The Use of a Performance Assessment for Identifying Gifted ... · assessment in identifying gifted Lebanese students. DISCOVER is an acronym that stands for discovering intellectual

275

KettyM.SarouphimisanassociateprofessorofpsychologyandeducationattheLebaneseAmericanUniversity,DepartmentofSocialSciences.Thefocusofherresearchisontheuseofperformance-basedassessmentsinmeasuringintelligenceandidentifyinggiftedness.Shehaspresentedherworkatinterna-tionalconferencesandhasseveralpublishedarticlesontheeffectivenessoftheDISCOVERassessmentinidentifyinggiftedstudents.

Journal for the Education of the Gifted.Vol.33,No.2,2009,pp.275–295.Copyright©2009PrufrockPressInc.,http://www.prufrock.com

The Use of a Performance Assessment for Identifying Gifted Lebanese Students:

Is DISCOVER Effective?

Ketty M. Sarouphim Lebanese American University

the purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of diSCoVEr, a per-formance-based assessment in identifying gifted lebanese students. the sample con-sisted of 248 students (121 boys, 127 girls) from Grades 3–5 at two private schools in Beirut, lebanon. Students were administered diSCoVEr and the raven Standard Progressive Matrices (rSPM). teachers and parents of identified students were inter-viewed. results showed evidence for diSCoVEr’s concurrent validity with rSPM, as correlations between students’ diSCoVEr ratings in spatial intelligence and their raven scores were high, whereas correlations between students’ diSCoVEr ratings in linguistic intelligences and their raven scores were low. Parents’ and teachers’ inter-views corroborated the results, with a few exceptions. of the total sample, 14.5% were identified, with no gender differences. the researcher concluded that diSCoVEr could be used effectively in lebanon for identification purposes, but further research is needed to support the findings.

TheidentificationofgiftedstudentshastraditionallyreliedontheuseofIQtesting.Scoresinthe97thpercentileorabovehavetypicallyenabledstudents’entryintoprogramsforthegifted(Ford,Harris,Tyson,&Trotman,2002).However,inthelasttwodecades,scholarsandresearchershavequestionedtheuseofIQtestsforidentificationpurposes,duetothemountingevidencethatthesemeasuresdonotconstitutethesoleindicatorsofgiftedness(Baldwin,2005;Maker,1993);instead,alternativemethodssuchastheuseofperformance-basedassessmentandportfolioswereexaminedaspossibleadditionalor even replacement tools for identification purposes (Gallagher,2005).OnereasonforthedissatisfactionwithIQtestsisthattheir

Journal for the Education of the Gifted276

usehasledtotheunderrepresentationofstudentsfromeconomicallydisadvantagedandculturallydiversegroups(Callahan,2005),pos-siblybecauseoftheirheavyrelianceonverbalskills,whichminoritystudentsoftenlack. InLebanon,asmallcountryintheMiddleEast,agrowinginter-estintheeducationofthegiftedhasbeennotedamongeducatorsandscholarseventhoughatpresent,thecountrylacksaformalsystemforeducatinggiftedstudents.Forthisreason,identificationproceduresconstituteamajorissue.Inordertoinitiateprogramsineducationofthegiftedbuiltonasolidbasis,researchonidentificationmeasuresismuchneededinthecountry,giventhatthegrowinginterestinthisfieldwilleventually leadtotheestablishmentofprogramsforthegiftedinLebaneseschools.ThisstudyexaminestheeffectivenessofDISCOVER(Maker,Nielson,&Rogers,1994),aperformance-basedassessmentinidentifyinggiftedLebanesestudents.DISCOVERisanacronymthat stands fordiscoveringintellectualStrengthandCapabilitieswhileallowingforVariedEthnicresponses. DISCOVERwaschosenforthisstudybecauseofitsmanychar-acteristicsthatmakeitsuitableforusewithnon-English-speakingpopulations.Althoughothertestscouldbeusefulwithnon-English-speaking students, DISCOVER has many advantages over otherinstruments,suchasitsrelianceonmanipulativesandthepossibilityofitsadministrationinthenativelanguageofthechildrentested.Otheradvantagesincludetheassessmentofmultipleintelligencesandtheenjoymentandengagementofchildrenintakingthetest.

Status of Education of the Gifted in Lebanon

LebanonisoneofthesmallestcountriesintheMiddleEast(10,452square kilometers), almost the size of the state of Connecticut.Schoolingfollowsalock-stepsystem,withlittleattentiongiventoindividualdifferences.Programsforstudentswithspecialneedsaresparse,butwhenfoundtheirfocusismostlyonstudentswithacademicproblemsratherthanonstudentswhoshowhighability.TheclosesttoaformalprogramforthegiftedisfoundinsomeprivateschoolslocatedinBeirut,thecapital.Theseschoolscatertostudentsfromhighsocioeconomicstatusandhaveestablishedforhigh-achieving

