Showing posts with label gifted. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gifted. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 26, 2025

IQs Corner: What is happening in gifted/high ability research from 2013 to 2023? - #gifted #talented #highability #EDPSY #intelligence #achievement #schoolpsychologists #schoolpsychology

 Click on image to enlarge for easier reading



Trends and Topics Evolution in Research on Giftedness in Education: A Bibliometric Analysis.  Psychology in the Schools, 2025; 62:3403–3413


Rius, C., Aguilar‐Moya, R., Martínez‐Córdoba, C., Cantos‐Roldan, B., Vidal‐Infer, A.

Open access article that can be downloaded and read for free at this link.

ABSTRACT

The article explores the evolution of research on giftedness and high ability through a bibliometric analysis. It highlights challenges in identifying gifted individuals, who represent approximately 6.5% of students, although biased instruments and discriminatory selection practices may affect the identification of high skilled students. The tripartite model, defining giftedness as a combination of high intellectual ability, exceptional achievement, and potential for excellence, serves as a fundamental framework for this study. Using Dirichlet's latent assignment model, major research topics were identified, and trends from 2013 to 2023 were analyzed based on 1071 publications in the Web of Science database. The analysis revealed that publications focus on topics such as giftedness, talent management, and educational programs, showing a significant increase in research on these areas over the past decade. Key topics included psychometrics, gifted programs, and environmental factors. The United States, Germany, and Spain led in productivity with prominent publications addressing cognitive and socio‐emotional aspects of giftedness. Findings underscore the need for targeted educational interventions, including acceleration and enrichment programs, to address the academic and emotional challenges faced by gifted students. Research is shifting toward understanding the environmental influences on these students, highlighting the importance of supportive educational environment for their success.

Monday, April 16, 2018

Research Byte: Differences in mathematical reasoning between typically achieving and gifted children

Differences in mathematical reasoning between typically achieving and gifted children
Derek H. Berg & Pamela A. McDonald (article link)

ABSTRACT

Mathematical giftedness refers to mastery in a specific mathematical domain at an earlier than expected age. The present study examined which cognitive processes accounted for differences in mathematical reasoning between gifted children (MRG) and their typically achieving peers (TA). Naming speed, phonological awareness, short-term memory, executive functioning, and working memory were examined in 51 children aged approximately 7 years. A series of stepwise regression models, using a contrast variable to capture differences in mathematical reasoning between MRG and TA children, were created to examine which cognitive domains accounted for differences in mathematical reasoning. Short-term memory (r2 = .08) and visual-spatial working memory (r2 = .39) emerged as the only cognitive predictors within a model that included gender, age, and fluid intelligence. This model captured all of the variance distinguishing mathematics reasoning between MRG and TA children, explaining an overall contribution of 70% of the variance in mathematical reasoning.

KEYWORDS: Giftedness, mathematical reasoning, working memory, child development


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Saturday, November 04, 2017

Mathematical (Gq) giftedness: Review of cognitive, conative and neural variables

Click on image to enlarge.

Article link.




ABSTRACT

Most mathematical cognition research has focused on understanding normal adult function and child development as well as mildly and moderately impaired mathematical skill, often labeled developmental dyscalculia and/or mathematical learning disability. In contrast, much less research is available on cognitive and neural correlates of gifted/excellent mathematical knowledge in adults and children. In order to facilitate further inquiry into this area, here we review 40 available studies, which examine the cognitive and neural basis of gifted mathematics. Studies associated a large number of cognitive factors with gifted mathematics, with spatial processing and working memory being the most frequently identified contributors. However, the current literature suffers
from low statistical power, which most probably contributes to variability across findings. Other major shortcomings include failing to establish domain and stimulus specificity of findings, suggesting causation without sufficient evidence and the frequent use of invalid backward inference in neuro-imaging studies. Future studies must increase statistical power and neuro-imaging studies must rely on supporting behavioral data when interpreting findings. Studies should investigate the factors shown to correlate with math giftedness in a more specific manner and determine exactly how individual factors may contribute to gifted math ability.


