Validating a Classroom Perception Instrument for Gifted Students in a University-Based Residential Program

Abstract

Summer enrichment and residential programs can provide gifted students with positive social interactions and challenging curricula. However, little research has focused on gifted students’ perceptions of the learning environment in such programs. This research project evaluated the psychometric properties and practical applications of the Student Perceptions of Classroom Quality (SPOCQ) instrument. The two studies used a total sample of 1,492 diverse, gifted students in Grades 5 through 12 who participated in a university-based enrichment residential program from 2010 through 2013. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that although the original model was a moderately good fit for the gifted student participants in 2010 to 2011, some items on the SPOCQ were classroom specific and did not apply to residential programs. Therefore, those items were revised and retested, and results showed that the modified model was a better fit for gifted student participants in 2012 to 2013.

Keywords

gifted residential program gifted students student perceptions of classrooms instrument validation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arbuckle

J. L.

(2006). Amos (Version 7.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago, IL: SPSS.

Arbuckle

J. L.

(2014). Amos (Version 23.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago, IL: IBM SPSS.

Arnau

R. C.

(1998, April). Second-order factor analysis: Methods and interpretation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.

Assor

Kaplan

Roth

(2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 261-278.

Bong

Skaalvik

E. M.

(2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1-40.

Carman

C. A.

(2013). Comparing apples and oranges: Fifteen years of definitions of giftedness in research. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24, 52-70.

Chae

Gentry

(2007). Korean high school student perceptions of classroom quality: Validation research. Gifted and Talented International, 22, 68-76.

Chae

Gentry

(2011). Gifted and general high school students’ perceptions of learning and motivational constructs in Korea and the United States. High Ability Studies, 22, 103-118.

Church

M. A.

Elliot

A. J.

Gable

S. L.

(2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 43-54. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.43

10.

Clinkenbeard

P. R.

(2012). Motivation and gifted students: Implications of theory and research. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 622-630.

11.

Deci

E. L.

(1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105-115.

12.

Dong

Peng

C. J.

(2013). Principled missing data methods for researchers. SpringerPlus, 2, Article 222. doi:10.1186/2193-1801-2-222

13.

Durik

A. M.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(2007). Different strokes for different folks: How individual interest moderates the effects of situational factors on task interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 597-610.

14.

Gentry

Gable

R. K.

(2001a). From the students’ perspective—My class activities: An instrument for use in research and evaluation. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 322-343.

15.

Gentry

Gable

R. K.

(2001b). My class activities: A survey instrument to assess students’ perceptions of interest, challenge, choice, and enjoyment in their classrooms [Instrument]. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

16.

Gentry

Gable

R. K.

Springer

(2000). Gifted and non-gifted middle school students: Are their attitudes toward school different as measured by the new affective instrument, my class activities? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 74-96.

17.

Gentry

Owen

S. V.

(2004). Secondary student perceptions of classroom quality: Instrumentation and differences between advanced/honors and nonhonors classes. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 20-29.

18.

Gentry

Paul

A. K.

Richardson

J. C.

(2014, November). Instruments available to researchers, evaluators, and practitioners through the Purdue GERI website. Paper presented at the 61st Annual Convention of the National Association for Gifted Children, Baltimore, MD.

19.

Gentry

Peters

S. J.

Mann

R. L.

(2007). Differences between general and talented students’ perceptions of their career and technical education experiences compared to their traditional high school experiences. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18, 372-401.

20.

Gentry

Rizza

M. G.

Gable

R. K.

(2001). Gifted students’ perceptions of their class activities: Differences among rural, urban, and suburban student attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 115-129.

21.

Gentry

Springer

P. M.

(2002). Secondary student perceptions of their class activities regarding meaningfulness, challenge, choice, and appeal: An initial validation study. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13, 192-204.

22.

George

Mallery

(2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson

23.

Gifted Education Resource Institute Center. (2013). Summer residential. Retrieved from http://geri.education.purdue.edu/youth_programs/SRES/index.html

24.

Gifted Education Resource Institute Center. (2015). Instrument repository. Retrieved from http://purduegeri.wix.com/instrument#!for-the-researchers/cp8h

25.

Hidi

Renninger

K. A.

(2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127.

26.

Joint Committee on Testing Practices. (2005). Code of fair testing practices in education. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

27.

Kahyaoglu

(2013). A comparison between gifted students and non-gifted students’ learning styles and their motivation styles towards science learning. Educational Research and Reviews, 8, 890-896.

28.

Kell

H. J.

Lubinski

Benbow

C. P.

(2013). Who rises to the top? Early indicators. Psychological Science, 24, 648-659.