Identifying Gifted Lebanese Students 277

studentswhatissimilartoenrichmentprogramsonpull-outbases.Theseprogramsare,however,rudimentaryandeffectedhaphazardlywithoutgroundinginasolidtheoreticalbase.Toalargeextent,thereasonforthelackofprogramsforthegiftedinthecountryisduetothelackofreliableandvalidinstrumentsforidentification.Currently,thecountrylacksmeasuresstandardizedonsamplesofLebanesestu-dentstoassessintelligence;theonlytestsusedforthispurposeareimportedfromtheWestandtranslatedintoArabic,thenativelan-guageoftheLebanese,aprocessdangerouslyflawed.Hence,agreatneedexistsforreliableandvalidinstrumentsfortheidentificationofgiftedLebanesestudentsaswellasforprogramsforthegiftedbuiltongroundedtheory. Giftednesscanbefoundinallculturesandisexpressedthroughavarietyofbehaviors(Baldwin,2005).Parents,teachers,andschoolofficialsneedtohaveknowledgeingiftednessanditsdeterminantssothattheybecome“talentspotters,”alwaysonthelookoutforuntappedhiddenability.Thefirststepinthisprocessistoadoptabroadviewoftheconceptsofintelligenceandgiftednessthatgoesbeyondhighacademicperformanceandencompassesawiderangeofhumanabili-ties.ThisisofparticularimportanceinLebanonwhereworkoniden-tificationandprogramsforgiftedstudentshavejuststarted,hencethesignificanceofallkindsofresearchinthisbuddingareaandofthisstudyinparticular.Oneadvantageofthelackofprogramsforgiftedstudentsinthecountryisthe“cleanslate”phenomenon;thatis,edu-catorscanstartworkingafresh,moldingthefieldofeducationofthegiftedbasedonempiricalevidenceyieldedbythepoolofresearchfind-ingsalreadyavailableintheWesternliterature,aprocesspotentiallylessproblematicthanattemptingtofixflawsinpreexistingprograms.However,athoroughexaminationoftheWesternresearchisneededforfine-tuningofthefindingstotheLebanesepopulationinsteadofjustimportingevidencefromtheWestandapplyingitblindlyintheLebaneseculture.Insum,establishingadisciplineofgiftededucationinLebanon,effectiveanduniquetothecountry,istimelyandcritical.Inacountrywithahistorytroubledwithrepetitivewars,itisthecivicresponsibilityofscholarsandeducatorstorecognizeandnurturethetalentsofitsgiftedcitizenswhorepresenttheuntappedpromiseforabetterfutureforLebanon.


Research on DISCOVER

Theuseofperformance-basedassessmentshasbeenontherise inthelasttwodecades.Advocatescitemanyadvantagesforusingtheseinstruments,suchasassessmentofhigherorderskills,reducingthegapbetweentestingandinstruction,theircoverageofbroadareasofintelligence,andassessingstudentsinlife-likeandcomplexsituations(Maker,1993;O’Neil,1992).Severalstudieshavebeenconductedontheeffectivenessoftheserelativelynewinstruments,withmostlypositiveresults(e.g.,Pierceetal.,2007;Reid,Udall,Romanoff,&Algozzine,1999;VanTassel-Baska, Johnson,&Avery,2002), sug-gestingaparadigmshiftinidentificationprocedures.MadausandO’Dwyer(1999)calledperformanceassessmentsthe“newtechnol-ogy”(p.688)oftestingtoday. Theperformance-basedassessmentDISCOVERisgroundedinGardner’s (1983)multiple intelligences(MI)theoryandbasedonMaker’s(1993)definitionofgiftedness:“theabilitytosolvethemostcomplexproblemsinthemostefficient,effective,oreconomicalways”(p.71).Basedontasks(manipulatives)thatrequireproblem-solvingandcreativeabilities,theinstrumentassessessixoftheintelligencesidentified by Gardner—linguistic, spatial, logical-mathematical,interpersonal,intrapersonal,andbodily-kinesthetic—throughactivi-tiescarefullydesignedtotapintostudents’strengthsandcapabilitiesintheseintelligences. DISCOVER was developed to identify gifted students fromculturally diverse groups and was tested in many countries whereEnglishisnotthenativelanguage(Baldwin,2005).Sinceitsincep-tionattheUniversityofArizona(Makeretal.,1994),DISCOVERhasbeenadministeredtostudentsintheUnitedStatesandtothou-sandsofstudentsfromdiversepopulationsincountriessuchasChina,Taiwan,France,Australia,England,andBahrain(Makeretal.,2006).However,mostresearchonthereliabilityandvalidityoftheinstru-menthasincludeddatacollectedintheUnitedStates,asshowninthefollowingreviews.


Interrater Reliability

InatriangulatedinquiryontheinterraterreliabilityofDISCOVER,Sarouphim (1999) investigated the alignment of ratings given tostudents by three independent raters: DISCOVER observers, theclassroomteacher,andtheresearcher.TheresultsshowedthattheDISCOVERobservers,classroomteacher,andresearchergavesimilarratingstostudentsinthelinguistic,spatial,andmathematicalintel-ligencesassessedinDISCOVERthroughstructuredactivities,buttheirratingswerenotassimilarinthepersonalandbodily-kinestheticintelligencesassessedinDISCOVERthroughunstructuredtasks.TheresearcherconcludedthattheDISCOVERobserversweremoreeffectiveinappraisingstudents’intelligenceswhentheappraisalwasmadethroughspecificactivitiesthanwhentheappraisaldependedonobservingunstructuredbehavior.Sarouphim(1999)recommendedthatspecificactivitiesbedevelopedforaccurateappraisalthroughDISCOVERofthewholespectrumofmultipleintelligences. InanotherstudyonDISCOVER’sinterraterreliability,Giffiths(1996)comparedtheratingsobserversgavetostudentsonthespa-tialactivitiesandthosemarkedbyindependentraterswhowatchedvideotapesoftherecordedadministration.Theresultsshowedhighinterrateragreement,rangingfrom80%to100%,withthehighestagreementfoundbetweentheobserversandindependentraterswiththemostexpertiseintheadministrationofDISCOVER.

