You limited your search to:
- Searching for hidden treasure: The identification of under-represented gifted and talented students.
- The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of staff development on the nomination and identification of culturally diverse and/or economically disadvantaged students for gifted programs. Teachers kindergarten through fifth grade from ten districts (N = 100) received 30 hours of staff development in gifted education. The experimental group (n = 50) received a specialized version of the training. The control group (n = 50) received the standard training provided by the Education Service Center. Teachers in the experimental group completed three Stages of Concern questionnaires at the beginning and end of the training and in the fall. Two Levels of Use interviews were also conducted, one in the fall and one in the spring. Innovation configurations were developed utilizing interview results. A repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to determine differences in concerns of teachers over time. The results revealed growth, however, not of a significant level. A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine differences in levels of use of the instructional strategies presented in the training. Again, results revealed growth in classroom application of strategies; however, the amount of growth was not significant. A paired-samples t-test was conducted on the components of the innovation configurations. Differentiated instruction was not significantly different, however, grouping strategies and student products showed significant growth in classroom application. Student nomination and identification data were analyzed across six ethnicities: White not economically disadvantaged, White economically disadvantaged, Hispanic not economically disadvantaged, Hispanic economically disadvantaged, African American not economically disadvantaged, and African American economically disadvantaged. Chi-square analyses determined statistical significance in nominations of Hispanic economically disadvantaged and African American not economically disadvantaged. Significant differences in placement of students occurred in White economically disadvantaged and Hispanic economically disadvantaged groups. No Hispanic not economically disadvantaged students met placement criteria.