29.

Kim

(2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60, 102-116.

30.

Kline

R. B.

(2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

31.

Lipstein

Renninger

K. A.

(2006). “Putting things into words”: 12-15-year-old students’ interest for writing. In Boscolo

Hidi

(Eds.), Motivation and writing: Research and school practice (pp. 113-140). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic.

32.

Lopez

F. G.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Gore

P. A.

(1997). Role of social-cognitive expectations in high school students’ mathematics-related interest and performance. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 44-52.

33.

Matthews

M. S.

McBee

M. T.

(2007). School factors and the underachievement of gifted students in a talent search summer program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 167-181.

34.

Meyer

D. K.

(1993). What is scaffolded instruction? Definitions, distinguishing features, and misnomers. In Leu

D. J.

Kinzer

C. K.

(Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice: Forty-second yearbook of The National Reading Conference (pp. 41-53). Washington, DC: National Reading Conference.

35.

National Science Board. (2016). 2016 science and engineering indicator report. Retrieved from https://nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsb20161/uploads/1/nsb20161.pdf

36.

O’Donnell

A. M.

O’Kelly

(1994). Learning from peers: Beyond the rhetoric of positive results. Educational Psychology Review 6, 321-349.

37.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(2003). Special summer and Saturday programs for gifted students. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 219-228). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

38.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

Witcher

A. E.

Collins

K. M. T.

Filer

J. D.

Wiedmaier

C. D.

Moore

C. W.

(2007). Students’ perceptions of characteristics of effective college teachers: A validity study of a teaching evaluation form using a mixed-methods analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 44, 113-160.

39.

Patall

E. A.

Cooper

Wynn

S. R.

(2010). The effectiveness and relative importance of choice in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 896-915.

40.

Patrick

Gentry

Moss

J. D.

McIntosh

J. S.

(2015). Understanding gifted and talented adolescents’ motivation. In Dixon

F. A.

Moon

S. M.

(Eds.), The handbook of secondary gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 185-210). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

41.

Pereira

Peters

S. J.

Gentry

(2010). My class activities instrument as used in Saturday enrichment program evaluation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21, 568-593.

42.

Peugh

J. L.

Enders

C. K.

(2004). Missing data in educational research: A review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Review of Educational Research, 74, 525-556.

43.

Phillips

Lindsay

(2006). Motivation in gifted students. High Ability Studies, 17, 57-73.

44.

Reeve

Jang

Carrell

Jeon

Barch

(2002). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 147-169.

45.

Rinn

(2006). Effects of a summer program on the social self-concepts of gifted adolescents. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 65-75.

46.

Robinson

Shore

B. M.

Enersen

D. L.

(2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

47.

Robinson

N. M.

(2006). A report card on the state of research in the field of gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 342-345.

48.

Roth

P. L.

(1994). Missing data: A conceptual review for applied psychologists. Personnel Psychology, 47, 537-560.

49.

Schunk

D. H.

Pajares

(2009). Self-efficacy theory. In Wentzel

K. R.

Wigfield

(Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 35-53). New York, NY: Routledge.

50.

Talton

E. L.

Simpson

R. D.

(1987). Relationships of attitude toward classroom environment with attitude toward and achievement in science among tenth grade biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 507-525.

51.

Turner

J. C.

Warzon

K. B.

Christensen

(2011). Motivating mathematics learning: Changes in teachers’ practices and beliefs during a nine-month collaboration. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 718-762.

52.

Urdan

Turner

J. C.

(2005). Competence motivation in the classroom. In Elliot

A. J.

Dweck

C. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 297-317). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

53.

Usher

E. L.

(2009). Sources of middle school students’ self-efficacy in mathematics: A qualitative investigation. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 275-314.

54.

VanTassel-Baska

(2006). NAGC symposium: A report card on the state of research in the field of gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 339-341.

55.

Vygotsky

(1978). Interaction between learning and development. In Gauvain

Cole

(Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 34-40). New York, NY: Scientific American Books.

56.

Weiner

(2005). Motivation from an attribution perspective and the social psychology of perceived competence. In Elliot

A. J.

Dweck

C. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 73-84). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

57.

Wentzel

Wigfield

Miele

(Eds.). (2009). Handbook of motivation at school. New York, NY: Routledge.

58.

Wholuba

B. H.

(2014). Examination of the motivation for learning of gifted and non-gifted students as it relates to academic performance (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:185339/datastream/PDF/view

59.

Worrell

F. C.

Schaefer

B. A.

(2004). Reliability and validity of Learning Behaviors Scale (LBS) scores with academically talented students: A comparative perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 287-308.