The Role of Nonverbal Tests in Gifted Education By Jack A. NAGLIERI Emerrrus Proressor, GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY ‘The under-representation of minority children in classes for the gifted has heen and continues to be one of the ‘most serious problems facing educators of gified students (Ford-Harris, 1998; Naglicri, Brulles, & Lansdowne, 2009). In the book Helping AU Gifted Students Learn (Naglieti et al, 2009) we sug- gested that nonverbal tests of general ability provide a way to identify under- represented populations that has both conceptual and empirical support and has instructional implications. Under- standing why this approach is helpful sequires clarification of several points. What is a Nonverbal Measure of General Ability? ‘The concept of general ability has been studied since the early 1900s. The idea of general ability can be attributed to Charles Spearman, who wrote the in- fluential book, General! Intelligence, Ob- Jjectively Determined and Measured, in 1904. He suggested thar although dif ferent tests of general ability may involve remembering information, ordering words, copying a geometric design, or putting together a puzzle, they all can measure general ability. There is con- siderable agreement that measures of general ability can also have unique di- mensions. David Wechsler, whose tests ‘of general ability have been widely used for more than 75 years, recognized that ‘general ability tests can vary in content. ‘Wechsler's original intelligence test, and the revisions that have been published since 1939, were built upon the concept that general ability could be measured using individual subtests that vary in content. Some of his tests require nowledge of words and comprehen- fessor of Sere from man as a) sion of verbal rela- OEMS tionships, while oth- ers require reasoning with arithmetic or working with blocks and puzzles. “the attributes and factors of intelligence, ike the elementary particlesin physics haveatonce collective and individual prop- erties (Wechsler, 1975, p. 138).” This means that although a test may have questions that are verbal, quantitative, or nonver- bal, they all can be used to measure general ability. It is very important to understand that even though Wechsler's IQ tests were organized into the verbal and nonverbal sections, he did not think that verbal and nonverbal tests measured different abilities. Wechsler (1958) explicitly stated that “the subtests are different measures of intelligence, not measures of different kinds of intelligence ¢(p. 64).” Similacly, Naglieri and Ford (2003) further clarified that “the term nonver- bal refers to the content of the test, not a type of ability (p. 2).” Simply stated, tests may differ in their content, and still measure the concept of general intelli- gence. But what is general ability? General ability is what allows people to solve a number of different kinds of problems that may involve words, pic- tures, sounds, or numbers. These prob- Iems may involve verbal, quantitative, or nonverbal reasoning, memory, se- quencing, verbal and math skills, pat- terning, connecting ideas across and within content areas, insights, making connections, drawing inferences, and eames aero c ease Rahat fellowships ten Teme Green ee ter) d his effort analyzing simple and complex ideas. Said another way, general ability is the foundation for all kinds of things we do {in our daily lives. ‘There is much scientific support for the concept of general ability as meas- ured by tests such as the Wechsler and. Binet (see Jensen, 1998, for a review). These tests measure general ability using tests that have verbal (e.g, vocab- ulary), quantitative (eg, math word problems), and nonverbal (e.g, puz- zles) content. Among the most impor tant sources of validity evidence for these 1Q tests is the fact that the scores the tests yield are strongly related to school achievement (Naglieri & Born- stein, 2003). It made sense in the early 1900s when these tests were devel- oped, as it does today, that limited Eng- lish language skills and overall knowledge may interfere with the meas- urement of general ability when mi- norities are tested. ‘An historical example of the value of a nonverbal measure of ability is seen in. the museum at Elis Island, NY. There is a story ofa young woman whose verbal test score suggested she may have been mentally retarded. Once a nonverbal test was administered, which she com- pleted easily, itbecame clear that it was ‘a mistake to think she was not smart. Even though she did not know Engli the test clearly showed that she was very intelligent, The issue is no differ ent today. It is actually made more evi- dent in the schools today given the increasingly diverse populations in the