Enhancing Equity in Gifted Education: a framework for examining assessments drawing on the theory of multiple intelligences

In the United States, poor and minority students are disproportionately excluded from programs for the gifted. Current identification practices for gifted education programs are a primary barrier for these youngsters. This study investigated three alternative assessments for identifying students. Each was said to draw on the theory of multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) and to increase the identification of traditionally under‐served youngsters. This investigation asked: (1) Is it reasonable to associate increases in the identification of under‐served youngsters with these assessments? (2) Is it reasonable to associate each assessment with the theory of multiple intelligences? To answer these questions, qualitative data were analyzed against a framework of eight criteria. This revealed that no assessment met all eight criteria; each met a different subset of the eight.     

Engaging Intelligence

Intelligence should not be considered merely a trait of individuals. Rather, intelligence is best conceived of as the product of a dynamic process involving individual competences and the values and opportunities afforded by society. In America today, the conception of intelligence, and concomitant forms of schooling and assessment, ought to be modified to enable young individuals to assume meaningful adult roles in society. Formal schooling ought to be complemented by apprenticeships in the community, and assessment should be refashioned to take into account a far wider range of competences. Finally, assessment vehicles ought to provide information that helps individuals to enhance their cognitive competences in authentic domains of knowledge.     

The benefits and challenges of academic writing retreats: an integrative review

The immediate drivers to increase publication outputs in higher education are government and research funding, organisational status, performance expectations and personal career aspirations. Writing retreats are one of a range of strategies used by universities to boost publication output. The aims of this integrative review were to synthesise the available evidence, identify the attributes, benefits and challenges of academic writing retreats and examine the components that facilitate publication output. The review was based on a systematic search of six electronic databases. Of the 296 articles identified, 11 primary research papers met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis of the data highlighted a raft of personal, professional and organisational benefits of writing retreats. The five key elements of writing retreats conducive to increasing publication output were protected time and space; community of practice; development of academic writing competence; intra-personal benefits and organisational investment. Participants involved achieved greater publication outputs, particularly when provided ongoing support. Further research is required to examine more substantively the feasibility of writing retreats, their cost-effectiveness and the features that increase publication outcomes.     

The Common Core’s promises and pitfalls from the perspectives of policy entrepreneurs and ground-level actors

The Common Core State Standards Initiative (Common Core) was spearheaded by policy entrepreneurs, unveiled nationally in 2010, and initially received strong support from leaders in state and federal government, philanthropic foundations, the business sector, and teacher unions. However, the reform came into the crosshairs of an ideologically wide set of politicians and interest groups. What is less well understood about the controversy are the responses the reform encountered within states, particularly from ground-level actors, such as parents, local educators, school boards, and community members, as well as their elected representatives. This study uses two data sets to examine how the promises and pitfalls that the reform’s policy entrepreneurs anticipated in 2011 were received by ground-level actors in 10 states between late-2013 and early-2014. The findings suggest ground-level responses to the anticipated promises and pitfalls both spurred and resonated with interest groups to disrupt the reform’s support among state-level leaders. The findings also suggest that political and implementation lessons may be gained from further study of the adoption and implementation of the Common Core in California. Whether the Common Core in California or other states may improve achievement or equity is considered in light of third-wave reforms.     

Peer assessment in the digital age: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings

Given the wide use of peer assessment, especially in higher education, the relative accuracy of peer ratings compared to teacher ratings is a major concern for both educators and researchers. This concern has grown with the increase of peer assessment in digital platforms. In this meta-analysis, using a variance-known hierarchical linear modelling approach, we synthesise findings from studies on peer assessment since 1999 when computer-assisted peer assessment started to proliferate. The estimated average Pearson correlation between peer and teacher ratings is found to be .63, which is moderately strong. This correlation is significantly higher when: (a) the peer assessment is paper-based rather than computer-assisted; (b) the subject area is not medical/clinical; (c) the course is graduate level rather than undergraduate or K-12; (d) individual work instead of group work is assessed; (e) the assessors and assessees are matched at random; (f) the peer assessment is voluntary instead of compulsory; (g) the peer assessment is non-anonymous; (h) peer raters provide both scores and qualitative comments instead of only scores; and (i) peer raters are involved in developing the rating criteria. The findings are expected to inform practitioners regarding peer assessment practices that are more likely to exhibit better agreement with teacher assessment.