Formal evaluation of student products completed in programs for the gifted and talented seldom occurs. Few instruments exist for this purpose, and reliability and validity information is not often available for the instruments that do exist. In this article, the development of the Student Product Assessment Form is reviewed. A description of the results obtained from content validation procedures, reliability findings, scoring, and interrater agreement and reliability techniques are provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Amabile, T.M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Bessemer, S.P., & O'Quin, K. (1987). Creative product analysis: Testing a model by developing a judging instrument. In S. G. lsaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research: Beyond the basics (pp. 341-357). Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
4.
Bessemer, S.P., & Treffinger, D.J. (1981). Analysis of creative products: Review and synthesis. Journal of Creative Behaviors, 15, 159-179.
5.
Betts, G.T. (1986). The autonomous learner model. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 27-56). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Clifford, J.A., Runions, T., & Smyth, E. (1986). The learning enrichment service (LES): A participatory model for gifted adolescents. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 92-125). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
8.
Council for Exceptional Children. (1979). Sample instruments for the evaluation of programs for the gifted and talented . Bureau of Educational Research, U-7, Storrs Hall, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269.
9.
Ebel, R.L. (1951). Estimation of the reliability of ratings. Psychometric, 16, 407-424.
10.
Feldhusen, J.F., & Kolloff, M.B. (1986). The Purdue three-stage enrichment model for gifted education at the elementary level. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 126-152). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
11.
Feldhusen, J.F., & Robinson, A. (1986). The Purdue Secondary Model for gifted and talented youth. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 126-152). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
12.
Getzels, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem-finding in art. New York : Wiley-Interscience.
13.
Guilford, J.P. (1954). Psychometric methods. New York : McGraw Hill.
14.
Jackson, P., & Messick, S. (1965). The person, the product and the response: Conceptual problems in the assessment of creativity. Journal of Personality , 33, 309-329.
15.
Kaplan, S.N. (1986). The grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 180-193). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
16.
MacKinnon, D.W. (1987). Some critical issues for future research in creativity . In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 120-130). Buffalo, NY : Bearly Limited.
17.
Reis, S.M. (1981). An analysis of the productivity of gifted students participating in programs using the revolving door identification model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
18.
Renzulli, J.S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted (pp. 429-460). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
19.
Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
20.
Rhodes, M. (1987). An analysis of creativity. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 216-222). Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
21.
Sobel, R.S., & Rothenberg, A. (1980). Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus separated visual images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 953-961.
22.
Treffinger, D.J. (1986). Fostering effective, independent learning through individualized programming. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. (pp. 429-460). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
23.
Treffinger, D.J. (1987). Research on creativity assessment. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research (pp. 103-119). Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
24.
Tuttle, F.B. (1980). Evaluation report for Concord MA. Project Gather and Project Lift. Concord SchoolSystem, Concord, MA.
25.
Westberg, K.L. (1990). The effects of instruction in the inventing process on students' development of inventions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
