In our identification model (Renzulli, Reis, & Smith, 1981), we have used above average ability as the major criterion for identifying a group of students who are referred to as the Talent Pool. This group generally consists of the top 15-20% of the general school population. Test scores, teacher ratings, and other forms of status information" (i.e., information that can be gathered and analyzed at a fixed point in time) are of practical value in making certain kinds of first-level decisions about accessibility to some of the general services that should be provided by a special program.
This procedure guarantees admission to those students who earn the highest scores on cognitive ability tests. Primary among the services provided to Talent Pool students are procedures for making appropriate modifications in the regular curriculum in areas where advanced levels of ability can be clearly documented. It is nothing short of common sense to adjust the curriculum in those areas where high levels of proficiency are shown. Indeed, advanced coverage of traditional material and accelerated courses should be the "regular curriculum" for youngsters with high ability in one or more school subjects.
So, is he saying that 15-20% of the school population would be considered or would be guaranteed admission (sorry I didn't read the whole article beyond what you linked)? Not to make Delisle the ultimate authority on giftedness, but I happen to like him
... in any case, I know the he has expressed concern in other places that using
above average ability not superior ability isn't a good way to create programs the meet the needs of the gifted.
eta: so I've gone back and quickly perused the article and it appears to me that he is using the top 15-20% as the group who would be considered based on "above average ability." Once you've got that piece, you also have to exhibit task commitment and creativity to be gifted. Since he does seem to focus a lot on gifted behaviors over innate differences that make one a gifted individual, I do see as how this could be implemented the way pps have seen in their school where a child who is ided is bumped out of GT based on lack of task commitment.
Where I'm at, I see some of that too. You never lose your GT identification but you are not guaranteed services/placement in advanced or GT classes unless you show
...evidence of high achievement...certain skills and characteristics (such as work habits, attendance, past performance, and motivation)
