Pyryt has raised important questions about the results reported in Plucker, Callahan, and Tomchin (1996). Although Pyryt's comments focus directly on statistical issues (issues upon. which we generally agree), he indirectly touches on some major issues related to contemporary intelligence theory and the use of alternative assessments. Our different approaches to these conceptual issues highlight important areas for future research and practice, illustrating the value of this type of intellectual debate for the fields of gifted education and talent development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Callahan, C. M., Tomlinson, C. A., Moon, T. R., Tomchin, E. M., & Plucker,J. A. (1999). Project START. Using a multiple intelligences model in identifying and promoting talent in high-risk students. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
2.
Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: Plenum Press.
3.
Fava, J. L., & Velicer, W. F. (1996). The effects of underextraction in factor and component analyses. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 907-929.
4.
Guskin, S. L., Peng, C.-Y., & Majd-Jabbari, M. (1988). Teachers' perceptions of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 216-221.
5.
Guskin, S. L., Peng, C.-Y., & Simon, M. (1992). Do teachers react to “multiple intelligences? Effects of teachers' stereotypes on judgments and expectancies for students with diverse patterns of giftedness/talent. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 32-37.
6.
Plucker, J. A. (1999). In search of multiple intelligences. Unpublished manuscript.
7.
Plucker, J. A., Callahan, C. M., & Tomchin, E. M. (1996). Wherefore art thou, multiple intelligences? Alternative assessments for identifying talent in ethnically diverse and low income students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 81-92.
8.
Thompson, B., & Daniel, L. G. (1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 197-208.
9.
Thomson, G. H. (1919). On the cause of hierarchical order among correlation coefficients. Proceedings of the Royal Society, A, 95, 400-408.
10.
Thomson, G. H. (1939). The factorial analysis of human ability. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
