TY - JOUR
T1 - Enhancing Equity in Gifted Education
T2 - A framework for examining assessments drawing on the theory of multiple intelligences
AU - Kornhaber, Mindy
N1 - Funding Information:
The author gratefully acknowledges that the research reported in this article was supported by a grant from the Harvard Graduate School of Education and by a Radcliffe Grant for Graduate Women.
PY - 1999/12
Y1 - 1999/12
N2 - In the United States, poor and minority students are disproportionately excluded from programs for the gifted. Current identification practices for gifted education programs are a primary barrier for these youngsters. This study investigated three alternative assessments for identifying students. Each was said to draw on the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) and to increase the identification of traditionally under-served youngsters. This investigation asked: (1) Is it reasonable to associate increases in the identification of under-served youngsters with these assessments? (2) Is it reasonable to associate each assessment with the theory of multiple intelligences? To answer these questions, qualitative data were analyzed against a framework of eight criteria. This revealed that no assessment met all eight criteria; each met a different subset of the eight.
AB - In the United States, poor and minority students are disproportionately excluded from programs for the gifted. Current identification practices for gifted education programs are a primary barrier for these youngsters. This study investigated three alternative assessments for identifying students. Each was said to draw on the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) and to increase the identification of traditionally under-served youngsters. This investigation asked: (1) Is it reasonable to associate increases in the identification of under-served youngsters with these assessments? (2) Is it reasonable to associate each assessment with the theory of multiple intelligences? To answer these questions, qualitative data were analyzed against a framework of eight criteria. This revealed that no assessment met all eight criteria; each met a different subset of the eight.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0346341108&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0346341108&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/1359813990100203
DO - 10.1080/1359813990100203
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0346341108
SN - 1359-8139
VL - 10
SP - 143
EP - 161
JO - High Ability Studies
JF - High Ability Studies
IS - 2
ER -