Critical Review of a Psychology Research Article on Students Essay

Research Issues in Psychology Critical Review of a Research Article Pupils who exhibit gifted characteristics along with another disability are referred to as ‘twice-exceptional students’ (Morrison, 2001; Nielsen 2002). This term is used in the article that I have chosen to review, which analyzes the responses and perceptions through interview, of one particular individual (Andrew) who was identified as being gifted and talented (G/T) and who had emotional and behavioral disabilities (EBD). What the researchers aimed to accomplish through this analysis was a clearer understanding of Andrew’s community and school experiences, as they stated that there was a lack of empirical data focusing upon pupils who displayed such behaviors. The features of the research design were straightforward and simple: a qualitative analysis with one participant; a structured interview, recorded then later transcribed and analyzed to produce 3 themes; a conclusion which produced findings of Andrew’s experiences as a twice-exceptional student. It is the appropriateness of the methods that were used in this study which will inform my first critique of this article. I will then move on to discuss the data which was collected, before finally examining how effective the conclusion is. Morrison and Omdal chose to include only one participant in their study, which compares quite significantly to the research of others in similar areas that have included a greater number of participants (Gross, 1994; Sankar-DeLeeuw, 2004; Howe et al, 1998). This particular participant, named under the pseudonym of Andrew, was 22 years of age when he consented to partake in the research. A brief description of his formidable successes both academic and socially, pointed out that he was currently employed as a ‘permanent substitute teacher’ (p.2). The reader is immediately drawn to a young man who has accomplished and triumphed against his ‘disabilities’; instantly gaining the respect of the readers’ as his successes show strength of character and determination. Surely then questions must arise about the validity of using such a small, select sample. Can the quality of data that has been gathered be representative of the population (Cohen et al 20002) o f twice-exceptional students? It is my assumption that no, it cannot. Especially since the chosen participant is a teacher reflecting upon his edu... ...otional/Behavioural disabilities and gifted and talented behaviours: Paradoxical or semantic differences in characteristics?, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 38(5), 2001 Nielsen, M.E. (2002) Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: recommendations for Identification and Programming, Exceptionality Vol.10 (2), 93-111 Nowak, M (2001) Double Inequity, Redoubled Critique: Twice-Exceptional (Gifted + Learning Disabled) Students, the Equality Ideal, and the Reward Structure of the Educational System http://www.newhorizons.org/spneeds/gifted/nowak3.htm#author#author Plucker, J.A. & Levy, J.J (2001) The Downside of Being Talented, American Psychologist, Vol 56(1) 75-76 Porter, L (1999) Gifted Young Children – A guide for teachers and parents Open University Press, Buckingham Sankar-DeLeeuw, N (2004) Case studies of gifted kindergarten children: profiles of promise. (On Gifted Students in School) Roeper Review, v26 i4 p192(16) Schuler, P.A. (2003) Gifted kids at risk: Who’s listening?, http://www.sengifted.org/articles_social/Schuler_GiftedKidsAtRiskWhosListening.shtml Teacher’s Training Agency – 20/01/05 http://www.teach.gov.uk/php/read.php?sectionid=218&articleid=1487 Critical Review of a Psychology Research Article on Students Essay Research Issues in Psychology Critical Review of a Research Article Pupils who exhibit gifted characteristics along with another disability are referred to as ‘twice-exceptional students’ (Morrison, 2001; Nielsen 2002). This term is used in the article that I have chosen to review, which analyzes the responses and perceptions through interview, of one particular individual (Andrew) who was identified as being gifted and talented (G/T) and who had emotional and behavioral disabilities (EBD). What the researchers aimed to accomplish through this analysis was a clearer understanding of Andrew’s community and school experiences, as they stated that there was a lack of empirical data focusing upon pupils who displayed such behaviors. The features of the research design were straightforward and simple: a qualitative analysis with one participant; a structured interview, recorded then later transcribed and analyzed to produce 3 themes; a conclusion which produced findings of Andrew’s experiences as a twice-exceptional student. It is the appropriateness of the methods that were used in this study which will inform my first critique of this article. I will then move on to discuss the data which was collected, before finally examining how effective the conclusion is. Morrison and Omdal chose to include only one participant in their study, which compares quite significantly to the research of others in similar areas that have included a greater number of participants (Gross, 1994; Sankar-DeLeeuw, 2004; Howe et al, 1998). This particular participant, named under the pseudonym of Andrew, was 22 years of age when he consented to partake in the research. A brief description of his formidable successes both academic and socially, pointed out that he was currently employed as a ‘permanent substitute teacher’ (p.2). The reader is immediately drawn to a young man who has accomplished and triumphed against his ‘disabilities’; instantly gaining the respect of the readers’ as his successes show strength of character and determination. Surely then questions must arise about the validity of using such a small, select sample. Can the quality of data that has been gathered be representative of the population (Cohen et al 20002) o f twice-exceptional students? It is my assumption that no, it cannot. Especially since the chosen participant is a teacher reflecting upon his edu... ...otional/Behavioural disabilities and gifted and talented behaviours: Paradoxical or semantic differences in characteristics?, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 38(5), 2001 Nielsen, M.E. (2002) Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities: recommendations for Identification and Programming, Exceptionality Vol.10 (2), 93-111 Nowak, M (2001) Double Inequity, Redoubled Critique: Twice-Exceptional (Gifted + Learning Disabled) Students, the Equality Ideal, and the Reward Structure of the Educational System http://www.newhorizons.org/spneeds/gifted/nowak3.htm#author#author Plucker, J.A. & Levy, J.J (2001) The Downside of Being Talented, American Psychologist, Vol 56(1) 75-76 Porter, L (1999) Gifted Young Children – A guide for teachers and parents Open University Press, Buckingham Sankar-DeLeeuw, N (2004) Case studies of gifted kindergarten children: profiles of promise. (On Gifted Students in School) Roeper Review, v26 i4 p192(16) Schuler, P.A. (2003) Gifted kids at risk: Who’s listening?, http://www.sengifted.org/articles_social/Schuler_GiftedKidsAtRiskWhosListening.shtml Teacher’s Training Agency – 20/01/05 http://www.teach.gov.uk/php/read.php?sectionid=218&articleid=1487