SELECTIVE SUMMARY CONCLUSION STATEMENTS

In line with the heterogeneous nature of mathematical disabilities (e.g., Rubinsten and Henik, 2009; Fias et al., 2013), mathematical giftedness also seems to correlate with numerous factors—(see Appendix A for which factors were found in each study). These factors roughly fall into social, motivational, and cognitive domains. Specifically, in the social and motivational domains, motivation, high drive, and interest to learn mathematics, practice time, lack of involvement in social interpersonal, or religious issues, authoritarian attitudes, and high socio-economic status have all been related to high levels of mathematical achievement. Speculatively, it is interesting to ask whether some of these factors may be related to the so-called Spontaneous Focusing on Numerosity (SFON) concept which appears early in life and means that some children have a high tendency to pay attention to numerical information (Hannula and Lehtinen, 2005). To clarify this question, longitudinal studies could investigate whether high SFON at an early age is associated with high levels of mathematical expertise in later life. Better assessment of individual variability is also important, for example, Albert Einstein (who was a gifted even if sometimes “lazy” mathematician; see e.g., Isaacson, 2008) was famously anti-authoritarian.

In terms of cognitive variables, we found that spatial processing, working memory, motivation/practice time, reasoning, general IQ, speed of information processing, short-term memory, efficient switching from working memory to episodic memory, pattern recognition, inhibition, fluid intelligence, associative memory, and motor functions were all associated with mathematical giftedness. As a caveat it is important to point out that mere “significance counting” (i.e., just considering studies with statistical significant results regarding a concept) can be very misleading especially in the typically underpowered context of psychology and neuro-imaging research (see e.g., Szucs and Ioannidis, 2017). However, considering the patchy research, this is the best we can do at the moment. In addition, even if meta-analyses were possible, these also typically only take into account published research, so they usually (highly) overestimate effect sizes especially from small scale studies (see Szucs and Ioannidis, 2017).


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Friday, June 03, 2016

Research byte: Profoundly gifted and accomplished tend to focus on their ability strengths

 

Nice article, I particularly love the three spatial figures that summarize the findings. They belong in the Gv Galllery Hall of Fame.

Click on images to enlarge for reading

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Research bytes: Cognitive employment testing--aging strategies--cognitive thresholds

Three interesting articles from one of my favorite journals--Current Directions in Psychological Science.

As per usual when I make a research byte/brief post, if anyone would like to read the original article, I can share via email---with the understanding that the article is provided in exchange for a brief guest post about it's contents. :) (contact me at iap@earthlink.net if interested). Also, if figure/images are included in the post, they can usually be made larger by clicking on the image.












- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad


Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Research bytes: Gf and Gv related to higher level math achievement




To cite this Article: Prescott, James , Gavrilescu, Maria , Cunnington, Ross , O'Boyle, Michael W. and Egan, Gary F. (2010) 'Enhanced brain connectivity in math-gifted adolescents: An fMRI study using mental rotation', Cognitive Neuroscience, 1:4, 277 - 288, First published on: 09 August 2010 (iFirst)

Abstract

Mathematical giftedness is a form of intelligence related to enhanced mathematical reasoning that can be tested using a variety of numerical and spatial tasks. A number of neurobiological mechanisms related to exceptional mathematical reasoning ability have been postulated, including enhanced brain connectivity. We aimed to further investigate this possibility by comparing a group of mathematically gifted adolescents with an average math ability control group performing mental rotation of complex three-dimensional block figures. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data were collected and differences in intrahemispheric and interhemispheric connectivity between the groups were assessed using structural equation modeling (SEM). The math-gifted showed heightened intrahemispheric frontoparietal connectivity, as well as enhanced interhemispheric frontal connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal and premotor cortex. These enhanced connectivity patterns are consistent with previous studies linking increased activation of the frontal and parietal regions with high fluid intelligence, and may be a unique neural characteristic of the mathematically gifted brain.





- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Saturday, October 16, 2010

iPost: Are you a high IQ "clever-silly"





Woodley, M. A. (2010). Are high-IQ individuals deficient in common sense? A critical examination of the 'clever sillies' hypothesis. Intelligence, 38(5), 471-480.

Abstract

A controversial hypothesis [Charlton (2009). Clever sillies: Why high-IQ people tend to be deficient in common sense. Medical Hypotheses, 73, 867–870] has recently been proposed to account for why individuals of high-IQ and high social status tend to hold counter-intuitive views on social phenomena. It is claimed that these ‘clever sillies’ use their high general intelligence and Openness to Experience to overanalyze social problems for which socially intelligent/common sense responses would seemingly be more appropriate. The first three sections of this review will consider i) the relationship between general and social intelligence; ii) the role of situational effects on the direction of the correlation between IQ and political attitudes; iii) the behavioral ecology of competitive altruism. While there is no hard evidence for Charlton's hypothesis, sophisticated although ultimately non-rational subjective analyses of social phenomena (i.e. ones that are disconfirmed by data, or reject empiricism) do seem to be favored by individuals in certain high-IQ knowledge work sectors. It is suggested that these function as costly signals of altruism, and that their popularity can best be understood in light of the theory that social attitudes are fundamentally influenced by perceptions of dominance and counter-dominance, with the latter playing an especially significant role in influencing the values systems of contemporary societies where the degree of conspicuous inequality is significantly evolutionarily novel.



- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

WMF Press: CHC cognitive profiles of gifted report (Margulies & Floyd, 2009)


Researchers focusing on cognitive assessment research, particularly that focused on CHC theory and assessment, should take a peak at a new publication outlet for quicker dissemination of research results (which the authors retain the copyright for possible publication in professional journals).

"The WMF Press™ publishes professional research and theory articles of interest to professionals in cognitive ability assessment. The on-line publication of these papers is a professional contribution of the Woodcock-Muñoz Foundation; there is no download fee."  Additional information regarding WMF Press can be found at the above link.  The first research bulletin has just been published.

  • Margulies, A. S., & Floyd, R. G. (2009). A Preliminary Examination of the CHC Cognitive Ability Profiles of Children with High IQ and High Academic Achievement Enrolled in Services for Intellectual Giftedness
WMF Press also publishes specially designed cognitive and neuropsychological related free software.

Conflict of interest disclosure - I am the WMF Research Director, but make $0 on the downloading of any of these manuscripts and/or software.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Tuesday, December 16, 2008

IQ (ISIR) Scholar Spotlight: David Lohman--CogAT, NNAT, Ravens research

David Lohman presented at the 2008 ISIR conference. I've been a big fan of Lohman's work as much of it has direct application to the work of practicing school and educational psychologists. Lohman was a student of the late Richard Snow, whose work has had a significant work on my thoughts regarding non-cognitive factors important for school learning (see prior post today). Lohman is an author of the group CogAt (click here to see prior post re: study with WJ III). Aside from being an excellent applied psychometrician, Lohman has written papers on a wide variety of topics in educational psychology and intelligence. He is also very generous in making his various publications available for download at his web page.

At this conference he presented a paper comparing scores and norm characteristics from the CogAT, NNAT, and Ravens. The name of the paper and abstract (italics added by me) is below. The focus was on the use of nonverbal measures of intelligence in the identifcation of gifted students. The results presented were a bit disconcerting regarding possible technical issues with the norms of two of the tests---I've featured Lowman's conclusion in the abstract below. Lohman's research raises significant issues re: the accuracy of gifted identification via the NNAT and Ravens. Of course, and appropriately so, Lohman made it clear that his findings and research needed to recognize his potential conflict of interest as author of the CogAT, a direct competitor to the other tests, esp. the NNAT. It is refreshing to see such scholarly integrity in person.
  • Ethnic Differences on Fluid Reasoning Tests: Is the NNAT the Panacea? David F. Lohman, University of Iowa
  • Abstract: Nonverbal, figural reasoning tests such as the Raven Progressive Matrices are often used as markers for Gf in research on intelligence. These tests are also widely used in schools to help identify academically gifted students. The Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) has been particularly popular following a recent report that in a large, representative sample of U.S. school children, it was found to identify equal proportions of high-scoring White, Black, and Hispanic students. Although questions have been raised about the integrity of the data analyses used in this study, the author of the study continues to defend it as the most important research yet conducted with the NNAT. The goal of this investigation was to compare the NNAT with two other nonverbal assessments: the Raven Progressive Matrices and the Nonverbal Battery of the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT). All three tests were administered by trained examiners in counterbalanced order to 1,200 children in grades K to 6 in an ethnically diverse school district. Results showed provided no support for the assertion that the NNAT reduced ethnic differences – either at the mean or at the tails of the distribution. Rather, ethnic differences were actually somewhat larger on the NNAT than on the other two tests. Furthermore, it was discovered that the variance of basic normative score on the NNAT (M = 100, SD = 15) substantially exceeded the reported value of 15 at all but one test level. Re-analyses of the standardization data for the NNAT confirmed this finding. A similar normative score on the Raven (computed from the most recent U.S. national norms) was 10 points too lenient. Consequences of invalid or outdated normative scores for research and practice are discussed.
If you are interested in learning more about this issue, you should check out his full length publication in Gifted Child Quarterly (which Lohman makes available from his web page). You can view a copy by clicking here. The reference citation is: Lohman, D. F., Korb, K., & Lakin, J. (2008). Identifying academically gifted English language learners using nonverbal tests: A comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 275-296. Apparently this paper received the "Research Paper of the Year Award" from the National Association of Gifted Children.