schools. Tests of ability that demand knowledge of English, and knowledge‘ies, Kor this reason nonverbal tests ot general ability offer one tool for identi- fying these children. Researchers have found that the non- verbal measures are only slightly influ- enced by limited English language skills and, there- ‘versions of the Naglieri Nonverbal Abil- ity Tests, ‘The progressive matrix shown in Fig: ure 1 can only be solved if the relation- ships among all the parts are FIGURE 1. Example of a Progressive Matrix hension demands that all the informa tion must be interrelated, Seeing a ‘word as a whole requires that the parts bbe related into a complete unit. Seeing patterns in math facts, or letter spellings, or historical events, all require general fore, more appropriate for bilingual children (Hayes, 1999). Verbal test scores can be adversely influenced when children have poor language skills and live in poverty (Kaufman, 1994; ‘Naglicri, 2008). ‘The use of nonverbal tests helps re- duce problems associated INSTRUCTION: Which answer goes on the question mark? = &> : ability. Notice that many con- tent areas (reading, math, science) require under standing of informat a larger context, The con- tent of the task (or test) may be described as ver- bal, mathematical, or non- verbal but the thinking with measuring ability through the use of language tests like vocabulary, for ex ° needed is the same. The use of verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal content can. ample. For these reasons, nonverbal tests of ability are oa 3 4 be used to measure gen- : eral ability provided the considered appropriate for a wide variety of persons, especially those with limited English language skills and academic failure (Bracken & McCallum, 1998; Zurcher, 1998). How Can General Ability be Measured Nonverbally? ‘The number of individually admini tered tests available for measuring gen- eral ability nonverbally has increased in recent years (see Naglieri & Goldstein (2009) for more information). For ex: ample, there are two types of nonverbal tests of general ability that are in use today. First, there are general ability tests comprised of different types of subtests like the Wechsler Nonverbal Seale of Ability (Wechsler & Naglieri, 2006) and the Universal Intelligence Test (Bracken & McCallum, 1998). Some of these nonverbal test questions may include building a design from blocks, completing a puzzle, or remem- bering the sequence of movements on 2 board. Second, there are those that measure general ability nonverbally using diagrams shown in Figure 1. ‘These tests items are referred to as pro- gressive matrices and are included in understood. The child needs to notice that the top row has two boxes with cir- cles in them. The one on the left has a white circle within a white box and the squares in the left column are white and the square(s) on the right columa should be gray. Looking row to row, the top row has boxes with circles in them, but the bottom row has boxes with a di- amond, In addition, the organization of shading in the left and right column, needs to be understood. So to solve the visual analogy, the child must reason: (@) TOP ROW white circle with white background white circle with gray background (b) BOTTOM ROW white diamond with white background white diamond. It is important to un- derstand that the problem demands a careful look at all of the aspects of the problem. ‘The essence of this nonverbal ques- tion is that the various aspects of the problem must be examined and in order to answer the question correctly. Many of the things children do in school also demand understanding how information is organized and re- examinee has had ade- ‘quate opportunity to learn and fluently speaks the language used in the test. Nonverbal Tests are a Part of the Identification Process Nonverbal measures of general abil- ity are particularly helpful when the goal is to find gifted children from di- verse populations. Gifted children who speak different languages and come from many different cultures can be identified using this nonverbal test of ability (see Naglieri, 2008). Their gift- edness has not been identified when general measures of ability that require comprehension of written language and/or quantitative test items have been used. Nonverbal tests of general ability reduce the injustice that could be ‘caused by using verbal and quantitative test questions (Yoakum & Yerkes, 1920). In my view, a nonverbal test is ‘one way to obtain a more equitable so- lution to the identification of gifted chil- dren and one that is socially just. Once a child has been found to have high general ability using a nonverbal test, the instruction that is provided may need to be differentiated to the aca-demic