Parenting
Inventory
107
PUMROY, D.
K.
(1966).
Maryland Parent Attitude Survey: A research instrument with social desirability
controlled.
Journal
of
Psychology,
64,
73-78.
REYNOLDS, W.
M.
(1989).
Reynolds Child Depression Scale: Professional Manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
STEVENS,
G.,
6r
CHO,
J.
H.
(1985).
Socioeconomic indexes and the new
1980
census Occupational Classification
Scheme.
Social Science Research,
14,
142-168.
STROM,
R. D.
(1984).
Purenr as a Teacher.
Bensenville,
IL:
Scholastic Testing Service.
Psychology
in
the Schools
Volume
29.
April I992
THE COMPARABILITY OF THE TEST OF COGNITIVE SKILLS WITH
THE WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR CHILDREN-REVISED
AND THE STANFORD-BINET: FOURTH EDITION WITH GIFTED CHILDREN
ERIC
L.
ROBINSON
AND
RICHARD
J.
NAGLE
University
of
South Carolina
The comparability of the Test
of
Cognitive Skills (TCS) with the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth
Edition (SBIV) with
75
elementary- and middle-school-aged gifted students was in-
vestigated. Results indicated that the mean Cognitive Skills Index was about
6
points
higher than the WISC-R FSIQ and about
9
points higher than the SBIV Composite
score. Correlation coefficients between the TCS Cognitive Skills Index and the SBIV
Composite score and the WISC-R FSIQ were
.51
and
.41,
respectively. Absolute
differences between individual scores revealed that
44%
of the students’ SBIV Com-
posite scores were more than
10
points different than their Cognitive Skills Index,
and
28%
of the students’ WISC-R FSIQ scores were more than
10
points different.
The results indicated limited comparability between the TCS and WISC-R and SBIV.
The implications
of
these findings and future research.questions are discussed.
There has been a growth in interest in programs for the gifted in recent years and,
subsequently, an increased demand for proper early identification of gifted students.
This interest has led to an increase in the number of theories and definitions concerning
the nature of giftedness. Most definitions include multiple dimensions that involve special
abilities in music, art, leadership, and creative thinking. Marland
(1972)
stated that the
gifted and talented were those who demonstrated high achievement or high potential
in at least one of the following areas: intellectual aptitude, academic achievement, creative
thinking, leadership, and visual and performing arts. Tannenbaum
(1983)
also offered
a multifaceted definition, suggesting five basic factors related to giftedness: (a) general
intelligence; (b) special talents, aptitudes,
or
ability; (c) nonintellective factors, such as
dedication and ego strength; (d) environmental conditions that are stimulating
or
sup-
portive; and (e) change factors. The central characteristic in virtually all definitions is
the concept of high intellectual functioning. There are some states that require individual
evaluations to determine eligibility for gifted programs.
Although there has been considerable discussion about proper identification
of
students for gifted programs, much debate has focused on the use of scholastic aptitude
Requests for reprints should be addressed to Richard
J.
Nagle, Department
of
Psychology, University
of
South Carolina, Columbia, SC
29208.