The bottom line take-away: Buyer beware. Educators need to do their due diligence when evaluating and comparing psychometric instruments (group or individual) that impact important educational decisions regarding children.

[Conflict of interest disclosure - I'm a coauthor of the WJ III mentioned above, which is an instrument that competes with a different individually administered cognitive battery of the author of the NNAT, which was a focus of Lohman's presentation and paper].

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Dissertation Dish: Gifted screening and executive functioning

I like this first dissertation. When I was a practicing school psychologist I, in one of my schools, help develop a screening of all incoming kindergarten students with the then test (now the WJ-R KnowledgeWJ III Academic Knowledge test). It was combined with the WJ-R Skills cluster. We found the knowledge measure a nice proxy for intelligence (for screening purposes only) and degree of preschool acculturation. The first dissertation below shows that this little test may be a good for screening gifted students...largely for the same reasons --- it is a good measure of crystallized intelligence (Gc). [Conflict of interest disclosure: I'm a coauthor of the WJ III Battery]

Predicting IQ from achievement when screening academically gifted students in the state of Tennessee by Edwards, Deidrah L., Ph.D., Tennessee State University, 2008, 74 pages; AAT 3307986

  • Abstract: This research investigated the predictability of pre-kindergarten through fifth grade students' IQ scores when given the Woodcock Johnson, Third Edition (WJ-III) Academic Knowledge sub test for the purpose of gifted screening in the state of Tennessee. The investigator explored a possible method to obtain a faster, more efficient way to screen academically gifted children. Data was collected from 127 student's comprehensive intellectually gifted assessment reports. The Student's Academic Knowledge score, Creative Thinking score and Teacher Observations Checklist score were assessed for the purpose of determining their ability to predict IQ. Both linear regressions and multiple regressions were used to analyze data. Results indicated The Academic Knowledge subtest acted as a significant predictor of both Verbal IQ and Full Scale IQ; however, results indicated the Academic Knowledge subtest was not a significant predictor of Non-Verbal IQ. Results also indicated that, when combined the Academic Knowledge subtest score, the Teacher Checklist score and Creative Thinking score were significant predictors of Full Scale IQ; while the Creative Thinking score added no significant predictability. The results supported previous literature for achievement's ability to predict IQ. Verbal and Full Scale IQ, as well as Academic Knowledge, appear to assess crystallized intelligence and may be a reason for the significant results.


The role of executive function skills in children's competent adjustment to sixth grade: Do elementary classroom experiences make a difference? by Jacobson, Lisa A., Ph.D., University of Virginia, 2008, 193 pages; AAT 3322487

  • Abstract: Executive functioning skills play an important role in children's cognitive and social functioning. These skills develop throughout childhood, concurrent with a number of developmental transitions and challenges. One of these challenges is the transition from elementary schooling into middle-level schools, which research shows has the potential to significantly disrupt children's academic and social trajectories. However, little is known about the role of executive functioning on children's adjustment during this transition.
  • This study investigated the relation between children's executive functioning skills, assessed both before and during elementary school, and sixth grade academic and social competence. In addition, the influences of the type of school setting attended in sixth grade and elementary classroom experiences on children's academic and behavioral outcomes were examined. Finally, associations with children's level of physiological development (pubertal status) were investigated.
  • Executive functioning skills were assessed broadly, using the Continuous Performance Test, the Woodcock-Johnson Memory for Sentences subtest, the Day-Night Stroop test, the Delay of Gratification test, and the Tower of Hanoi. Children's executive functioning skills significantly predicted sixth grade competence, as rated by teachers and parents, in both academic and social domains. The interactions between type of school setting and children's executive function skills were significant: parents tended to report more behavioral problems and less regulatory control in children with weaker executive skills who were attending middle school. In contrast, teachers reported greater academic and behavioral difficulty in students with poorer executive functioning attending elementary school settings. This association was partially mediated by children's perceptions of classroom expectations or demands.
  • Observations of classroom quality during elementary school provided an estimate of children's classroom experiences. Average levels of emotional, instructional and organizational quality were associated with sixth grade academic competence and parental reports of behavioral functioning, with variation in children's experiences of classroom organization predictive of both academic and social functioning. In addition, the interaction effects indicated that children with poorer executive functioning tended to show less competent academic behavior when they experienced greater variation in classroom instructional support. Children's pubertal status was weakly associated with children's planning and problem-solving skills but was not associated with sixth grade academic or behavioral competence.
Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, October 13, 2008

Dissertation dish: K-ABC II, SB5, WJ III CHC factor analysis studies

Two new CHC-based dissertations I stumbled across this weekend.