Fit Between DISCOVER and MI Theory

Sarouphim(2000)investigatedthealignmentofDISCOVERwithMItheorythroughaseriesofinterobservercorrelations.Thesam-pleconsistedof254elementarystudents,predominantlyfromeco-nomically disadvantaged Native American and Hispanic groups.Theresultsshowedlowinterobservercorrelationsacrossgradelev-elsbetweentheactivitiesthatmeasuredifferentintelligences(e.g.,linguisticandspatialactivities)andmoderatetohighcorrelationsbetweenactivitiesthatmeasurerelatedintelligences(e.g.,oralandwrittenlinguistic),indicatingthatstudentsidentifiedinoneintelli-gencewerenotnecessarilyfoundgiftedintheotherintelligences.TheresultssuggestedthatthedifferentDISCOVERactivitiespossibly


measuredifferentintelligences,afindingthatsupportstheconsis-tencybetweenDISCOVERandGardner’sMItheory.

Comparative Validity

Griffiths(1996)examinedthecomparativevalidityofDISCOVERwiththeWISC-III.Thesampleconsistedof30MexicanAmericanlow-incomechildrenwhoseagesrangedbetween9–11years.Griffithsexaminedtherelationshipbetweenstudents’ratingsoneachoftheDISCOVERactivitiesandtheirscoresonthecorrespondingWISC-IIIsubtests.Althoughoverallstudents’ratingsinthetwomeasuresweredifferent(i.e.,studentsidentifiedasgiftedthroughDISCOVERdidnotnecessarilyhaveIQscoresinthetop3%),analysesofseparateactivitiescorrespondingtothedifferentintelligences(e.g.,math,lin-guistic,etc.)showedcloseresemblance,indicatingevidencefortheconcurrentvalidityofDISCOVERwithWISC-III.

Gender and Ethnic Differences

Finally,Sarouphim(2005)examinedtheeffectivenessofDISCOVERonalargesampleof955studentstakenfromGradesK–12in10schoolsinArizona.TheresultsrevealedagoodfitbetweenDISCOVERandMItheory;also,nosignificantethnicorgenderdifferencesiniden-tificationwerefound.Atotalof20.9%participantswereidentified,suggestingthatDISCOVERmightcontributetodiminishingtheproblemofminorityunderrepresentationinprogramsforthegifted. In sum, research on DISCOVER has yielded mostly posi-tiveresultsonitseffectivenessinidentifyingstudentsfromcultur-allydiversegroups.AsBaldwin(2005)stated:“[DISCOVER]hasundergonerevisionstomakeitavalidandreliabletoolforidentify-ingindividualstrengthsinmultipleintelligences”(p.107).However,datausedinresearchonDISCOVERweremostlycollectedintheUnitedStates.TheonlystudythatwasconductedonDISCOVERinLebanon,thecountrywherethepresentinvestigationhastakenplace,hasincludedasmallsampleandaimedattestingthegroundfor whether the assessment could be used effectively in Lebanon(Sarouphim,2007).Inthatstudy,DISCOVERwasadministeredto49fifthgraderstakenfromoneprivateschoolinBeirut.Theresults


weresimilartothosefoundintheWesternpopulationsandshowedasimilarpatternofidentificationtrends,suchasinthehighpercent-ageofstudentsidentified(19%ofthesample)andthelackofgenderdifferencesinidentification.Theresultswerealsocorroboratedbyinterviewswithteachersandthestudents’gradereports,indicatingthatDISCOVERcouldbeusedeffectivelyinLebanon.Inthecur-rentstudy,alargersamplewasusedaswellasadditionalinstrumentstovalidatethedata.Threeresearchproblemswereinvestigatedinthisstudy:

• TheconcurrentvalidityofDISCOVERwiththeRaven’sStandardProgressiveMatrices(RSPM).

• CongruenceoftheDISCOVERratingswiththoseofparentsandteachers,aswellaswiththestudents’schoolgrades.

• Genderdifferencesinidentification.

Method

Participants

Thesampleconsistedof248students(121boysand127girls)takenfromGrades3–5attwoprivateschoolsinBeirut,Lebanon.Thepar-ticipantswerepredominantlyfromthemiddleSES,asevidencedbytheirplaceofresidenceandtheirparents’occupation.Thepartici-pants’meanagewas8.1yearsinthirdgrade(n =86,36boysand50girls),9.2yearsinfourthgrade(n =77,43boysand34girls),and10.2yearsinfifthgrade(n =85,42boysand43girls).TheywereallCaucasiansandspokeEnglishaswellasArabic.

Procedures

AllparticipantsweregiventheGrades3–5versionoftheDISCOVERassessment followed by the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices(RSPM).Theadministrationofbothteststookplaceinthestudents’classrooms on two consecutive days. Both the researcher and theobserverswerewell-trainedintheuseofbothinstruments.Interviewswiththehomeroomteachersandwiththeparentswhonominated


theirchildrenwereconductedfollowingtheadministrationofthetwoinstruments.Interviewstookplaceafterschoolhoursandweretaperecordedwiththepermissionoftheinterviewees.ThecriteriaforidentificationweresetaccordingtothestandardsspecifiedbythedevelopersofDISCOVER:aratingofdefinitelyinatleasttwooftheassessment’sactivities.

Instruments

TheRavenStandardProgressiveMatrices. TheRSPMisatestofnonverbalabilitydesignedtobeequallyeffectivewithEnglishandnon-English-speakingpopulations.TheRSPMisnowusedinterna-tionallyforcomparativepurposes(Raven,Raven,&Court,1998),thusthechoiceforitsuseinthisstudy.AnotherreasonforitsuseinthiscurrentinvestigationisthattheRSPMisconsideredtoberela-tivelyculturallyfair(Chaffey,Halliwell,&McCluskey,2006)andhasbeentestedwithdifferentpopulations.Basically,thetestcomprises60problems(dividedinto5setsof12itemseach)andconsistsofpre-sentingaseriesoffigures,eachwithamissingpiece.Beloweachfigurearesixtoeightalternativepieces,butonlyonecompletesthefigure.Thefiguresarepresentedinascendingdifficultyandkeepthestudentmotivated(Baldwin,2005;Ravenetal.,1998). BoththereliabilityandvalidityofRSPMarereasonablyhigh.Split-halfinternalconsistencycoefficientsreportedintheliteratureexceed.90,withamodalvalueof.91(Ravenetal.,1998).Test-retestreliabilitycoefficientsrangebetween.78to1.00,dependingontheintervalbetweentests,withhigherreliabilitycorrelationsassociatedwithshorterintervals.Intermsofvalidity,studiesonRSPMwithconcurrentintelligencemeasures,suchasBinetandWechslerScales,haveyieldedacoefficientrangefrom.54to.86(Ravenetal.,1998).However,themajorlimitationoftheinstrumentisthatitmeasuresonekindofability,namelynonverbalreasoning,totheexclusionoftheotherintelligences.