needs of the gifted child. This challenge too can be overcome (sce Nagler’ et al., 2009) My goal is to use a nonverbal meas- ure of general ability so that gifted chile deen from a wide variety of cultural and linguistic groups can be provided gifted services. I am not suggesting that tal ‘ented children who speak English flu- ently should not be identified and served, nor that they should be served in smaller numbers. Instead, children who earn high scores on a nonverbal measure of general ability should also be served, and that they should be pro- vided instruction tailored to their aca- demic skill levels. A nonverbal measure of general ability, therefore, plays a key role in identifying these children; and cone with excellent reliability and valid- ity (Naglieri, 2008). m References Bracken, 8A, & McCallum. S(1998).Univer- sal Nonverbal intelligence Test. tasca IL: Ri side Ford-Hartis,D.¥.(1998). The underrepresents- tion of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. Journal of Special Education, 32,4 14 Hayes,5.C. (1999). Comparison ofthe Kaufman, Brief Inteligence Test and the Matrix Analo- {les Test Short Form in an adolescent foren- sic population. Psychological Assessment, 17, 108-110. Jensen, A.R. (199). Bias in mental testing. New York, NY:Free Press. Kaufman, A.5.(1994) Inteligent testing withthe WASC-Il, New York,NY: Wiley. Nagler, & Ford, .¥.(2003). Addressing nder-tepresentation of gifted minority chil- dren using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NAT). Gifted Child Quortery,47,155- 160. NaglieJ.A.(2008). Traditional 10: 100 years of ‘misconception and is relationship to mi- nority representation in gifted programs. In J.NanTassel-Baska (Ed), Alternative assess- ments with gifted and talented students (pp. (67-88). Waco, T:Prufrock Press. NaglierA. & Bornstein, &.T-(2003).ntel- ‘gence and achievement: Just how correlated are they? Journal of Psychoeducational As- sessment, 21, 244-260. Naglier1.A, Brulles,D, &Lansdowne, K.(2008). Helping ail gifted children learn:A teacher's {guide to using the NNAT2.San Antonio, TD: Pearson. Nagler J. A, 8 Goldstein, . 2009). Practi- toner’ guide to assessment ofinteligence and ‘achievement. New York, NY: Wiley ‘Wechsler, D.(1958).The measurement of adult inteligence. Baltimore: Wiliams & Wilkins. ‘Wechsler, D.(1975).Inteligence defined and Undefined: relativistic appraisal. American Psychologist 30, 135-138. Wechslet,D, & Nagler JA (2006), Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Abilty.San Antonio, TX: Pearson, Yoakum, CS, Yerkes, RIM.(1920). Army mental tests, New York,NY: Henry Holt and Company. Zurcher, (1998) Issues and trends in culture fale assessment. intervention in School and ‘nic, 34, 103-106. CURRICULUM CONNECTION continued from page 18 portunities provided during the school day have demon- strated gains in critical thinking and content acqui for promising students of poverty. a Are there specifi tasks); and 7) the teaching of concrete to abstract concepts with interest-based components. ‘The resource and research list for promising students TS: Curriculum selections are critical to the success of promising students of poverty. The curriculum must be re- spectful and higher level, while considering students’ unique needs. Curricular design must include the following ele- ‘ments: 1) teacher modeling of language and practices of the discipline through explanation of student ideas, both writ- ten and verbal; 2) specific graphic organizers that focus on. higher-level skills; 3) linkages to real-world problems and contexts applicable to students of poverty; 4) scaffolding from lower to higher-level skills; 5) involvement and ongoing professional development with educators AND student fam- ilies; 6) the use of pre-assessment as a guide for educational planning (these pre-assessments involve less writing and more graphic depictions and concrete representations of 22 Teachins Fon Hick Porenmat. | WinTeR 2011 of poverty is growing, but is still limited. Specific curriculum, ‘with quasi-experimental designs and a positive research base include the following: Mentoring Mathematical Minds and the William and Mary Language Arts Curriculum (both avail- able from Kendall Hunt), The William and Mary Project Clar- ion Science Curriculum and The Jacob's Ladder Reading, Comprehension Program (both available from Prufrock Press) and Project U-STARS~PLUS (available from NAGC and ‘the Council for Exceptional Children). Another successful program to review is the SEMR project from the University of Connecticut. Also, be sure to check the NAGC Teaching for ‘High Potential webpage for an abridged list of resources that may be helpful for educators interested in learning more about this special population. wwwnagcorg