A joint-confirmatory factor analysis using the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Ability and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales: Fifth Edition with high-achieving children by Williams, Tasha H., Ph.D., Ball State University, 2005, 206 pages; AAT 3176652


  • Abstract: A considerable about of research has concentrated on studying the performance of high achieving children on measures of intellectual functioning. Findings have indicated high achieving children display differences in performance patterns as well as in the cognitive constructs measured when compared to their average peers. The conceptualization of intelligence has evolved over time and contemporary theories of intelligence have described cognitive ability as consisting of multiple constructs which are often interrelated. Currently, one of the most comprehensive and empirically supported theories of intelligence is the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory (Cattell, 1941; Horn, 1968; Carroll, 1993). The multidimensional and hierarchical CHC theory has served as the foundation for the development and recent revisions of cognitive ability measures such as the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability - Third Edition (WJ-III COG; McGrew & Woodcock, 2001) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales - Fifth Edition (SBS; Roid, 2003b). The purpose of this study was to explore the construct validity of the WJ-III COG and SBS with a sample of high achieving children. Individual confirmatory factor analyses were conducted using the WJ-III COG and SBS. Additionally, a joint confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using both the WJ-III COG and SBS. The results indicated an alternative six-factor WJ-III COG and four-factor SBS models provided the best fit to the data of a high achieving sample, supporting previous research suggesting high achieving children display differences in cognitive constructs when compared with their average counterparts. The joint-confirmatory factor analysis indicated the best measures for the CHC factors measured by both the WJ-III COG and SB5 to help guide cross-battery assessments with high functioning children. Clinical applications of the findings are discussed.

The validity of intelligence tests using the Cattell-Horn-Carroll Model of intelligence with a preschool population by Morgan, Kimberly Elaine, Ph.D., Ball State University, 2008, 219 pages; AAT 3303357

  • Abstract: Individual differences in human intellectual abilities and the measurement of those differences have been of great interest to the field of school psychology. As such, different theoretical perspectives and corresponding test batteries have evolved over the years as a way to explain and measure these abilities. A growing interest in the field of school psychology has been to use more than one intelligence test in a "cross-battery" assessment in hopes of measuring a wider range (or a more in-depth but selective range) of cognitive abilities. Additionally, interest in assessing intelligence began to focus on preschool-aged children because of initiatives to intervene early with at-risk children. The purpose of this study was to examine the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB-V) and Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II) in relation to the Cattell-Hom-Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence using a population of 200 preschool children. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted with these two tests individually as well as in conjunction with one another. Different variations of the CHC model were examined to determine which provided the best representation of the underlying CHC constructs measured by these tests. Results of the CFAs with the SB-V revealed that it was best interpreted from a two-stratum model, although results with the KABC-II indicated that the three-stratum CHC model was the best overall design. Finally, results from the joint CFA did not provide support for a cross-battery assessment with these two particular tests.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, November 12, 2007

RIAS overview/review article

My two recent RIAS posts seem to be generating some interest. I just received a copy of another RIAS journal article, written in the context of gifted identification, from one of the test authors - Dr. Cecil Reynolds. I'm posting it here so folks can access additional RIAS published material.

Enjoy.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Critical thinking and CHC theory - Guest post by John Garruto

The following is a guest post by John Garruto, school psychologist with the Oswego School District and member of the IQs Corner Virtual Community of Scholars. John reviewed the following article and has provided his comments below. [Blog dictator note - John's review is presented "as is" with only a few minor copy edits by the blog dicator


Willingham, D.T. (2007). Critical Thinking: Why Is It So Hard to Teach? American Educator, 31(2), 8-19.

Guilty as charged. Frequently my copy of American Educator makes it to the trash before I have cracked the cover. I have tried to read it a few times, but typically have found that it often did not meet my professional needs or interests. As I was eating breakfast this morning I could not help but note a statue of Rodin’s “The Thinker” and an enticing lead-in on the cover asking the question--“Can Critical Thinking Be Taught?” My curiosity had been substantially piqued, so I took the magazine downstairs to read with my Sunday coffee.

