“Hidden Gifted” Students: Underachiever Prevalence and Profile

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the prevalence of one type of “hidden gifted” population (gifted underachievers) and to identify some of the key academic and personal characteristics that define this group. Study participants were selected from 19 elementary, junior, and senior high schools in a large Western Canadian urban school district. A formula was used to identify grades 4, 7, and 10 students whose measured intellectual potential was 120 or higher and who demonstrated a significant achievement-potential discrepancy. Out of a total of 80 prospective students, a final sample of 58 students was administered the Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-Revised (WJPB-R), the Piers-Harris Self-Concept Scale (PHSCS), and Thinking About My School (TAMS). Results of a MANOVA and discriminant analysis indicate that there was a significant interaction effect between gender and school level and a significant grade-level effect. Major findings were: (a) achievement scores on the WJPB-R were higher than their course grades; (b) there was a significant decline in attitudes toward school for this group of students at the junior high level, particularly for females; and (c) overall achievement declined as students progress from grade 4 to grades 7 and 10.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baldwin

A. Y.

(1991). Ethical and cultural issues. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 416–427). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Cone

Wilson

(1981). Quantifying a severe discrepancy: A critical analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 359–371.

Cox

Daniel

Boston

B. O.

(1985). Educating able learners: Programs and promising practices. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Dowdall

C. B.

Colangelo

(1982). Underachieving gifted students: Review and implications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 179–184.

Eby

J. W.

Smutny

J. F.

(1990). A thoughtful overview of gifted education. New York: Longman.

Feldman

D. H.

Bratton

J. C.

(1980). Relativity and giftedness: Implications for equality of educational opportunity. In Renzulli

J. S.

Stoddard

E. P.

(Eds.), Gifted and talented education in perspective (p. 20). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

Fine

M. J.

Pitts

(1980). Intervention with underachieving gifted children: Rationale and strategies. Gifted Child Quarterly, 14, 51–55.

Gagné

(1991). Toward a differentiated model of giftedness and talent. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 65–80). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Gallagher

J. J.

(1991). Educational reform, values, and gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35(1), 12–19.

10.

Hopkins

K. D.

(1978). Review of the Cognitive Abilities Test. In Buros

O. K.

(Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 255–257). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

11.

Horn

J. L.

(1989). Cognitive diversity: A framework of learning. In Ackerman

P. L.

Sternberg

R. J.

Glaser

(Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 61–116). New York: Freeman.

12.

Johnson

(1981). Smart kids have problems too. Today's Education, 70, 26–29.

13.

Kerr

B. A.

(1985). Smart girls, gifted women. Columbus: Ohio Psychology Publishing Co.

14.

Lupart

J. L.

(1992). The hidden gifted: Current state of knowledge and future research directions. In Monks

F. J.

Peters

W. A. M.

(Eds.) Talent for the future: Social and personality development of gifted children: Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children (pp. 177–190). The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.

15.

Mather

Udall

A. J.

(1985). The identification of gifted underachievers using the Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery. Roeper Review, 8, 54–56.

16.

McGrew

K. S.

Werder

J. K.

Woodcock

R. W.

(1991). Woodcock Johnson Technical Manual. Allen, TX: DLM.

17.

National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.

18.

Nichols

R. C.

(1978). Review of the Cognitive Abilities Test. In Buros

O. K.

(Ed.), The eighth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 255–257). Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

19.

Piers

E. V.

(1984). Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale (Revised). Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

20.

Renzulli

J. S.

Delcourt

M. A. B.

(1986). The legacy and logic of research on identification of gifted persons. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 20–23.

21.

Richert

E. S.

(1987). Rampant problems and promising practices in the identification of disadvantaged gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(4), 149–154.

22.

Richert

E. S.

(1991). Rampant problems and promising practices in identification. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 81–96). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

23.

Seeley

K. R.

(1985). Gifted adolescents: Potential and problems. NASSP Bulletin, 69, 75–78.

24.

Shriner

J. G.

Ysseldyke

J. E.

Gorney

Franklin

M. J.

(1993). Examining prevalence at the ends of the spectrum: Giftedness and disability. Remedial and Special Education, 14(5), 33–39.

25.

Sternberg

R. J.

Davidson

J. E.

(1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.

26.

Thorndike

R. L.

(1963). The concepts of over- and underachievement. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

27.

Thorndike

R. L.

Hagen

Wright

E. N.

(1989). Canadian Cognitive Abilities Test: Examiner's Manual. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada.

28.

Treffinger

D. J.

(1991). School reform and gifted education—Opportunities and issues. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 6–19.

29.

Whitmore

J. R.

(1980). Giftedness, conflict, and underachievement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

30.

Whitmore

J. R.

(1985). Thinking About My School: A practical tool for assessing student attitudes and feelings about their school. East Aurora, NY: United Educational Services.