Giftedness and High School Dropouts - Neag Center for Gifted ...

27
Research Question 2: Is there any difference between gifted dropouts and
non-gifted dropouts with respect to their plans to return school
A chi-square analysis was conducted to examine differences between gifted
students and non-gifted students who dropped out of school, with respect to their plans to
return to school. The adequacy of expected frequencies was examined prior to the
analysis, and no violation of assumptions was found. There was no significant difference
between the two groups with respect to their plans to return to school, χ 2 (1, N=839)=.02,
p=.88. As Table 6 indicates, only 35.9% of gifted students planned to return to school,
while 64.2% had no plan to return to school. Similarly, 34.9% of non-gifted students
planned to return to school, while 65.1% had no plan to return to school.
Research Question 3: Is there any difference between gifted dropouts and
non-gifted dropouts with respect to their self-concept and locus of control
To examine differences between gifted and non-gifted students who dropped out
of school with respect to their self-concept and locus of control, a multivariate analysis of
variance (MANOVA) was performed. Prior to conducting the MANOVA, a principal
factor analysis was performed to determine the subscales of self-concept. A total of 13
items from the NELS:88 questionnaire, which represent students' opinion about
themselves and their attitudes, was included in the analysis. Results indicated that two
factors were extracted, accounting for 45% of the variance. Loadings of variables on
factors, percent of variance, and their reliabilities are presented in Table 7. To facilitate
interpretation, factors below .45 were suppressed. Based on the theoretical grounds,
factor 1 was labeled as self-concept and factor 2 was labeled as locus of control.
A MANOVA was conducted to examine the differences in self-concept and locus
of control between gifted and non-gifted students who dropped out of school. Results
indicated that the combined dependent variables were significantly affected by the two
groups (F=23.79, p