The DISCOVER Assessment. DISCOVER is performance-basedand includes tasks that increaseprogressively incomplexityandopenness.LiketheRSPM,theassessment isnotatraditionaltestandchildrenhave funworkingonsolving theassignedprob-lems. Basically, three activities are performed in class during the


DISCOVERadministrationtoassessspatial,mathematical,andorallinguisticintelligences.Logical-mathematicalandwrittenlinguisticintelligencesaremeasuredadayorsofollowingtheclassroomassess-mentthroughpaper-and-penciltasks.Bodily-kinestheticandtheper-sonalintelligencesareassessedbyobservingthebehaviorsofstudentsthroughouttheadministration,whichtypicallylasts2½hours. TheDISCOVERassessmentmeasuresthedifferentintelligencesbyusingseparateactivitiesacrossintelligencesandagelevels.DifferenttasksaredesignedforgradelevelsfromKindergartenthroughGrade12.ThefocusinthisstudyisontheDISCOVERversionforGrades3–5.Thefollowingisabriefdescriptionoftheactivitiesinthisver-sion.(Foradetailedaccount,seeMaker,1992).

Spatialartistic. Studentsareprovidedwithcoloredcardboardpiecesofdifferentshapes,designs,andsizesandaskedtomakediffer-entconstructionswiththesepieces(e.g.,geometricaldesigns,flowers,somethingthatmoves,andafreeconstruction).

Spatial analytical. Each student is given a set of ChineseTangrams(21piecesofthreedifferentshapes:trianglesofthreediffer-entsizes,squares,andparallelograms).StudentsarefirstrequestedtomakeatriangleusingasmanyTangrampiecesaspossible;theneachstudentisgivenabookletofsixpuzzlesheetsarrangedinascendingorderofdifficultyandaskedtosolvethem.Studentswhocompletethistaskarethenprovidedwith“ChallengeSheets”thatconsistofmoredifficultpuzzleproblems.

Orallinguistic.Studentsareprovidedwithanarrayoftoysandaskedtoprovideasmanydescriptorsoftheitemsaspossible.Theneachstudentisaskedtotellastoryofhisorherchoicethatincorpo-ratessomeoralloftheprovidedtoys.

Writtenlinguistic.Studentsareaskedtoproduceawrittenpiece(story,poem,etc.)aboutatopicoftheirchoice.

Logical-mathematical. Worksheetsconsistingmostlyofopen-endednumericalproblemsareusedtoassessthisintelligence.Theproblemsincreaseinopennessanddifficulty,withthelastproblemconsistingof“problem-finding,”thatis,creatingasmanyproblemsaspossible(addition,subtraction,etc.)withaprespecifiednumberastheanswer.

Interpersonal, intrapersonal, and bodily-kinesthetic.Although these intelligences are not measured through specific


activities, behaviors corresponding to students’ strengths in theseintelligencesarenotedbytheobservers.Forexample,statementssuchas“Ican’tgiveupnow,IknowIcansolvethispuzzle”isconsideredstrength in intrapersonal intelligence;cooperativebehavior in theformofhelpingaclassmatetofinishataskisconsideredstrengthintheinterpersonalintelligence,andincorporatingone’sownbodyintoaconstructionorformsofgracefulmovementsarenotedasstrengthsinbodily-kinestheticintelligence. Typically, the DISCOVER administration takes place in theclassroom. Trained observers gather around the children with anapproximateratioof1:5(oneobservertofivechildren).Eachobservertakesnotesandrecordsobservedbehaviorsonstandardsheetswhiletheclassroomteachergivesinstructionsinthechildren’sdominantlanguage.Observerspayattentiontothechildren’sproblem-solvingprocessaswellastotheirproducts.Toavoidobserverbias,observersrotateatthecompletionofeachactivity;thus,eachchildisobservedbyatleasttwopersonsduringtheadministration. Followingtheadministration,allobserversmeettodiscussthestudents’strengthsandcompleteabehaviorchecklistoneachchild.Observersclassifychildren’sstrengthsineachactivityintooneoffourdifferentcategoriesrangingfrom“nostrengthobserved”toa“definitestrengthobserved”usingtheratingsofUnknown,Maybe,Probably,anddefinitely.Thecategorydefinitelycorrespondstohighabilityortogiftednessinthatparticularintelligenceassessedbyitscorrespond-ingactivity.Achildwhogetsadefinitely ratinginatleasttwooftheactivitiesisidentifiedasgifted. Asdescribedinthereviewofliterature,studiesontheproper-tiesofDISCOVERhaveyieldedmostlypositiveresults.However,amajorlimitationoftheinstrumentisthatthreeoftheintelligences—interpersonal,intrapersonal,andbodily-kinesthetic—arenotassessedthroughspecificactivities,whichmightaffecttheobjectivityoftheratings.AnotherlimitationthatmightimpactthisstudyisthatthetasksincludedintheDISCOVERactivitiesmightnotbefamiliartoLebanesestudents,thuspossiblyimpactingtheirperformanceandconsequentlyincreasingthemarginoferrorintheirratings.


