Group-Specific Norms and Teacher-Rating Scales

By S. Peters, Marcia Gentry. 2012

87 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d4797bfcfe6758e693c7a4721b8191975ef86371

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. Jaret Hodges
2. Juliana Tay
3. Yukiko Maeda
4. Marcia Gentry
5. S. Peters
6. Carolyn M. Callahan
7. Jonathan Plucker
8. Kenneth G. Engerrand

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Jaret Hodges
2. Juliana Tay
3. Yukiko Maeda
4. Marcia Gentry
5. S. Peters
6. Carolyn M. Callahan
7. Kenneth G. Engerrand
8. Jonathan Plucker

Citations in the corpus

• Research on Giftedness and Gifted Education (2014, background): “For example, Peters and Gentry (2010, 2012a) have gathered promising criterion-related validity 396 Summer 2014 evidence for a teacher rating scale as well as its use in a multicriteria identification system (Peters & Gentry, 2012b), and McBee (2006, 2010a) has conducted state-level identification…”
• Equity and Excellence (2016, background): “Lohman (2006, 2009), Lohman and Renzulli (2007), and Peters and Gentry (2012) have been proponents of group-specific norms in gifted education as a way to better control for OTL when making identification decisions.”
• A Meta-Analysis of Gifted and Talented Identification Practices (2018, methodology): “For example, the Having Opportunities Promotes Excellence (HOPE) Scale (Gentry, Peters, Pereira, McIntosh, & Fugate, 2015; Peters & Gentry, 2012) is an instrument that measures students’ academic and social characteristics of giftedness as identified by their teachers.”