Critical Review of a Psychology Research Article on Students Essay

research Issues in Psychology deprecative Review of a seek ArticlePupils who exhibit gifted characteristics along with another disability argon referred to as twice-exceptional students (Morrison, 2001 Nielsen 2002). This term is used in the article that I rush chosen to review, which analyzes the responses and perceptions done 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 finished this analysis was a cle ber understanding of Andrews community and school experiences, as they stated that there was a lack of empirical data snap upon pupils who displayed such behaviors. The features of the research design were straightforward and simple a soft analysis with one participant a structured interview, recorded indeed later transcribed and analyzed to produce 3 themes a shutdown which produced findings of Andrews experiences as a t wice-exceptional student. It is the appropriateness of the methods that were used in this lease which will inform my first critique of this article. I will thus move on to discuss the data which was collected, before finally examining how impelling the shutting is.Morrison and Omdal chose to include only one participant in their interpret, which compares rather a significantly to the research of others in similar areas that postulate 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 historic period of age when he consented to partake in the research. A brief explanation of his formidable successes both academic and socially, pointed out that he was currently utilize as a permanent substitute instructor (p.2). The reader is like a shot drawn to a young man who has accomplished and triumphed against his disabilities instantly gaining the approve of the re aders as his successes show strength of character and determination. Surely and then questions essential arise about the validity of using such a small, recognise sample. Can the quality of data that has been gathered be representative of the universe of discourse (Cohen et al 20002) of 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), 2001Nielsen, M.E. (2002) Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities recommendations for Identification and Programming, Exceptionality Vol.10 (2), 93-111Nowak, M (2001) double up 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 authorauthor Plucker, J.A. & Levy, J.J (2001) The Downside of Being Talented, American Psychologist, Vol 56(1) 75-76Porter, L (1999) Gifted Young Children A guide for teachers and parents Open University Press, BuckinghamSankar-DeLeeuw, N (2004) contingency 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 Whos listening?, http//www.sengifted.org/articles_social/Schuler_GiftedKidsAtRiskWhosListening.shtmlTeachers 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 searchResearch Issues in PsychologyCritical Review of a Research ArticlePupils 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 analyze s 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 Andrews community and school experiences, as they stated that there was a lack of empirical data focalization upon pupils who displayed such behaviors. The features of the research design were straightforward and simple a soft analysis with one participant a structured interview, recorded then later transcribed and analyzed to produce 3 themes a conclusion which produced findings of Andrews 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 good the conclusion is.Morrison and Omdal chose t o 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 historic period of age when he consented to partake in the research. A brief comment of his formidable successes both academic and socially, pointed out that he was currently active as a permanent substitute teacher (p.2). The reader is right away drawn to a young man who has accomplished and triumphed against his disabilities instantly gaining the appraise of the readers as his successes show strength of character and determination. Surely then questions mustiness arise about the validity of using such a small, fill sample. Can the quality of data that has been gathered be representative of the cosmos (Cohen et al 20002) of 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), 2001Nielsen, M.E. (2002) Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities recommendations for Identification and Programming, Exceptionality Vol.10 (2), 93-111Nowak, M (2001) double up 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.htmauthorauthor Plucker, J.A. & Levy, J.J (2001) The Downside of Being Talented, American Psychologist, Vol 56(1) 75-76Porter, L (1999) Gifted Young Children A guide for teachers and parents Open University Press, BuckinghamSankar-DeLeeuw, N (2004) cocktail dress 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 Whos listening?, http//www.sengifted.org/articles_social/Schuler_GiftedKidsAtRiskWhosListening.shtmlTeachers Training Agency 20/01/05 http//www.teach.gov.uk/php/read.php?sectionid=218&articleid=1487