This study uses a rigorous research process to explore the psychometric properties of the Gifted Rating Scale-School Form (GRS-S) within the Qatari educational context. We employed stratified cluster sampling of 326 students (aged 6–13 years, M = 10.9) from 25 public schools in Doha. Data was collected in the second semester of the 2023–2024 school year and analyzed for internal consistency, factorial validity, and concurrent and predictive validity. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the six-factor model (root mean square error of approximation = 0.073, comparative fit index = 0.886). The findings revealed that the GRS-S had high internal consistency (α = 0.926–0.982), moderate to strong correlations with the HOPE scale (r = 0.651), and solid predictive validity with grade point average (r = 0.917). These findings validate the GRS-S as a reliable tool for identifying gifted students in Qatar, with significant implications for the region's educational practices and policy development, potentially shaping the future of gifted education in the country.
AboudY. Z. (2023). Evaluating the status of gifted education in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2206080. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2206080
2.
AlamiriF. (2020). Gifted education in Saudi Arabian educational context: A systematic review. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 9(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.18533/journal.v9i4.1895
AljughaimanA. M.AyoubA. E. A. (2017). Giftedness in Arabic environments: Concepts, implicit theories, and the contributed factors in the enrichment programs. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1364900. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1364900
5.
AlodatA. M.GentryM.LeeH. (2024). Validity evidence of the HOPE teacher rating scale-Arabic version for identifying gifted refugee students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 68(4),251–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862241256047
6.
AlodatA. M.ZumbergM. F. (2019). Using a nonverbal cognitive abilities screening test in identifying gifted and talented young children in Jordan: A focus group discussion of teachers. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 42(3), 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353219855676
7.
BehrD. (2017). Assessing the use of back translation: The shortcomings of back translation as a quality testing method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice, 20(6), 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1252188
8.
BensonN. F.KranzlerJ. H. (2018). Another look at the construct validity of the gifted rating scales: Preschool/kindergarten and school forms. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(8), 782–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282917710377
9.
ByrneB. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315757421
10.
CallahanC. M.AzanoA. P. (2021). Overcoming structural challenges related to identification and curricula for gifted students in high-poverty rural schools. In SternbergR. J.AmbroseD. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness and talent (pp. 51–64). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56869-6_4
11.
CastellanoJ. A.FrazierA. D. (2021). Special populations in gifted education: Understanding our most able students from diverse backgrounds. Routledge.
DavidH. (2018). Gifted education in the Middle East. In APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 113–129). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-008
14.
ErwinJ. O.WorrellF. C. (2012). Assessment practices and the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted and talented education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428197
FordD. Y.GranthamT. C.WhitingG. W. (2008). Culturally and linguistically diverse students in gifted education: Recruitment and retention issues. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290807400302
GentryM.PereiraN.PetersS. J.McIntoshJ. S.FugateC. M. (2015). HOPE teacher rating scale: Involving teachers in equitable identification of gifted and talented students in K-12: Manual. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003235569
19.
GubbinsE. J.SiegleD.Ottone-CrossK.McCoachD. B.LangleyS. D.CallahanC. M.BrodersenA. V.CaugheyM. (2021). Identifying and serving gifted and talented students: Are identification and services connected?Gifted Child Quarterly, 65(2), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986220988308
20.
Hemdan MohamedA. H.OmaraE. M. N. (2020). Validation of an Arabic version of the Gifted Rating Scales—School Form. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 43(3), 252–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353220933005
21.
HoelterJ. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociological Methods & Research, 11(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124183011003003
22.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
23.
IsmailS. A. A.AlghawiM. A.AlSuwaidiK. A.ZieglerA. (2022). Gifted education in Arab countries: Analyses from a learning-resource perspective. Cogent Education, (1), 2115620. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2115620
24.
JabůrekM.ŤápalA.PortešováŠ.PfeifferS. I. (2021). Validity and reliability of Gifted Rating Scales—School form in sample of teachers and parents – A Czech contribution. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39(3), 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282920970718
25.
JaffalA. F.Abu-HilalM.Al-NaimiM. N. (2021). Construct validity and reliability of the scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students among a sample of elementary students in Qatar. Gifted Education International, 37(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294211013441
26.
JarosewichT.PfeifferS. I.MorrisJ. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20(4), 322–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290202000401
27.
