Are Teachers Really Poor Talent Detectors? Comments On Pegnato and Birch's (1959) Study of the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Various Identification Techniques
Author:
- 1 July 1994
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Gifted Child Quarterly
- Vol. 38 (3) , 124-126
Abstract
This article reanalyses Pegnato and Birch's data in their often cited 1959 article, especially their measures of effectiveness and efficiency. The author shows that these two concepts are not independent, as usually assumed in studies examining the criterion-related validity of various identification techniques for the gifted and talented. Rather, both are related to the number of subjects singled out as a result of the cutoff value chosen to implement the method. Consequently, most comparisons made between and within methods become invalid. A simple alternative is presented: compare the correla tion coefficients of the predictors with the criterion. It is concluded that this methodological flaw, as well as some other technical limitations, invalidates the most often cited observation from that study, namely, that teacher nominations should not be relied upon as an identification technique for the gifted and talented.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cooperation or Exploitation? the Argument against Cooperative Learning for Talented StudentsJournal for the Education of the Gifted, 1990
- The use of teacher-judgment measures in the identification of gifted pupilsTeaching and Teacher Education, 1986
- The effect of different types of nomination forms on teachers' identification of gifted childrenPsychology in the Schools, 1983
- Accuracy of Teacher Judgment in Identifying Intellectually Gifted Children : a Review of the LiteratureGifted Child Quarterly, 1976
- Effectiveness of teacher and parent identification of gifted children as a function of school levelPsychology in the Schools, 1971
- Locating Gifted Children In Junior High SchoolsExceptional Children, 1959