Data Analysis

Separatebutidenticalanalyseswereperformedonthedatacollectedineachgrade;thenthesameanalyseswereperformedondatapooledfromtheentiresample.Toanswerthefirstresearchquestiononcon-currentvalidity,thestudents’DISCOVERratingswerecorrelatedwiththeirRSPMscores,thusyieldingcorrelationcoefficientsontheconcurrentvalidityofRSPMwitheachoftheDISCOVERactivities. Forthesecondresearchquestiononthecongruenceofthestu-dents’DISCOVERratingswiththeirschoolperformance,interviewswereconductedwiththeteachersandstudents’parents.Allinterviewsweretranscribedandcoded.Also,thestudents’DISCOVERratingswerematchedwiththeirgradesinthesubjectareascorrespondingtotheDISCOVERtasks,namelymath,art,andlanguage. Finally, to answer the third research question on gender dif-ferences, a 2 x 3 MANOVA was performed (Gender X Grade).MANOVAwasusedbecausethetwovariablesofgenderandgrades(independent variables) were investigated with regard to the stu-dents’performanceinthefiveDISCOVERactivities(thedependentvariables).Theaimwastoexaminewhethersignificantdifferencesexistedbetweentheratingsgiventoboysandthosegiventogirlsintheactivitiesmeasuringeachoftheintelligences.Theratingswerecodedasfollows:1forUnknown,2forMaybe,3forProbably,and4fordefinitely.AccordingtotheDISCOVERcriteriaforidentifica-tion,studentsgiventheratingofdefinitelyintwooftheactivitiesareconsideredgifted.Therefore,thenumberofboysandgirlswhofitthiscriterionwascalculated,thenchi-squaretestsofsignificancewereperformedforgenderbygiftedparticipantstoexaminegenderdifferencesinidentification.

Results

Concurrent Validity

Inthisstudy,thestudents’ratingsineachoftheDISCOVERactivi-tieswerecorrelatedwiththeirRSPMscores.AsshowninTable1,thehighestcorrelationwasfoundbetweenthestudents’ratingsin


thespatialanalyticactivityandtheirRSPMscores(r =.776,p<.01)followedbythatbetweentheirratingsinthespatialartisticactivityandtheirRSPMscores(r =.547,p<.01).Thelowestcorrelationswerebetweenthestudents’RSPMscoresandtheirratingsinthelinguisticactivities,orallinguistic(r =0.2,p=0.11,ns),andwrittenlinguistic(r =.114,p=0.23,ns).

Parents’ and Teachers’ Nomination

The results showed that students identified through the use ofDISCOVER were all nominated by either their parents, teach-ers,orboth.Asoneteachersaid:“Iknewallalongthat[thesestu-dents]weregifted.Iamgladtoknowthatmyhunchwasvalidatedbyaformalassessment.”However,7studentsnominatedbypar-entsand3bytheir teacherswerenot identifiedthroughtheuseofDISCOVER.Interviewswiththeparentswhodisagreedwiththeirchildren’sscoresshowedthattheybelievedstronglyintheirchildren’shighability,especiallyspatialartisticability,abeliefthatwasnotsubstantiatedbytheirDISCOVERratings.Asoneparentstated:“WhenIwastoldthatmychildwasbeinggivennontradi-tionalassessments,Ithoughtthathefinallyhadachancetoshine;IamdisappointedbecauseIdon’tthinkthatthesetestsdidjusticetomyson’struecapability.”Anothermothersaid

Table 1

Correlations Between Raven Scores and DISCOVER Ratings

Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade All

(n = 86) (n = 77) (n = 85) (N = 248)

r p r p r p r p

Spatial Artistic .418** 0.01 .551** 0.00 .603** 0.00 .547** 0.01

Spatial Analytic .613** 0.00 .777** 0.00 .824** 0.00 .776** 0.00

Math .269* 0.05 .311* 0.04 .427** 0.01 .454** 0.01

Oral .212 0.10 .198 0.19 .224 0.09 .201 0.11

Written .127 0.22 .072 0.54 .137 0.20 .114 0.23

Note. *p < .05. **p < .01.


Ialwaysthoughtthatmydaughterwasabornartist.Herartisticskillsstartedtoshowasearlyaswhenshewas3yearsold.Irememberthatshedrewthenahousewithagardeninperfectproportionsandwithalltheelementspresent.Shespendsmostofherfreetimedrawing.Whenpeopleseeherdrawings,theycannotbelievethatthisistheworkofachild.Idon’tunderstandhowthesealternativeassessmentsdidnotrevealherhighartisticability.

The teachers’ interviews mostly corroborated the results; that is,teachersmostlyagreedwithDISCOVER’sfindingsinrelationtotheidentifiedparticipants,exceptinthecaseof3students,allmalesinfourthgrade,andallinonesection.Theteacherexpressedherdisap-pointmentwiththeresultsandstatedthatall3nonidentifiedstu-dentsdeservedtobegiventhelabel“gifted.”Whenaskedtojustifyhercomment,shesaid:

Ihavewatchedthesestudentsstrugglewithschoolworksincethefirstdayofclass,butsomehowIthoughtthatthethreeofthemwerehighlygiftedinmanydifferentwayseventhoughtheirgradeswereneveroutstanding.It’sjustafeelingthatIhad,basedontheirgoodbehaviorandgreateffort.Istillbelievethattheirabilitieswillbe“discovered”oneday,evenifDISCOVERdidnotdiscoverthat!