This article was a delight to read. Willingham elaborated on the characteristics of many failed critical thinking programs of the past, given that they only tended to focus on reasoning in and of itself and not without the necessary background knowledge. Examples included Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment, Covington’s Productive Thinking, or de Bono’s Cognitive Research Trust (p. 12). However, the shortcomings of such programs relate to the difficulty in the importance of using a student’s background knowledge to reason out new conclusions.

He gives an interesting example--a story problem relating a marching band with rows of 12, leaving one person behind, then a reconfiguration of columns of 8, with one person behind, and finally rows of 3 with one person behind. The person behind said rows of five would take care of the problem. The problem indicated there were at least 45 musicians on the field, but fewer than 200…how many students were there? Willingham noted that few people answered the question correctly because they tended to focus on marching bands, rather than the math behind the problem. He also indicated that the problem before (one relating to vegetables) could be solved in much of the same way. When students were clued into that fact--more of them answered correctly (by the way-my guess to the answer is 145-the answer would have to be N/5 would have a remainder of zero and N-1 must be divisible by 12, 8, and 3…I found the problem easier to solve once I stopped thinking of it as a story.) He indicates that by looking beyond the surface structure, one can master things so much more easily.

Three thoughts came flooding to my cortex. The first was Horn’s final chapter in CIA2 (see my prior post) particularly related to expertise abilities. His regular examples of playing chess by two different processes (he goes into inductive primarily and then transformed to deductive when expert) can also be conceptualized by looking at things from the surface and deep structure perspectives.

My second thought was how this is related to schema theory and set shifting--something I wish the article had addressed. Typically we use our background knowledge (and we need it) to think critically. However, another important component we need is the ability not to view what we see so rigidly. Sometimes we must alter our cognitive paradigms to reach the answer (consider the above problem).

Finally, I thought about the essence of the article in terms of CHC theory. Clearly, an important component to critical thinking (particularly as it pertains to later secondary and post-secondary education) is not simply Gc-but it is Gc X Gf…or a Gc/Gf interaction. Only by using both ability domains in combination can we see relationships, draw conclusions, and then write or comment using persuasive arguments. It’s an interesting idea for an Aptitude-Treatment Interaction (ATI) research study--I predict that one might need both high Gc and Gf to meaningfully affect a dependent variable we might call “critical thinking”. By the way, for what it’s worth, I used my background knowledge of human cognition and my inductive abilities of overlap to draw conclusions and write this blog entry--it seems Willingham could be right.

I will be careful not to hastily throw out my copy of American Educator so quickly in the future.


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Charles Murray # 3 on IQ and education-gifted

Today Charles "Bell Curve" Murray completed the third in his Wall Street Journal trilogy on the role of general intelligence (g) in educational policy. The final aritlce ("Aztecs vs Greeks") deals with the upper end of the intelligence distribution...the gifted/talented. Be forewarned...it does have an elitist tone.

Yesterday I posted comments re: his first article...an article that staked out a strong nativist position on intelligence, and more importantly (and I think somewhat simplisticly), argued for significantly different educational expectations for children of different IQ scores (IQ = proxy for general intelligence...which is the fundamental intelligence construct upon which Murray basis his arguments.). I won't reiterate my comments again here today.

A major problem I have with all three of Dr. Murray's articles is his almost blind faith in the cut-point implications of specific IQ scores. Individuals with IQ's below X can only be expected to......; individuals with IQs above Y should be.......... etc. Yes....psychometrically sound IQ scores are the single best predictor we have of the probability of educational success. But, Murray places almost all his arguments on specific IQ scores, scores that account for 40% to 50% of school achievement. As I argued yesterday, what is really important for educational success, the development of educational policies regarding testing, expectation formation, meeting standards, etc., is not just single cut-point IQ scores, but a focus on "intelligent behavior and competence"....which includes non-cognitive/conative abilities. I feel Richard Snow's work on "aptitude" (broadly defined) is much more relevant to educational policy than simple IQ.

Enough said. I'm done with this thread.


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

powered by performancing firefox

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

How to develop our brightest minds

Nice story in Science Daily regarding the ongoing research by a team of researchers at Vanderbilt (who have been analyzing 35 years of research from the Study of Mathematically Precious Youth) re: the factors involved in developing our talent pool of gifted/bright minds in the sciences.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

powered by performancing firefox