A body of evidence should consist of quantitative and qualitative measures to determine if a student meets the criteria for gifted identification and to build a student profile of strengths and interests. Quantitative assessment provides numerical scores or ratings that can be analyzed or quantified. Qualitative assessment provides interpretive and descriptive information about certain attributes, characteristics, behaviors or performances. The former is considered objective, while the latter is considered subjective.
Quantitative
Qualitative
While some of the data in a body of evidence will be used to meet the criteria for gifted identification, other data or information may be used to build a learner profile for the purpose of developing appropriate programming options.
Criteria are the rules for evaluating a level of exceptionality for identification assessment. The 95th percentile ranking and above describes the rule for demonstration of exceptionality on a standardized, nationally-normed test or observation tool. A performance assessment that indicates exceptionality compared to age mates includes a rating that exceeds expectations or demonstrates distinguished/advanced command. Performance indicators may include criterion-referenced tests, portfolio or observation. Criterion-referenced data may be used as qualifying evidence if the student’s performance level exceeds grade-level expectations or if “up-level” assessments are used.
Criteria are not cut-off scores. Typically, cut-off score terminology is used in reference to practices that eliminate students from access to further identification assessment because a single test result or score did not provide evidence at the exceptional level. Colorado does not adhere to cut-off score practices. Review teams should continue to explore additional data to reveal student strengths.
A variety of measures are contained within a body of evidence. A measure is the tool; a metric is the numeric result of using that measure. A cognitive test is an example of a measure that assesses general intelligence. This test provides a metric to express a level of cognitive ability.
Collection of data for a body of evidence includes, but is not limited to assessment results from multiple sources and multiple types of data (i.e., qualitative and quantitative data about achievement, cognitive ability, performance, parent and teacher input, motivation and observations of gifted characteristics/behaviors). The body of evidence contains data to identify the strength area(s) according to the definition of gifted children, and also informs decisions about appropriate programming services.
A body of evidence may consist of the following assessments:
Cognitive Tests
Cognitive tests are designed to measure a student’s general intellectual ability. Such tests do not measure specific academic aptitude in various content areas such as reading or math. Many general intelligence tests and checklists include items that assess both fluid reasoning, such as analogies, block designs, and pattern arrangements, and crystalized abilities, such as mathematics problems, vocabulary, and comprehension of reading passages. In the AU’s, all 2nd grade students are screened in the Spring of that year and all 6th grade students are screened in the fall of that year. Any students that transfer into the schools grade 3-8 will be screened. The Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) is the AU’s tool for initial screening. Additional cognitive measures may be used if the data obtained is not clear or there is a need for additional data.
When only cognitive ability assessment data meets criteria in a body of evidence (95th percentile or above), the team may determine that the student is identified with general or specific intellectual ability. This exception to the typical body of evidence is critical in identifying students with exceptional ability who may not yet be performing academically or demonstrating strong interests in the school environment. This student might lack motivation or have gaps in learning thereby requiring additional guidance and educational support services. Although the criteria for identification may be met by cognitive assessment data, a comprehensive body of evidence is still collected and examined to determine a student’s strength area and academic and affective needs for goal setting and programming as recorded on an Advanced Learning Plan (ALP). This general intellectual identification meets the condition of portability.
If a student scores at the 95th percentile or above on the composite of CogAT, but does not score at the 95th percentile or above on one or more of the separate batteries, it is recommended to consider providing the student a different cognitive or intellectual assessment that is perhaps untimed, administered individually or an instrument that approves the use of a composite score to measure exceptionality.
Creativity Tests
Assessment data from standardized, norm-referenced creativity tests are used to determine if a student demonstrates gifted ability in the area of creativity. Creative aptitude is demonstrated by a student scoring 95th percentile or above on norm-referenced creativity tests (e.g., Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking [TTCT], Profile of Creative Abilities [PCA]).
Some students who do not achieve qualifying scores on cognitive or achievement tests may still demonstrate many characteristics of giftedness. Many gifted traits and behaviors are evidence of the high level of creativity typical of many gifted students. To aid in identifying students who do not score at or above the 95th percentile on cognitive or achievement measures, creativity tests may be useful in building a body of evidence for formal identification, because these tests add validity to the observed creative characteristics. A score at the 95th percentile or above on a creativity test is not required for identification in the arts areas. These assessments will be used to build a body of evidence when a student exhibits creativity significantly above that of their peers.
Achievement Tests
Assessment data from standardized, criterion- and norm-referenced tests are utilized to determine if a student demonstrates exceptional ability in a specific academic area. Specific academic aptitude areas include reading, writing, math, science, social studies, and world language. Some assessments that can be used for this but not limited to: PARCC, CMAS, NWEA Maps, Star reading and math. Specific talent aptitude areas include visual arts, performing arts, music and dance. Specific academic and talent aptitude is demonstrated by a student scoring at the advanced/distinguished level on criterion-referenced assessments and/or 95th percentile or above on norm-referenced achievement tests. Districts may use alternative achievement tests to determine advanced academic competence.
If a student does not demonstrate exceptional general intellectual ability from a cognitive assessment, but does demonstrate exceptional abilities in a specific academic area, the identified gifted educator will start observing and collecting data over time and not moving to formal gifted identification based on achievement data collected from just one grade level. Students who are identified as gifted in the Specific Academic Aptitude area who do not demonstrate exceptional general intellectual ability are not identified until multiple achievement data points support the academic determination.
For example: When a young child (kindergarten-third grade) demonstrates specific academic potential without a qualifying cognitive score, differentiated pace and depth of instruction can be used to build additional data over time to identify exceptionality. The Colorado READ Act requires that teachers assess the 10 Gifted Identification Guidebook 2016 literacy development of all kindergarten-third grade students. Data from these reading competency tests are used to determine if a student has a significant reading deficiency and may be included in a student learning profile, but are not used as qualifying data for gifted identification. Assessments utilized to progress monitor student achievement or diagnose an academic deficiency are often defined as diagnostic instruments. Diagnostic assessments or skill inventories measure proficiency of grade level foundational skills. Diagnostic and inventory assessments are not intended to measure exceptional abilities in a specific content area. Therefore, these instruments are not used as qualifying data.