Alignment of Students’ Grades With Their DISCOVER Ratings

All identified students had high grade point averages, rangingbetween3.8and4.0,indicatingthattheirDISCOVERratingswerealignedwiththeirclassroomperformance.Interviewswiththeteach-ersrevealedthattheidentifiedstudentshadbeengettinghighgradesthroughout the school year and accordingly, “they deserved to begiventhelabelgifted.”


Gender Differences in Identification

Atotalof36childrenor14.5%ofthesample(19boysand17girls)wereidentifiedthroughDISCOVER.Althoughtheboys’DISCOVERratingsweregenerallyslightlyhigherthanthoseofthegirls(seeTable2),theresultsshowednosignificantgenderdifferencesinstudents’ratingsacrossgradelevelsandactivities,withoneexceptionfoundinthemathratingsoffifthgraders.The2x3MANOVAyieldednonsignificantresultsforgenderbygradeinteraction(f[4,232])=1.62,p=0.57,ns),andnosignificantmaineffectforgradewasfound(f[3,208]=0.83,p =0.67,ns).However,asignificantmaineffectforgender(f[4,232]=4.89,p=0.03)wasfound,eta-squared=0.36,

Table 2

Mean Ratings of Students in the DISCOVER Activities Across Grades

Third Grade Fourth Grade Fifth Grade

M F M F M F

Spatial Artistic

M 3.1 2.9 3.0 2.8 2.9 2.8

SD 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4

Spatial Analytic

M 3.0 3.0 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.7

SD 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.8

Logical-Math

M 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.5 3.1* 2.4

SD 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.3

Oral Linguistic

M 2.9 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.9

SD 0.7 0.9 1.2 0.8 1.0 0.8

Written Linguistic

M 2.8 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.6

SD 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.4

Note. Unknown = 1; Maybe = 2; Probably = 3; Definitely = 4.*p < .05.


whichledtofurtherunivariateanalysis.TheANOVArevealedthatboyssignificantlyoutperformedgirlsinmathinfifthgrade(f[1,122]=6.54,p=0.01),withamoderateeffectsizeof0.41.Moreover,asshowninTable3,chi-squaretestsdidnotrevealanysignificantgen-derdifferencesinidentification(i.e.,nosignificantdifferencesinthenumbersofboysandgirlswhoweregiventhedefinitely ratinginatleasttwooftheDISCOVERactivities)inallgradelevelsandacrosstheentiresample(χ2 =1.59,p=0.11,ns).

Discussion

ThisstudyexaminedtheeffectivenessofDISCOVER,analterna-tiveassessment,inidentifyinggiftedLebanesestudents.ConcurrentvalidityofDISCOVERwiththeRSPMwasstudied,aswellasgen-derdifferencesinidentification.Alsoexaminedwasthecongruencebetweenstudents’DISCOVERratingsandthoseoftheirparentsandteachersontheonehand,andbetweenstudents’DISCOVERrat-ingsandtheiracademicperformanceontheother.Theresultspro-videdmostlypositiveresults,insupportoftheuseofDISCOVERinLebanon. Thecorrelationsbetweenstudents’DISCOVERratingsandtheirRSPMscoresshowedthatthespatialactivitiesofDISCOVERwerealignedwithRSPM,indicatingthatthetwomeasuresassesssimilarabilities.Alongthesamelines,theresultsshowedlowcorrelationsbetweenstudents’RSPMscoresandtheirratings inthe linguistic

Table 3

Chi-Square Tests of Significance for Gender by Gifted Participants

Grade

Gifted Boys Gifted Girls Total

n % n % n % df χ2 p

Third 8 16.6 6 16.0 14 16.3 1 0.09 0.34

Fourth 5 13.9 6 14.7 11 14.2 1 1.23 0.28

Fifth 6 12.0 5 13.9 14 12.9 1 2.21 0.09

Total 19 14.0 17 14.9 36 14.5 1 1.59 0.11


activitiesofDISCOVER,suggestingthatthetwomeasuresassessdifferentabilities.ThesefindingsprovideevidencefortheconvergentanddiscriminantvalidityofDISCOVER.GiventhattheRSPMisameasureofnonverbalability,thehighcorrelationsfoundbetweenstudents’RSPMscoresandtheirDISCOVERratingsinthespatialactivitiessuggestahighconcurrentvaliditybetweentheRSPMandDISCOVER.Similarly,thelowcorrelationsfoundbetweenstudents’RSPMscoresandtheirDISCOVERratingsinthelinguisticactivi-tiesgiveevidencefordiscriminantvalidity.Theseresultsalsosuggestthatagoodfitexistsbetweentheassessment’sinternalstructureandthetheoryofmultipleintelligencesbecausestudentswhoweregivenahighratinginthespatialactivitieswerenotnecessarilygivenhighratingsinthelinguisticactivitiesaswell,possiblyindicatingthatthespatialandlinguisticactivitiesmeasureseparateanddifferentintel-ligences.Similarresultswereobtainedinresearchconductedonsam-plesofAmericanstudents(Sarouphim,2001,2002,2005). Anotherinterestingfindingisthesignificantgenderdifferencesfoundinstudents’mathratingsinfifthgrade,butnotintheyoungerparticipants.IncurrentWesternresearch,theresultsshowthatthegendergapinmathhasbeennarrowing,althoughpreviousfindingsindicatedthatgenderdifferencesinmathstartshowinginlateele-mentaryschool,possiblybecauseofthe“masculine”labelassociatedwithhighmathematicalability(Hyde,2005).Earlyadolescenceistheageduringwhichindividualstrytodefinetheirvaluesandgenderroles.BecausethecultureinLebanontendstobefairlytraditional,itisnotsurprisingthattheboys’ratingsinmathwerefoundtobesuperiortothoseofthegirls,asLebaneseearlyadolescentgirlsdonotwishtoriskbeinglabeledmasculine.SimilarresultswerefoundintheresearchperformedonDISCOVERencompassingsamplesofAmericanstudentsfromculturallydiversegroups(Sarouphim,2001). Alongthesamelines,anothernoteworthyfindingisthelackofsignificantgenderdifferencesinidentification,suggestingthattheuseofDISCOVERdoesnotproducegenderbias.SimilarresultswereobtainedinthepilotstudyconductedinLebanon(Sarouphim,2007).Educatorshavelongshunnedtheuseofinstrumentsthatleadtoanykindofdiscrimination,especiallywithregardtogenderorrace.ThefactthatDISCOVERdidnotleadtogenderidentificationbiasinacultureastraditionalastheLebanesecultureisquitesignificant.


