Critical Review of a Psychology Research Article on Students Essay

Research Issues in psychological scienceCritical Review of a Research ArticlePupils who exhibit keen characteristics along with another disability are referred to as twice-exceptional students (Morrison, 2001 Nielsen 2002). This term is utilise in the article that I have chosen to review, which analyzes the responses and perceptions through interview, of hotshot exceptional individual (Andrew) who was identified as being knowing and able (G/T) and who had emotional and behavioral disabilities (EBD). What the researchers aimed to accomplish through this analysis was a clearer perceptiveness of Andrews community and school experiences, as they stated that there was a lack of empirical information focusing upon pupils who displayed such behaviors. The features of the research initiation were straightforward and simple a qualitative analysis with unity musician a structured interview, recorded then later transcribed and examine 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 utilize in this study which will inform my offshoot critique of this article. I will then move on to hash out the data which was collected, before finally examining how effective the conclusion is.Morrison and Omdal chose to include sole(prenominal) if one musician 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 crabby participant, named under the pseudonym of Andrew, was 22 years of age when he consented to meet in the research. A brief description of his formidable successes both schoolman and socially, pointed out that he was currently employed as a unchanging substitute teacher (p.2). The reader is immediately drawn to a recent man who has accomplished and triumphed against his disabilities instantly gaining the respect of the readers as his successes show bearing of character and determination. Surely then questions must arise about the rigour 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) of twice-exceptional students? It is my assumption that no, it cannot. in particular since the chosen participant is a teacher reflecting upon his edu... ...otional/Behavioural disabilities and gifted and expert behaviours Paradoxical or semantic differences in characteristics?, psychology in the Schools, Vol. 38(5), 2001Nielsen, M.E. (2002) intellectual Students With skill Disabilities recommendations for Identification and Programming, Exceptionality Vol.10 (2), 93-111Nowak, M (2001) Double Inequity, Redoubled Critique Twice-Exceptional ( quick-witted + schooling Disabled) Students, the Equality Ideal, and the Reward Structure of the Educational System http//www.newhorizons.org/spneeds/gif ted/nowak3.htm root informant 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) 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 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 psychological science Research Article on Students EssayResearch 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 rev iew, which analyzes the responses and perceptions through interview, of one particular individual (Andrew) who was identified as being gifted and gifted (G/T) and who had emotional and behavioral disabilities (EBD). What the researchers aimed to accomplish through this analysis was a clearer mind of Andrews 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 blueprint were straightforward and simple a qualitative analysis with one participant a structured interview, recorded then later transcribed and canvas 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 outgrowth critique of this article. I will then move on to deal the data which was collected, before finally examining how effective the conclusion is.Morriso n 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 affect in the research. A brief description of his formidable successes both faculty member and socially, pointed out that he was currently employed as a abiding substitute teacher (p.2). The reader is immediately drawn to a newfangled man who has accomplished and triumphed against his disabilities instantly gaining the respect of the readers as his successes show potence of character and determination. Surely then questions must arise about the cogency 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) of twice-exceptional students? It is my assumption that no, it cannot. peculiarly since the chosen participant is a teacher reflecting upon his edu... ...otional/Behavioural disabilities and gifted and apt 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 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) Case studies of gifted kindergarten children profiles of promise. (On Gifted Students i n 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