The Impact of the Nomination Stage on Gifted Program Identification

By Matthew T. McBee, S. Peters, E. Miller. 2016

161 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f9127e51a06eb63bf7fe6f9a2d83d9ec434342c6

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. S. Peters
2. Marcia Gentry
3. Matthew T. McBee
4. Gilman W. Whiting

Citations in the corpus

• The Challenges of Achieving Equity Within Public School Gifted and Talented Programs (2021, background): “In research by McBee et al. (2016) and Card and Giuliano (2016), equity improved as a result of universal consideration or its related cousin, universal screening.”
• Who Gets Served in Gifted Education? Demographic Representation and a Call for Action (2019, background): “McBee et al. (2016) referred to this as a two-phase identification system in which a student must first pass through a screening phase to be formally considered in a confirmation phase.”