality." The coexistence of both conditions, as 
well as the manifestations of the interaction between the two, can be 
confusing to parents, teachers, and other professionals. 
"Learning disabilities" is a general term that refers to a 
heterogeneous group of disorders manifested by significant difficulties 
in the acquisition and use of listening, speaking, reading, writing, 
reasoning, or mathematical abilities. These disorders are intrinsic to the 
individual and presumably due to central nervous system dysfunction. 
Although learning disabilities may occur concommitantly with other 
handicapping conditions or with extrinsic influences such as insufficient 
or inappropriate instruction, they are not the result of those conditions 
or influences. 
A further definition provided in this presentation was an 
operationalization of a "gifted and learning-disabled child": A student 
who has an overall IQ score in the superior range or a superior score on 
one section of individually administered IQ test or an exceptional ability 
in one area and who exhibits a significant discrepancy (not due to 
emotional or motivational problems) between achievement and 
identified intellectual potential. 
SYMPOSIA 269 
Some gifted and learning-disabled children are easily identified as 
gifted (high abilities, high achievements, or high IQs). However, the 
discrepancy between expected and actual performance increases with 
age. Students who are identified as learning disabled who are also gifted 
may be failing or struggling in school. With attention focused on their 
deficiency, their gifts may be ignored. 
Mills listed characteristics that should be utilized by the educator in 
the identification of gifted and learning-disabled children. Special 
attention should be paid to (a) wide discrepancies in test scores from one 
test session to another or from one type of test to another (ability vs. 
achievement or verbal vs. quantitative) and to unexplained differences 
between standardized test scores and actual classroom performance, 
and (b) exceptional reasoning ability with a simultaneous inability to 
memorize numerical facts, or exceptional mathematical reasoning 
ability appearing together with inconsistent or nonexistent ability to 
compute. 
Mills concluded that programming for the gifted learning-disabled 
student should be based on a qualified experts specific diagnosis of the 
underlying problem. The program should focus on the child's strengths 
and successes. Compensatory strategies should be developed where 
necessary, and classroom instruction may need to be modified. Above 
all, the programming should be creative and flexible. 
I n the paper provided by M. Schaarschmidt & Häuser, the topic was 
a research project focused on the identification of giftedness in 
preschool children, and on the development of these children in a 
longitudinal study. The contribution at the symposium referred to the 
former topic. On the basis of results from studies conducted to date, 
including the comparison of early readers and early calculating 
children as well as children in contrast to their age norms, the 
following questions were discussed: (a) Can giftedness be identified at 
preschool age? I f so what are the indicators? (b) Are differentiations in 
giftedness already identifiable at preschool age? How are they 
expressed? (c) What should diagnostic methods for the early 
identification of giftedness look like? On the basis of a preliminary 
answer to this question, the future research procedure was specified 
and preliminary consequences of pedagogical relevance were 
suggested. 
Unfortunately, the colleagues from the Hungarian Academy of 
Sciences and from the Chinese Academy of Sciences were not able to 
come to Kyoto for financial reasons. Their lectures on "Problems of 
Identifying High Intellectual Potential" (by E. Gefferth & M . 
Herskovits) and "Identifying the Gifted in China: Idea and Practice" (by 
Z. Zixiu) had to be cancelled. 
270 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 
After the presentations a very lively discussion with the audience 
took place. T. Hidano (the discussant) concluded the symposium by 
summarizing the contributions. He stressed 6 points: (a) validation, (b) 
concepts of giftedness, (c) the Japanese point of view on special 
education for gifted children, (d) cross-cultural perspectives, (e) the need 
for identification of the gifted in early childhood, (f) diagnosis: how to 
use it? Al l participants agreed that the exchange of information and 
experiences concerning diagnosis of giftedness was very useful and 
stressed the necessity of more cross-cultural studies i n this field. 


https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/2508/1/2508.pdf

Issues and Practices of the Diagnosis of Giftedness

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Access LMU

Universität München: Elektronischen Publikationen