Comparing Prospective Twice-Exceptional Students With High-Performing Peers on High-Stakes Tests of Achievement. (September 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bell, Sherry Mee; Taylor, Emily P.; McCallum, R. Steve; Coles, Jeremy T.; Hays, Elizabeth
• Is Part Of: Journal for the education of the gifted. Volume 38:Number 3(2015:Sep.)
• Page Start: 294
• Page End: 317
• Publication Date: 2015-09
• Subjects: academic achievement -- mathematics -- research -- causal-comparative research -- quantitative -- identification of gifted children -- standardized test -- reading -- response to intervention -- curriculum based measurement; Gifted children -- Education -- United States -- Periodicals; 371.9505
• DOI: 10.1177/0162353215592500
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0162-3532

Abstract

From a sample of 1, 242 third graders, prospective twice-exceptional students were selected using reading and math curriculum-based measures (CBMs), routinely used in Response to Intervention (RtI). These prospective twice-exceptional students were compared with non-twice-exceptional peers with similar strengths in either math or reading on CBMs and an end-of-year high-stakes achievement test. Students (both potentially twice-exceptional and not) who are potentially gifted in reading based on CBM performance did not differ significantly on the end-of-year outcomes in reading ( p < .05); rather, students in both groups performed equally high. However, twice-exceptional students who are potentially gifted in math performed significantly lower on both end-of-year math and reading outcomes than non-twice-exceptional peers. Most of the end-of-year math subtest scores were negatively affected by the prospective twice-exceptional students' deficits in reading, even though their math CBM scores placed them into a category representing giftedness in math. Implications for screening for twice-exceptionality are discussed.