Role and function of school psychologists, 1992–93: A comparative study

The roles and functions of 52 school psychologists from Iowa and Tennessee were examined. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to test differences between reported time spent on prereferral, assessment, intervention, consultation, and curriculum-based assessment. Significant differences were found for the time spent in all areas. A second one-way MANOVA was used to test the differences between the two groups in reported actual time spent and desired time spent. A significant difference was found for consultation. A third MANOVA was utilized to test the differences between the two groups' desired time spent on the five variables. A significant difference was found for curriculum-based assessment. The results suggest that school psychologists in Tennessee and Iowa occupy different roles. School psychologists in Tennessee reported spending the majority of their time on assessment activities, whereas the Iowa sample balances their time between the five functions. The Iowa role exemplifies alternative functions for school psychologists. The Tennessee role is oriented more toward the refer, test, place model.     

Selecting children for gifted classes: Choosing for breadth vs. choosing for depth

This article compares and contrasts two types of multiple criteria models that can be used to select children for gifted classes: breadth models and depth models. In a breadth model, children are selected for gifted classes if they score moderately well on several assessment areas simultaneously. In a depth model, children are selected for gifted classes if they score superlatively well on any one assessment area, regardless of the level of their performance in other assessment areas. In the study, three breadth models, three depth models, and a more traditional Intelligence Test Model were applied to a population of fourth graders (N = 159) in a small town. The results indicated that children selected by the breadth models had very high classroom grades and were well thought of by their teachers. However, depth models included more students with unusually high IQ scores and more promising underachievers than did breadth models. These and other factors made depth models more advantageous than breadth models.     

Effect of gear ratio on peak power and time to peak power in BMX cyclists

The aim of this study was to ascertain if gear ratio selection would have an effect on peak power and time to peak power production in elite Bicycle Motocross (BMX) cyclists. Eight male elite BMX riders volunteered for the study. Each rider performed three, 10-s maximal sprints on an Olympic standard indoor BMX track. The riders’ bicycles were fitted with a portable SRM power meter. Each rider performed the three sprints using gear ratios of 41/16, 43/16 and 45/16 tooth. The results from the 41/16 and 45/16 gear ratios were compared to the current standard 43/16 gear ratio. Statistically, significant differences were found between the gear ratios for peak power (F(2,14)?=?6.448; p?=?.010) and peak torque (F(2,14)?=?4.777; p?=?.026), but no significant difference was found for time to peak power (F(2,14)?=?0.200; p?=?.821). When comparing gear ratios, the results showed a 45/16 gear ratio elicited the highest peak power,1658?±?221?W, compared to 1436?±?129?W and 1380?±?56?W, for the 43/16 and 41/16 ratios, respectively. The time to peak power showed a 41/16 tooth gear ratio attained peak power in ?0.01?s and a 45/16 in 0.22?s compared to the 43/16. The findings of this study suggest that gear ratio choice has a significant effect on peak power production, though time to peak power output is not significantly affected. Therefore, selecting a higher gear ratio results in riders attaining higher power outputs without reducing their start time.     

Mystery to mastery: Shifting paradigms in gifted education

We provide here a brief historical analysis of a movement in progress from a belief‐based “mystery” model to an evidence‐based “mastery” model of giftedness and talent development. We have observed that educators concerned about exceptionally capable learners are moving from a categorical notion of “the typical gifted child” with somewhat mysteriously defined attributes and learning needs, toward the perspective that some children have exceptionally advanced learning needs that require more flexibly responsive educational attention. We discuss factors that differentiate the two models, and observe some benefits of the shifting paradigm, arguing that by conceptualizing gifted education as providing a dynamically responsive educational match for students who otherwise experience a mismatch with the curriculum normally provided, the mastery model is socially, educationally, and politically more defensible. We discuss some practical implications of this shift in perspective.