User Name:

Password:
Welcome Guest
Journals Home > Journal For The Education Of The Gifted > Volume 27 |  Issue 1 > Article Abstract
 

Abstract

Back to TOC
Reference
X

  • Abeel, L., Callahan, C., & Hunsaker, S. (1994). The use of published instruments in the identification of gifted students. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
  • Arnheim, D., & Sinclair, W. (1974). Basic motor ability tests. Long Beach: California State University, Institute of Sensory Motor Development.
  • ArtsConnection. (1993). Talent beyond words (Report to the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, #R206A00148). New York: Author.
  • ArtsConnection. (1996). New horizons (Report to the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, #R206A30046). New York: Author.
  • Baum, S. M. (1990). Recognizing talent in young children. In S. Baum, S. Reis, & L. Maxfield (Eds.), Nurturing the gifts and talents of primary grade students (pp. 30–40). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Baum, S. M., Owen, S. V., & Oreck, B. A. (1996). Talent beyond words: Identification of potential talent in dance and music in elementary students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 93–101.
  • Baum, S. M., Owen, S. V., & Oreck, B. A. (1997). Transferring individual self-regulation processes from arts to academics. Arts Education Policy Review, 98, 32–39.
  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books.
  • Boyle, J. D., & Radocy, R. E. (1987). Measurement and evaluation of musical experiences. New York: Schirmer.
  • Briggs, D. P. (1991). Young talent: The first decade. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
  • BrooksSchmitz, N. (1990). Young talent research project: An analysis of the effect of arts-in-education programming on the motivation, academic performance, and personal development of inner-city youth involved in the young talent program. Unpublished manuscript, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
  • Byrnes, P., & Parke, B. (1982, April). Creative Products Scale: Detroit public schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children, Baltimore.
  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessments and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 5–30.
  • Eisner, E. W. (1994). Cognition and curriculum reconsidered (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Elam, A., & Doughty, R. (1988). Guidelines for the identification of artistically gifted and talented students (Rev. ed.). Columbia: South Carolina State Department of Education.
  • Gardner, H. (1973). The arts and human development. New York: Wiley & Sons.
  • Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: BasicBooks.
  • Gilliam, J., Carpenter, B., & Christensen, J. (1996). Gifted and talented evaluation scales. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
  • Gordon, E. E. (1965). Musical aptitude profile. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Gordon, E. E. (1979). Primary measures of music audiation and intermediate measures of music audiation. Chicago: GIA.
  • Haroutounian, J. (2002). Kindling the spark: Recognizing and developing musical talent. New York: Oxford.
  • Huck, S. W., & Cormier, W. H. (1996). Reading statistic and research (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
  • Kay, S. I., & Subotnik, R. F. (1994). Talent beyond words: Unveiling spatial, expressive, kinesthetic, and musical talent in young children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 70–74.
  • Linn, R. L., & Baker, E. L. (1996). In J. B. Baron & D. P. Wolf (Eds.), Performance-based student assessment: Challenges and possibilities (Yearbook of the National Society of Education, Part 1, pp. 84–103). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Love, J., & Kipple, B. (1995). Arts participation and race/ethnicity: An analysis of 1982, 1985 and 1992 SPPA surveys. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.
  • Maker, J. C. (1992). Intelligence and creativity in multiple intelligences: Identification and development. Educating Able Learners, 11, 12–19.
  • Marland, S. P., Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.
  • New York State Department of Education & Touchstone Applied Science Associates. (1981). Degrees of reading power. New York: College Board.
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub L. No. 107–110.
  • Ohio Department of Education. (2000). Project START ID: Statewide arts talent identification and development project. Columbus: Author.
  • Oreck, B. (2000, April). Artistic CHOICES: How and why teachers use the arts in the classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans.
  • Oreck, B. A. (2001). The arts in teaching: An investigation of factors influencing teachers’ use of the arts in the classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs. (ProQuest cat. # 9999695).
  • Oreck, B. A. (2002). D/M/T TAP training manual. New York: ArtsConnection.
  • Oreck, B. Baum, S., & McCartney, H. (2000). Artistic talent development for urban youth: The promise and the challenge. Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Research Center for the Gifted and Talented.
  • Pearson, L. (2003). Identifying and serving our gifted students: How professional development can help meet the challenges. TRIAD: Journal of the Ohio Music Education Association, 70(6), 37–41.
  • Piers, E. V. (1984). Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale, revised manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
  • Prescott, G. A., Balow, I. H., Hogan, T. P., & Farr, R. C. (1985/86). Metropolitan achievement tests (6th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
  • Profile: Eliot Feld. (1998, April, 16). Parade Magazine, p. 22.
  • Rainbow, E. L. (1965). A pilot study to investigate the constructs of musical aptitude. Journal of Research in Music Education, 13, 3–14.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184, 261.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S., Reis, S. M., & Smith, L. H. (1981). The revolving door identification model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., & Hartman, R. K. (1976). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Richert, S. E. (1992). Equitable identification of students with gifted potential. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED366159).
  • Roach, E., & Kephart, M. (1966). Purdue perceptual motor survey. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
  • Saunders, R. J., & Schmidt, L. (Eds.). (1979, March). Con-Cept IV: Task force report on identifying the talented in the creative arts. Hartford: Connecticut State Department of Education.
  • Seashore, H. (1938). Psychology of music. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Shwedel, A. M., & Stoneburner, R. (1983). Identification. In M. B. Karnes (Ed.), The underserved: Our young gifted children (pp. 17–39). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
  • Sternberg, R. (1988). The triarchic mind. New York: Penguin Books.
  • Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). The theory of successful intelligence as a basis for gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 265–277.
  • Subotnik, R. (1995). Talent developed: Conversations with masters in the arts and sciences. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 440–466.
  • Torrance, E. (1966). Torrance tests of creative thinking. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.
  • U.S. Department of Education. (1995). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. (Office of Educational Research and Improvement No. NCES 95-082).
  • Webster, P. (1994). Measure of creative thinking in music. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  • Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fields marked with an asterisk * are mandatory.
 

Your Name:*
 

Your Email:*
 

Friend's Name:*
 

Friend's Email:*
 

Message:
 

 
Send CC to self
 

 
 

Bookmark
X
  • Volume 27
  •  Issue 1
  • Publication Date: Fall 2003



Validity, Reliability, and Equity Issues in an Observational Talent Assessment Process in the Performing Arts

Barry A. Oreck, Steven V. Owen, & Susan M. Baum

The lack of valid, research-based methods to identify potential artistic talent hampers the inclusion of the arts in programs for the gifted and talented. The Talent Assessment Process in Dance, Music, and Theater (D/M/T TAP) was designed to identify potential performing arts talent in diverse populations, including bilingual and special education students and students who have had no prior formal arts instruction. Research results over 13 years in elementary schools in New York and Ohio provide evidence that creative and artistic potential can be assessed validly and equitably and that such assessments can offer a reliable prediction of success in rigorous arts instruction.


ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
Your cart is empty.