ProgramsforthegiftedinLebanonshouldbeestablishedonsolidgrounds;hence,itismandatorythattheinstrumentsforidentifica-tionusedbefreeofgenderbiasfromthebeginning. Aninterestingbutnotsurprisingresultisthatofthediscrepancyfoundbetweenafewoftheteachers’andparents’nominationsontheonehandandthestudents’correspondingDISCOVERratingsontheother.Thisfindingisnotsurprisingbecauseseveralstudieshavedocumentedthemisguidedperceptionsofparentsandteachersonwhattheyconsiderevidenceforgiftedness(Baldwin,2005;Pierceetal.,2007).Moreoftenthannot,teachersdeveloptheirowntheoriesofwhatisgiftedbehaviorandattimesconfusegoodbehaviorwithgiftedness. Similarly, parents tend to overestimate their children’sabilities,particularlytheirsons’(Miller,2006).Ontheotherhand,theresultthatallstudentsidentifiedasgiftedwerenominatedbytheirteachersisinfactunexpectedanddoesnotcorroboratefindingsintheliterature(Baldwin,2005).Typically,teachersunderestimatetheabil-itiesofstudentswhodonotfarewellacademically.Moreover,teachersconsiderthemselvesmoreknowledgeableintheirstudents’abilitiesthananyinstrumentcouldreveal.Asoneteacherexplained,“Teachersworkwiththechildondailybasis.Theycanclaimtoknowthechildbetterthananytestdoes.”Oneexplanationforthegoodmatchfoundinthisstudybetweenteachers’nominationsandtheDISCOVERrat-ingsmaybeduetothefactthatallidentifiedstudentshadhighgradepointaverages,thusconfirmingtheteachers’beliefthatgiftednessisinterchangeablewithhighgrades.InLebanon,teachersdonothavemuchexperience,ifany,ineducatingthegifted.Bothteachersandparentsneedtobeeducatedinwhatconstitutesgiftedness,giventhateducationofthegiftedisanewfieldinthecountry. AnotherfindinginsupportoftheuseofDISCOVERinLebanonisthatrelatedtothealignmentbetweenthestudents’DISCOVERratings and their school grades. Similar results were obtained inthepilotstudyconductedonasmallsampleofLebanesestudents(Sarouphim,2007).AlthoughthisfindingisunexpectedanddoesnotnecessarilycorroboratetheresultsofpreviousresearchconductedintheWest,whichhavemostlyshowedthatstudentsidentifiedthroughDISCOVERdonotallscorehighontraditionalstandardizedtests(Sarouphim,2005),thefindingisneverthelesssignificant,becausenoLebaneseinstrumentcurrentlyexistsfortheidentificationofgifted


students.Onewouldwanttostartaprogramforthegiftedwithaninstrumentthatprovidesagoodfitwithschoolgrades;otherwise,aclashbetweenthetwomightaffectnegativelythevalidityoftheinstrument. In this regard, one explanation for the difference inresultsfoundinthisstudyandthoseinstudiesconductedintheWestmightberelatedtothebettermatchbetweentheabilitiesneededtosolvetheDISCOVERtasksandthoseinthecurriculumadoptedinLebaneseschools.Forexample,agreatemphasisisplacedinLebaneseschools on the mastery of foreign languages, mostly English andFrench(Ghaith,2003).Bythetimetheygraduatefromhighschool,Lebanesestudentsarealmostasfluent(andinsomecasesevenmorefluent)inatleastoneforeignlanguageastheyareintheirownnativeArabiclanguage.Thisemphasismightexplainthehighratingsgiventostudyparticipantsinthelinguisticactivities.AnotherexplanationisthattheLebanesecultureisacollectivisticcultureasopposedtotheindividualisticcultureoftheWest.Itisatight-knitcultureinwhichtraditionsaretransmittedorallyfromonegenerationtothenextintheformofstoriesandfolktales.Thus,storytelling(ataskrequiredintheorallinguisticactivityofDISCOVER)isintegraltotheLebanesecultureandisengrainedinitsdailylife,whichmightexplainwhyLebanesechildrenfaredbetterinthelinguisticactivitiesthantheWesternsampledid. AfindingthatalsodoesnotcorroboratetheresultsofWesternresearchisthelowerpercentagesofstudentsidentifiedinLebanon,about 25% less than those identified in the American sample(Sarouphim,2001,2005).AlthoughLebanesestudentsdidbetterinthelinguisticactivitiesofDISCOVER,theydidnotdoaswellinthemathandanalyticalactivities,possiblybecausethetasksrequiredinthesetwoactivitiesarelessrelatedtothematerialtaughtinLebaneseschools.Forexample,oneoftheproblemsintheDISCOVERmathworksheetinvolvessolvingmagicsquares,withwhichAmericanstu-dents are quite familiar, but for many Lebanese students, comingacrossthistaskinDISCOVERmightbetheirfirstencounterwithsolvingmagicsquares.


Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

One major limitation of this study is that the sample used wasrestrictedtotwoprivateschoolsinBeirut,thustheresultscannotbegeneralizedtotheLebanesestudentpopulation.Anotherrelatedlimi-tationisthattheparticipantswereallthird,fourth,andfifthgraders,whichconfinesthefindingstoelementaryschoolstudents.Therefore,infutureresearch,largersamplesencompassingawiderangeofstu-dentstakenfromdifferentgeographicallocationsinLebanonmustbeincluded. Furthermore,athirdlimitationisthatDISCOVERwasorigi-nallydesignedforusewithstudentsintheUnitedStates,thereforethevalidityandreliabilityofthisinstrumentmustbeestablishedwithsamplesofLebanesestudentsbeforeonecouldsoundacallforitsuseonalargescaleinLebanon.Consequently,infutureresearch,empha-sismustbeplacedonexaminingtheDISCOVERtaskswithscrutinytodeterminethenecessarymodificationstobemadetotheLebaneseversionwithoutcompromisingtheintegrityoftheassessmentoritsoriginaldesign. Inconclusion,DISCOVERmightbecomealeadinginstrumentusedfortheidentificationofgiftedstudentsinLebanon,butfurtherresearch is of utmost importance, especially because education ofgiftedstudentsisarelativelynewareainthecountryandneedstobeestablishedonasolidbasis.

References

Baldwin,A.Y.(2005).Identificationconcernsforgiftedstudentsofdiversepopulations.theory into Practice, 44,105–114.

Callahan,C.M.(2005).Identifyinggiftedstudentsfromunderrepre-sentedpopulations.theory into Practice, 44,98–104.

Chaffey,G.W.,Halliwell,G.,&McCluskey,K.W.(2006).IdentifyinghighacademicpotentialinCanadianAboriginalprimaryschoolchildren.Gifted and talented international, 21(2),61–70.

Ford,D.,Harris,J.,Tyson,C.,&Trotman,F.(2002).Beyonddeficitthinking:ProvidingaccessforgiftedAfricanAmericanstudents.roeper review, 24,52–58.


Gallagher,J.J.(2005).Theroleofraceingiftededucation.roeper review, 27,135–136.

Gardner,H.(1983).frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelli-gences.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.

Ghaith,G.(2003).Therelationshipbetweenformsofinstruction,achievementandperceptionsofclassroomclimate.Educational research, 45,83–93.

Griffiths,S.E.(1996).the inter-observer reliability of the diSCoVEr problem-solving assessment.Unpublishedmanuscript,UniversityofArizona,Tucson.

Hyde,J.S.(2005).Thegendersimilaritieshypothesis.american Psychologist, 60,21–31.

Madaus,G.,&O’Dwyer,L.(1999).Shorthistoryofperformanceassessment:Lessonslearned.Phi delta Kappan, 9, 688–695.

Maker,C.J.(1992).Intelligenceandcreativityinmultipleintelli-gences:Identificationanddevelopment.Educating able learners, 17(4),12–19.

Maker,C.J.(1993).Creativity,intelligence,andproblemsolving:Adefinitionanddesignforcross-culturalresearchandmeasurementrelatedtogiftedness.Gifted Education international, 9,68–77.

Maker,C.J.,Muammar,O.,Serino,L.,Kuang,C.C.,Mohamed,A.,&Sak,U.(2006).TheDISCOVERcurriculummodel:Nurturingandenhancingcreativityinallchildren.Journal of Educational Policy, 3,99–121.

Maker,C.J.,Nielson,A.B.,&Rogers,J.A.(1994).Giftedness,diver-sity,andproblem-solving.teaching Exceptional Children, 27(1),4–19.

Miller,E.M.(2006).Characteristiccentralityintheperceptionsofgiftednessasapredictorofthepatternofnominationofstu-dentsforplacementingiftedprogramming.roeper review, 28,179–181.

O’Neil, J. (1992). Putting performance assessment to the test.Educational leadership,49(8),14–19.

Pierce,R.,Adams,C.,SpeirsNeumeister,K.,Cassady,J.,Dixon,F.,&Cross,T.(2007).Developmentofanidentificationprocedureforalargeurbanschoolcorporation:Identifyingculturallydiverseandacademicallygiftedelementarystudents.roeper review, 29,113–118.


Raven,J.,Raven,J.C.,&Court,J.H.(1998).Manual for the Standard Progressive Matrices.London,England:H.K.Lewis.

Reid,C.,Udall,A.,Romanoff,B.,Algozzine,B.(1999).Comparisonoftraditionalandproblem-solvingassessmentcriteria.Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 252–264.

Sarouphim,K.M.(2000).InternalstructureofDISCOVER:Aper-formance-basedassessment.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23,314–327.

Sarouphim,K.M. (2005).DISCOVERacross the spectrumofgrades:Identifyinggiftedminoritystudents.Gifted and talented international, 20,70–77.

Sarouphim,K.M.(2007,April). diSCoVEr in lebanon: a pilot study.PaperpresentedattheAnnualMeetingoftheAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation,Chicago.(ERICDocumentReproductionServicesNo.ED496155)

Sarouphim,K.M.(1999).DISCOVER:Apromisingalternativeassessmentfortheidentificationofgiftedminorities.Gifted Child Quarterly, 43,244–252.

VanTassel-Baska,J.,Johnson,D,&Avery,L.(2002).Usingperfor-mancetasksintheidentificationofeconomicallydisadvantagedandminoritygiftedlearners:FindingsfromprojectSTAR.Gifted Child Quarterly, 46,110–124.

Documents

The Use of a Performance Assessment for Identifying Gifted ... · assessment in identifying gifted Lebanese students. DISCOVER is an acronym that stands for discovering intellectual