Journal of Gifted/Talented Education (영재교육연구)

The Korean Society for the Gifted (한국영재학회)
권호 표지

Construct Validity of Korean Translated Gifted Rating Scale

한국어판 Gifted Rating Scale의 구인타당도

  • Received : 2010.07.13
  • Accepted : 2010.08.17
  • Published : 2010.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examined the construct validity of a Korean translated version of the Gifted Rating Scales-School Form (GRS-S). Data were collected from five elementary schools in a metropolitan area and a midsize town in South Korea. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that the original factor structure (6-factor solution) fit the data collected from the teachers. However, the 6-factor solution did not fit the data collected from the parents. Thus, exploratory factor analysis was conducted for the parent data. The results showed that seven factors were extracted, and the factors explained 71.96% of the total variance. Unlike the original factor structure, some items of the academic ability scale were grouped with intellectual ability scale, and a creativity scale item and another academic ability scale item were an independent factor. The study outcomes provide preliminary support for a translated version of the GRS-S with elementary students in Korea. More detailed interpretations and implications of the results are discussed in the study.

본 연구는 Pfeiffer와 Jarosewich(2003)에 의해서 개발된 Gifted Rating Scale(GRS)을 한국어로 번역한 한국어판 GRS의 구인타당도를 검증하고자 하였다. GRS는 교사의 평가에 의해서 아동의 영재성을 판별하는 척도로 미국 교육부의 영재성에 대한 정의에 기초하여 영재성의 6개 하위영역(지적 능력, 학업적 능력, 예술적 재능, 창의성, 지도력, 동기)을 측정하도록 개발되었다. 본 연구에서는 한국어판 GRS의 구인타당도 검증을 위하여 서울 경기 지역에 있는 5개 초등학교에서 자료를 수집하여 확인적 요인분석과 탐색적 요인분석을 실시하였다. 확인적 요인분석 결과 한국어판 교사용 GRS는 미국판 GRS와 동일한 요인구조를 가지고 있는 것으로 나타났으나 학부모용의 경우 미국판 GRS와 동일한 요인구조를 가지고 있다고 결론 내릴 수 없었다. 이러한 결과들은 한국어판 GRS 교사용의 타당도에 대한 근거를 제시해 주고 있으며, 한국 교육 현장에의 적용 가능성을 시사하고 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. 조석희, 김양분 (1994). 일반 학교에서의 효율적인 심화 학습 프로그램 운영 방안 연구, RR 94-11. 서울: 한국교육개발원.
  2. 조석희, 오영주 (1998). 지역공동 영재반 운영 방안, CR 98-17. 서울: 한국교육개발원.
  3. Alvino, J., McDonnel, T. C., & Richert, S. (1981). National survey of identification practices in gifted and talented education. Exceptional Children, 48, 124-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298104800205
  4. Boatman, T. A., Davis, K. G., & Benbow, C. P. (1995). Best practices in gifted education. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology-III (pp. 1083-1095). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
  5. Borland, J. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 129-147. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329601900202
  6. Borland, J. H., & Wright, L. (1994). Identifying young, potentially gifted, economically disadvantaged students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629403800402
  7. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
  8. Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, J. J. (1995). State identification policies: Gifted students from special populations. Roeper Review, 17, 268-275.
  9. Coleman, M. R., Gallagher, J. J., & Foster, A. (1994). Update report on state policies related to the identification of gifted students. Chapel Hill, NC: Gifted Education Policy Studies Program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
  10. Davidson, K. (1986). The case against formal identification. Gifted Child Today, 9, 7-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621758600900602
  11. Elliot, S. N., Busse, R. T., & Gresham, F. M. (1993). Behavior rating scales: Issues of use and development. School Psychology Review, 22, 313-321.
  12. Feldhusen, J. F., & Jarwan, F. A. (2000). Identification of gifted and talented youth for educational programs. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 271-282). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
  13. Funderburk, B. W., Eyberg, S. M., Rich, B. A., & Behar, L. (2003). Further psychometric evaluation of the Eyberg and Behar raring scales for parents and teachers of preschoolers. Early Education and Development, 14, 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed1401_5
  14. Gallagher, J. J. (2003). Issues and challenges in the education of gifted students. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of Gifted Education (3rd ed.). (pp. 11-23). Boston, MA: Allyn&Bacon.
  15. Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304-312. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.304
  16. Gilliam J. E., Carpenter, B. O., & Christensen, J. R. (1996). Gifted and talented evaluation scales. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
  17. Gottfried, A. W., Gottfried, A. E., Bathurst, K., & Guerin, D. W. (1994). Gifted IQ: Early developmental aspects, the Fullerton longitudinal study. New York: Plenum.
  18. Guttman, L. (1954). Some necessary conditions for common factor analysis. Psychometrika, 19, 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289162
  19. Hagen, E. (1980). Identification of the gifted. New York: Teacher's College Press.
  20. Hall, R. J., Snell, A. F., & Foust, M. S. (1999). Item parceling strategies in SEM: Investigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 233-236. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819923002
