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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

36 Research Question 3: Are there any differences between gifted students who dropped out of school and gifted students who completed school with respect to the use of marijuana or cocaine To examine differences between gifted students who dropped out of school and who completed school with respect to drug use, two t-tests were performed (Research Triangle Institute, 1995). Based on the result of the preliminary analyses, two dependent variables were transformed using inverse transformation because they were both extremely positively skewed. After transformations, two t-test procedures were conducted in which the independent variable was group (dropouts vs. non-dropouts) and the dependent variables were number of times marijuana and cocaine were used. The first t-test result indicated that the effect for dropout status was significant (t (3,026)=2.04, p
37 nine predictors (SES, gender, race, students' educational aspirations, father's highest education level, mother's highest education level, pregnancy or having children, school quality, and absenteeism) against a constant-only model was found to be statistically significant, χ 2 (31, N=1,505)=332.45, p
Page 1:
NRC G/T THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTE
Page 4 and 5:
THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER ON THE
Page 7:
Giftedness and High School Dropouts
Page 10 and 11: Research Questions Using two differ
Page 12 and 13: were defined more flexibly as those
Page 14 and 15: To examine differences between gift
Page 16 and 17: model was found to be statistically
Page 18 and 19: References Lajoie, S. P., & Shore,
Page 21: List of Tables Table 1. Profiles of
Page 25 and 26: Giftedness and High School Dropouts
Page 27 and 28: 3 et al., 1991). Bachman, Green, an
Page 29 and 30: 5 CHAPTER 2: Review of the Literatu
Page 31 and 32: 7 4. Dropouts reported more behavio
Page 33 and 34: 9 Some research focused on racial i
Page 35 and 36: 11 accommodate a variety of learnin
Page 37 and 38: 13 Table 1 Profiles of Gifted and T
Page 39 and 40: 15 CHAPTER 3: Research Methods and
Page 41 and 42: 17 A causal-comparative design was
Page 43: 19 To compensate for unequal probab
Page 46 and 47: 22 dropouts (83%) responded that th
Page 48 and 49: 24 100 90 80 70 Percent 60 50 40 30
Page 50 and 51: 26 Finally, gifted dropouts' future
Page 52 and 53: 28 Table 7 Factor Loadings, Percent
Page 54 and 55: 30 Percent 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30
Page 56 and 57: 32 Don't Know 15.3 Ph.D., M.D., etc
Page 58 and 59: 34 Table 9 Mother's Educational Exp
Page 62 and 63: 38 Table 13 Logistic Regression Ana
Page 64 and 65: 40 between the two groups with resp
Page 66 and 67: 42 educational support at home. Eks
Page 68 and 69: 44 have more involvement with regar
Page 71 and 72: 47 References Ascher, C., & Schwart
Page 73 and 74: 49 Grossnickle, D. R. (1986). High
Page 75 and 76: 51 National Center for Education St
Page 77: 53 Tinto, V. (1982). Limits of theo
Page 81 and 82: 57 Variables in the Study Reasons f
Page 83: 59 Pregnancy or child-rearing (F1S7
Page 86 and 87: 62 Also of interest from the Resear
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?