The purpose of the current examination was to preliminarily suggest severity standards for the recently revised Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale–Second Edition (CTAS-2). Participants responded to the CTAS-2, Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), and FRIEDBEN Test Anxiety Scale. Using both latent class and cluster analyses, we were able to classify participants as belonging to one of the three distinct cognitive test anxiety profiles—low, moderate, and high. Comparison of the identified test anxiety profiles allowed us to generate a set of severity standards for the CTAS-2 that can be used to differentiate between individuals with differing levels of cognitive test anxiety. The validity of the severity standards was established through group comparisons of test-anxious students on the MSLQ–Text Anxiety, FRIEDBEN–Cognitive Obstruction, FRIEDBEN–Social Derogation, and FRIEDBEN–Physiological Tenseness scales. Discussion concerns the practical implications of establishing CTAS-2 severity standards for educators, student support staff, and learners.

The present study sought to examine the perceptions of giftedness and identification procedures held by experienced teachers of gifted minority students. Twenty-seven 4th-grade teachers of gifted students in an urban school system with a high representation of minority and economically disadvantaged students were surveyed. Results indicated that experienced teachers still held a narrow conception of giftedness and were not aware of how culture and environmental factors may influence the expression of giftedness in minority and economically disadvantaged students. Findings also indicated that these teachers expressed concerns for approximately one third of their students qualifying for the gifted program. These concerns were based primarily on students having a skill deficit in one area, poor work habits, or behavioral or family problems. Teachers were less likely to notice gifted characteristics in these students compared to other identified students, even though both groups were identified in the same way. Implications for teaching gifted minority and economically disadvantaged students are discussed.