  21. Haroutounian, J. (1995). Talent identification and development in the arts: An artistic/educational dialogue. Roeper Review, 13, 112-117.
  22. Harrison, C. (2004). Giftedness in early childhood: The search for complexity and connection. Roeper Review, 26, 78-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190409554246
  23. Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177-189.
  24. Hodge, K. A., & Kemp, C. P. (2000). Exploring the nature of giftedness in preschool children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 46-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320002400103
  25. Hoge, R. D. (1983). Psychometric properties of teacher-judgments measures of pupil aptitudes, classroom behaviors, and achievement levels. Journal of Special Education, 17, 401-429. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698301700404
  26. Hoge, R. D., & Butcher, R. (1984). Analysis of teacher judgments of pupil achievement levels. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 777-781. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.5.777
  27. Hoge, R. D., & Coladarci, T. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 59, 297-313. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059003297
  28. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  29. Jackson, N. E. (2003). Young gifted children. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.). (pp. 470-482). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  30. Jarosewich, T., Pfeiffer, S. I., & Morris, J. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 322-336. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290202000401
  31. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
  32. Kaufman, A. S., & Harrison, P. L. (1986). Intelligence tests and gifted assessment: What are the positives? Roeper Review, 8, 154-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198609552961
  33. Kenny, D. A., & McCoach, D. B. (2003). Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 333-351. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1003_1
  34. Kenny, D. T., & Checkaluk, E. (1993). Early reading performance: A comparison of teacher based and test-based assessments. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 227-236. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949302600403
  35. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural education modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
  36. Lee, D., & Pfeiffer, S. I. (2006). The reliability and validity of a Korean-translated version of the Gifted Ratings Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 210-224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282906287829
  37. Lee, E. A., & Seo, H. (2006). Understanding of creativity by Korean elementary teachers in gifted education, Creativity Research Journal, 18, 237-242. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1802_9
  38. Li, H., Pfeiffer, S. I., Petscher, Y. Kumtepe, A. T., & Mo. G. (2008). Validation of the Gifted Rating Scales-School Form in China. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 160-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986208315802
  39. Li, H., Lee, D., Pfeiffer, S. I., Kamata, A., Kumtepe. A. T., & Rosado, J. (2009). Measurement Invariance of Gifted Rating Scales-School Form across five cultural groups. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 186-198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017382
  40. Li, H., Lee, D., Pfeiffer, S. I., & Petscher, Y. (2008). Parent rating using Gifted Rating Scales-School Form: Reliability and validity in Chinese students. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 68, 659-675. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407313365
  41. Margulies, A. S., & Floyd, R. G. (2004). Test review. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22, 275-282. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428290402200306
  42. McCarney, S. B., & Anderson, P. D. (1989). Gifted evaluation scale (2nd ed.). Columbia, MO: Hawthorne Educational Services.
  43. Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. (2006). Problems with item partialing for confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 369-403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105283384
  44. Meisels, S. J., Bickel, D. D. P., Nicholson, J., Xue, Y., & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2001). Trusting teachers' judgments: A validity study of a curriculum-embedded performance assessment in kindergarten to grade 3. American Educational Researcher Journal, 38, 73-95.
  45. Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Ryser, G., & Pierce, C. D. (2005). Reliability and validity of the behavioral and emotional rating scale-second edition: Parent rating scale. Children and Schools, 27, 147-155. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/27.3.147
  46. Morelock, M. J., & Feldman, D. H. (1992). The assessment of giftedness in preschool children. In E. V. Nuttall, I. Romero & J. Kalesnik (Eds.), Assessing and screening preschoolers: Psychological and educational dimensions (pp.301-309). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  47. Perry, N. E., & Meisels, S, J. (1996). Teachers' judgments of students' academic performance [Working paper No. 96-08, National Center for Education Statistics]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
