The challenge of correctly identifying gifted students is a critical issue. Gifted education in Puerto Rico is marked by insufficient support and a lack of appropriate identification methods. This study examined the reliability and validity of a Spanish translation of the Gifted Rating Scales-School Form (GRS) with a sample of 618 island-residing Puerto Rican students. Alpha values for the Spanish-translated version ranged from 0.98 to 0.99, comparable to those reported for the USA standardization sample. Scores on the Spanish-translated GRS correlated positively and significantly with classroom grades, Naglieri Non-verbal Test of Intelligence (NNAT) scores and with the island’s local norm-referenced achievement test. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the six-factor model. Overall, findings provide evidence supporting the use of a Spanish-translated GRS for Puerto Rican island students.
BembenuttyHFKarabenickSA (2004) Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review16: 35–57.
2.
BenjaminiYHochbergY (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological)57(1): 289–300.
3.
BorlandJH (2009) Myth 2: The gifted constitute 3% to 5% of the population. Moreover, giftedness equals high IQ, which is a stable measure of aptitude: Spinal tap psychometrics in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly53: 236–238.
4.
BrackenBAKeithLKWalkerKC (1998) Assessment of preschool behavior and social-emotional functioning: A review of thirteen third-party instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessments16: 153–169.
5.
BradenJP (2000) Perspectives on the non-verbal assessment of intelligence. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment18: 204–210.
6.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
7.
CramerRH (1991) The education of gifted children in the United States: A delphi study. Gifted Child Quarterly35(2): 84–91.
8.
ErwinJOWorrellFC (2012) Assessment practices and the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted and talented education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment30: 74–87.
9.
Foley NicponMPfeifferSI (2011) High-ability students: New ways to conceptualize giftedness and provide psychological services in the schools. Journal of Applied School Psychology22: 1–13.
10.
GeisengerKF (1994) Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment6: 304–312.
11.
Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement (1996) La prueba de logros en español, segunda edición [aprenda-2]. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
JarosewichTPfeifferSIMorrisJ (2002) Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment20(4): 322–336.
14.
KaufmanSB (2013) Ungifted: Intelligence redefined. New York, NY: Basic Books.
15.
LeeDPfeifferSI (2006) The reliability and validity of a Korean-translated version of the gifted rating scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment24(3): 210–224.
16.
LiHPfeifferSIPetscherY. (2008) Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales-School Form in China. Gifted Child Quarterly52: 160–169.
17.
LohmanDF (2006) Exploring perceptions and awareness of high ability. Roeper Review29: 32–40.
18.
McClainMCPfeifferSI (2012) Education for the gifted in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology28: 59–88.
NaglieriJA (2003) Naglieri non-verbal ability test. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
21.
NaglieriJABoothALWinslerA (2004) Comparison of Hispanic children with and without limited English proficiency on the Naglieri non-verbal ability test. Psychological assessment16(1):81–84.
22.
NaglieriJAFordD (2005) Increasing minority student’s participation in gifted classes using the NNAT: A response to Lohman. Gifted Child Quarterly49: 29–36.
23.
NaglieriJARonningME (2000) The relationships between general ability using the NNAT and SAT reading achievement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment18: 230–239.
24.
Pérez-BrebánM (2005) Los padres de APRENDO: Nadan contra la corriente por el futuro de sus hijos superdotados [electronic version]. La Perla del Sur (retrieved February 10, 2005).
25.
PfeifferSI (2002) Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology19(1): 31–50.
26.
PfeifferSI (2003) Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly47(2): 161–169.
27.
PfeifferSI (2009) The Gifted: Clinical challenges for child psychiatry. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry48: 787–790.
28.
PfeifferSI (2012a) Current perspectives on the identification and assessment of gifted students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment30: 3–9.
29.
PfeifferSI (2012b) Serving the gifted. NY: Routledge.
30.
PfeifferSIBleiS (2008) Gifted identification beyond the IQ test: Rating scales and other assessment procedures. In: PfeifferSI (ed) Handbook of Giftedness in Children. NY: Springer, pp. 177–198.
31.
PfeifferSIJarosewichT (2003a) Gifted rating scales. San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
32.
PfeifferSIJarosewichT (2003b) Gifted rating scales. Technical Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
33.
PfeifferSIJarosewichT (2007) The gifted rating scales-school from: An analysis of the standardization sample based on age, gender, race, and diagnostic efficiency. Gifted Child Quarterly51: 39–50.
34.
PfeifferSIPetscherYKumtepeA (2008) The Gifted Rating Scales-School Form: A validation study based on age, gender and race. Roeper Review30: 140–146.
35.
PfeifferSISoldiveraSNortonJ (1992) Consumer’s guide to mental health outcome measures. Villanova, PA: The Devereux Foundation. (reprinted in ERIC Reports, TM 019317).
36.
Pruebas Puertorriqueñas de Aprovechamiento Académico Académico(2007). Hato Rey, Puerto Rico: Educational Testing Service.
37.
RenzulliJ SDelcourtMAB (2004) The legacy and logic of research on the identification of gifted persons. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
38.
RhodesRLOchoaSHOrtizSO (2005) Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students: A practical guide. New York: Guilford Press.
39.
RobertsonSGPfeifferSITaylorN (2011) Serving the gifted: A national survey of school psychologists. Psychology in the Schools48: 786–799.
40.
RobinsonNM (2008) The social world of gifted children and youth. In: PfeifferSI (ed.) Handbook of giftedness in children. New York: Springer, pp. 33–52.
41.
RosadoJIPfeifferSIPetscherY (2008) The Reliability and Validity of Spanish Translated Version of the Gifted Rating Scales. Gifted & Talented International Journal23: 102–111.
42.
SiegelDPowellT (2004) Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48: 21–29.
43.
SorianoEMLBlumen-PardoSCastellanos-SimonsD (2000) Programs and practices for identifying and nurturing giftedness and talent in Latin American countries. In: HellerKAMonksFJSternbergRJ. (eds) Handbook of giftedness and talent2nd edn, Amsterdam:Elsevier, pp. 816–828.
44.
SubotnikRF (2003) A developmental view of giftedness: From being to doing. Roeper Review26: 14–15.
45.
SubotnikFFKubiliusOlszewski-WorrellFC (2011) Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science12: 3–54.
46.
USA Census Bureau (2000) Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
47.
WechslerD (2003) Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children4th edn, San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