JohnsenS. K. (2018). Making decisions about placement. In JohnsenS. K. (Ed.), Identifying gifted students (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003235682
28.
JohnsenS. K. (2021). Identifying gifted students: A practical guide. Routledge.
KhatriS. (2015). Report: Qatar Foundation plans to build new school for gifted kids. https://dohanews.co/report-qatarfoundation- plans-to-build-new-school-for-gifted-kids/
31.
KlineR. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed., pp. xvii, 534). Guilford Press.
32.
LeeH.SewardK.GentryM. (2022). Equitable identification of underrepresented gifted students: The relationship between students’ academic achievement and a teacher-rating scale. Journal of Advanced Academics, 33(3), 400–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X221088816
33.
LiH.LeeD.PfeifferS. I.KamataA.KumtepeA. T.RosadoJ. (2009). Measurement invariance of the Gifted Rating Scales—School Form across five cultural groups. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(3), 186–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017382
34.
LiH.PfeifferS. I.PetscherY.KumtepeA. T.MoG. (2008). Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales–School form in China. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(2), 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208315802
35.
MacRaildJ. (2016). The International Baccalaureate program: Meeting the needs of high-ability students in Qatar. TalentEd, 29(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.260215148437349
36.
MatthewsM. S. (2017). Utilizing non-test assessments in identifying gifted and talented learners. In CallahanC. M.Hertberg-DavisH. L. (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315639987
37.
McBeeM. T.PetersS. J.MillerE. M. (2016). The impact of the nomination stage on gifted program identification: A comprehensive psychometric analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(4), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216656256
38.
McCoachD. B.GambinoA. J.PetersS. J.LongD.SiegleD. (2023). How much teacher is in teacher rating scales? (EdWorkingPaper: 23-828). Retrieved from Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/6vpz-en33
39.
NakanoT. d. C.PeixotoE. M. (2023). Item analysis of the teacher’s gifted rating screening scale. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 40, e200056. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0275202340e200056
PetscherY.PfeifferS. I. (2020). Reconsidering the psychometrics of the GRS-S: Evidence for parsimony in measurement. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 46(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508418824743
42.
PfeifferS. I. (2012). Current perspectives on the identification and assessment of gifted students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282911428192
PfeifferS. I. (2015). Essentials of gifted assessment (pp. xiv, 169). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
45.
PfeifferS. I.BleiS. (2008). Gifted identification beyond the IQ test: Rating scales and other assessment procedures. In PfeifferS. I. (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (pp. 177–198). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74401-8_10
46.
PfeifferS. I.JarosewichT. (2003). Gifted rating scales. The Psychological Corporation.
47.
PfeifferS. I.JarosewichT. (2007). The Gifted Rating Scales-School Form: An analysis of the standardization sample based on age, gender, race, and diagnostic efficiency. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986206296658
48.
PfeifferS. I.PetscherY. (2008). Identifying young gifted children using the Gifted Rating Scales—Preschool/ Kindergarten Form. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(1), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207311055
49.
PfeifferS. I.PetscherY.KumtepeA. (2008). The Gifted Rating Scales-School Form: A validation study based on age, gender, and race. Roeper Review, 30(2), 140–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190801955418
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (2010). Is there still a need for gifted education? An examination of current research. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(4), 308–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.10.012
52.
RenzulliJ. (2010). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students: Technical and administration manual (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003237808
53.
RidgleyL. M.RubensteinL. D.FinchW. H. (2019). Issues and opportunities when using rating scales to identify creatively gifted students: Applying an IRT approach. Gifted and Talented International. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15332276.2020.1722041
RyserG. R. (2022). Use of teacher rating scales to augment identification. In JohnsenS. K.Van Tassel-BaskaJ. (Eds.), Handbook on assessments for gifted learners (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003285991
56.
SiegleD.PowellT. (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620404800103
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.WorrellF. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
59.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S.UllmanJ. B. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
60.
UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report – Gender Report: A new generation: 25 years of efforts for gender equality in education. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54676/IBSP9880
61.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2021). Alternative assessments with gifted and talented students. Routledge.
62.
WestbergK. L. (2012). Using teacher rating scales in the identification of students for gifted services. In HunsakerS. (Ed.), Identification (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003419419
63.
ZieglerA.HellerK. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In HellerK. A.MönksF. J.SubotnikR.SternbergR. J. (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 3–21). Pergamon Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043796-5/50002-4
