A classroom teacher's unique perspective is valuable when considering students for gifted and talented programs. We developed a series of 11 student profiles to measure 290 preservice and 95 in-service teachers' attitudes and asked them to indicate how strongly they believed the students in the profiles should or should not be recommended for their district's gifted program. We found students' interests, SES, and areas of academic strength influenced teachers' perceptions of students as gifted. In-service teachers were more likely than preservice teachers to view the students in the profiles as gifted. In-service teachers also were influenced by whether previous children in the family had been identified as gifted and talented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlviderezJ.WeinsteinR. S. (1999). Early teacher perceptions and later student academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 731–746
2.
BainS. K.BlissS. L.ChoateS. M.BrownK. S. (2007). Serving children who are gifted: Perceptions of undergraduates planning to become teachers. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 450–478
3.
BenbowC. P. (1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169–232
4.
BernardM. E. (1979). Does sex role behavior influence the way teachers evaluate students?Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 553–562
5.
BorlandJ. H. (1978). Teacher identification of the gifted: A new look. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 2, 22–32
6.
BusseT. V.DahmeG.WagnerH.WieczerkowskiW. (1986). Teacher perceptions of highly gifted students in the United States and West Germany. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 55–60
7.
CampbellJ. R.VernaM. A. (1998, April). Messages from the field: American teachers of the gifted talk back to the research community. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York
8.
CashionM.SullengerK. (1996, April). What it means to be gifted: Changing beliefs, changing practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York
9.
CopenhaverR. W.McIntyreD. J. (1992). Teachers' perception of gifted students. Roeper Review, 14, 151–153
10.
CramondB.MartinC. E. (1987). Inservice and preservice teachers' attitudes toward the academically brilliant. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 15–19
11.
DusekJ. B.JosephG. (1983). The bases of teacher expectancies: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 327–346
12.
Endepohls-UlpeM.RufH. (2005). Primary school teachers' criteria for the identification of gifted pupils. High Ability Studies, 16, 219–228
13.
GagnéF. (1993). Sex differences in the aptitude and talents of children as judged by peers and teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 69–77
14.
GagnéF. (1994). Are teachers really poor talent detectors? Comments on Pegnato and Birch's (1959) study of the effectiveness and efficiency of various identification techniques. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 124–126
15.
GuskinS. L.PengC. J.SimonM. (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
16.
HarrisonC. (2004). Giftedness in early childhood: The search for complexity and connection. Roeper Review, 26, 78–84
17.
HodgeK. A.KempC. R. (2006). Recognition of giftedness in the early years of school: Perspectives of teachers, parents, and children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 164–204
18.
HogeR. D.CudmoreL. (1986). The use of teacher-judgment measures in the identification of gifted pupils. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2, 181–196
19.
HunsakerS. L. (1994). Creativity as a characteristic of giftedness: Teachers see it, then they don't. Roeper Review, 17, 11–15
20.
HunsakerS. L.FinleyV. S.FrankE. L. (1997). An analysis of teacher nominations and student performance in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 19–24
21.
KoloI. A. (1999). The effectiveness of Nigerian vs. United States teacher checklist and inventories for nominating potentially gifted Nigerian preschoolers. Roeper Review, 21, 179–183
22.
MannJ. (1994). The difference: Growing up female in America. New York, NY: Warner Books
23.
McBeeM. T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 103–111
24.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 (2001)
25.
OlivaresO. J. (2001). Student interest, grading leniency, and teacher ratings: A conceptual analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 382–399
26.
OlivaresR. A.RosenthalN. (1992). Gender equity and classroom experience: A review of the research. New York, NY: Queens College. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED366701)
27.
PegnatoC. W.BirchJ. W. (1959). Locating gifted children in junior high schools: A comparison of methods. Exceptional Children, 25, 300–304
28.
PerssonR. S. (1998). Paragons of virtue: Teachers' conceptual understandings of high ability in an egalitarian school system. High Ability Studies, 9, 181–196
29.
PierceR. L.AdamsC. M.NeumeisterSpeirs K. L.CassadyJ. C.DixonF. A.CrossT. L. (2007). Development of an identification procedure for a large urban school corporation: Identifying culturally diverse and academically gifted elementary students. Roeper Review, 29, 113–118
30.
RenzulliJ. S.DelcourtM. A. B. (1986). The legacy and logic of research on the identification of gifted persons. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 20–23
31.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1997). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press
32.
RenzulliJ. S.SmithL. H.WhiteA. J.CallahanC. M.HartmanR. K. (1976). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press
33.
RenzulliJ. S.SmithL. H.WhiteA. J.CallahanC. M.HartmanR. K.WestbergK. L. (1997). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students(Rev. ed.).Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press
34.
RohrerJ. C. (1995). Primary teacher conceptions of giftedness: Image, evidence, and nonevidence. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 269–283
35.
RotigelJ. V. (2003). Understanding the young gifted child: Guidelines for parents, families, and educators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 30, 209–214
36.
RyserG.McConnellK. (2004). Scales for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press
37.
SadkerM.SadkerD. (1993). Fair and square? Creating a nonsexist classroom. Instructor, 102 (7), 44–45, 67–68
38.
SadkerM.SadkerD. (1995). Failing at fairness: How our schools cheat girls. New York, NY: Touchstone Press
39.
SiegleD. (2008). The time is now to stand up for gifted education: 2007 NAGC Presidential Address. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 111–113
40.
SiegleD.PowellT. (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 21–29
NeumeisterSpeirs K. L.AdamsC. M.PierceR. L.CassadyJ. C.DixonF. A. (2007). Fourth-grade teachers' perceptions of giftedness: Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 479–499
43.
TomlinsonC. A. (2004). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms(2nd ed.).Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
44.
WatsonM. V. (2000). Classroom interactions: The role of gender in algebra classes (Unpublished master's thesis). Boise State University, Boise, ID
45.
WeberP. (1999). Mental models and the identification of young gifted students: A tale of two boys. Roeper Review, 21, 183–188
46.
WynerJ.BridgelandJ.DiIulioJ. (2007). Achievement trap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families. Retrieved from http://www.civicenterprises.net/pdfs/jkc.pdf