  48. Pfeiffer, S. I. (2001). Professional psychology and the gifted: Emerging practice opportunities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32, 175-180.
  49. Pfeiffer, S. I. (2002). Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 1, 31-50.
  50. Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 161-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700207
  51. Pfeiffer, S. I., & Jarosewich, T. (2003). Gifted rating scales. San Antonio, TX: PsychCorp, Harcourt Assessment.
  52. Pfeiffer, S. I., & Jarosewich, T. (2007). The Gifted Rating Scale-School Form: Analysis of the standardization sample based on age, gender, race, and diagnostic efficiency. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986206296658
  53. Pfeiffer, S. I., & Petscher, Y. (2008). Identifying young gifted children using the gifted rating scales-preschool/kindergarten scale. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 19-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207311055
  54. Pfeiffer, S. I., Petscher, Y., & Kumtepe, A. (2008). The Gifted Rating Scale-School Form: A validation study based on age, gender, and race. Roeper Review, 30, 140-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190801955418
  55. Pfeiffer, S. I., & Stocking, V. B. (2000). Vulnerabilities of academically gifted students. Special Services in the Schools, 16, 83-93. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v16n01_06
  56. Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., Hartman, R. K., & Westberg, K. I. (1997). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  57. Richert, E. S., Alvino, J. J., & McDonnel, R. C. (1982). National report on identification: Assessment and recommendations for comprehensive identification of gifted and talented youth. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Educational Information Resource Center.
  58. Rimm, S. B. (1995). Why bright kids get poor grades and what you can do about it. New York: Crown.
  59. Rimm, S. B. (1997). Underachievement syndrome: A national epidemic. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Hand book of Gifted Education (2nd ed.). (pp. 416-434). Boston MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  60. Ross, P. O. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
  61. Sankar-DeLeeuw, N. (2002). Gifted preschoolers: Parent and teacher views on identification, early admission, and programming. Roeper Review, 24, 172-177. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554174
  62. Seo, H., Lee, E. A., & Kim, K. H. (2005). Korean science teachers' understanding of creativity in gifted education. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 98-105. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-476
  63. Sharpley, C. F., & Edgar, E. (1986). Teachers' ratings vs. standardized tests: An empirical investigation of greement between two indices of achievement. Psychology in the Schools, 23, 106-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(198601)23:1<106::AID-PITS2310230117>3.0.CO;2-C
  64. Siegel, D., & Powell, T. (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620404800103
  65. Silverstein, A. B., Brownlee, L., Legutki, G., & MacMillan, D. L. (1983). Convergent and discriminant validation of two methods of assessing three academic traits. Journal of Special Education, 17, 63-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698301700108
  66. Sternberg, R. J. (1996). The sound of silence: A nation responds to it gifted. Roeper Review, 18, 168-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199609553729
  67. Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  68. Tate, R. (1998). An introduction to modeling outcomes in the behavioral and social sciences (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Burgess.
  69. Urban, K. K. (1995). Creativity: A component approach model. The 11th World Conference on the Education for the Gifted and Talented, Hong Kong.
  70. Ward, S. A. (2005). Gifted rating scales. In R. A. Spiers, & B. S. Plake (Eds.). The 16th mental measurements year book (pp. 404-407). Lincoln, NE: The University of Nebraska Press.
  71. Whitmore, J. R. (1980). The etiology of underachievement in highly gifted young children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 3, 38-51.
  72. Wu, W., Cho, S., & Munandar, U. (2000). Programs and practices for identifying and nurturing giftedness and talent in Asia (outside the mainland of China). In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (1st ed.). (pp. 765-777). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
  73. Yang, S. & Sternberg, R. J. (1997a). Concepts of intelligence in ancient Chinese philosophy. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 17, 101-119. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0091164
  74. Yang, S. & Sternberg, R. J. (1997b). Taiwanese Chinese people's conceptions of intelligence. Intelligence, 25, 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90005-2
  75. Young, K. T., Davis, K., Schoen, C., & Parker, S. (1998). Listening to parents: A national survey of parents with young children. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 152, 255-252.
  76. Zigler, A., & Heller, K. A. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd ed.). (pp. 3-21). Amsterdam: Elsevier.