Factors That Influence In-Service and Preservice Teachers' Nominations of Students for Gifted and Talented Programs

By Del Siegle, Michelle D. Moore, R. Mann, Hope E. Wilson. 2010

149 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0267050264f1ad8604359aeb01d4c341e0efb6d7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. S. Peters
2. E. Miller
3. Matthew T. McBee
4. Carolyn M. Callahan
5. Jonathan Plucker
6. Marcia Gentry
7. So Yoon Yoon
8. Aaron J. Boulton

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. S. Peters
2. Matthew T. McBee
3. E. Miller

In Social Psychology

1. Matthew T. McBee

Citations in the corpus

• The Impact of the Nomination Stage on Gifted Program Identification (2016, methodology): “We chose a validity coefficient of .7 because, on consideration of the literature regarding teachers’ beliefs about giftedness (i.e., Berman, Schultz, & Weber, 2012; Miller, 2009; Siegle et al., 2010), this is about as high of a validity coefficient as one could expect to encounter.”