Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The inclusion of well-described systematic reviews in gifted education is extremely important in the field of education, especially as we are facing a turning point. This helps us to understand exactly where we stand nationally and internationally. This one, following the PRISMA protocols, is well done and includes quality metrics, which is much appreciated. It highlights the need for greater methodological integrity in the field. 

Author Response

Dear review,

Thank you very much for your kind and encouraging words. I truly appreciate your recognition and the opportunity to contribute to such an important and respected publication. It is always motivating to know that our work resonates with colleagues in the field, and I am honored by your invitation.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Education Sciences Review

 

The Identification of Giftedness in Children: A Systematic Review

 

1. 1: The references are very NAGC-centric. Have the researchers considered international perspectives for introductory comparisons?

 

1. 2 Have the researchers considered Siegle’s (2024) work on teacher biases in gifted nominations? Or Jason Grissom’s 2021 work in gifted nominations impacted by SES? These are more recent studies by experts in the field in the content described. I think these are important works that should be included and may impact some interpretation of the stated results. What can be said about teacher nominations? Family access to information that influences their potential nominations? More is needed here.

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewers,

We sincerely thank you for the time and dedication you have devoted to reviewing the article: Systematic Review: The Identification of Giftedness in Children: A Systematic Review.

We have carefully considered the valuable comments and suggestions provided by the reviewers. In the text marked in red, you will find the aspects that we have incorporated into the body of the review, as you suggested.

Recent studies, such as Jason Grissom’s (2021) work on the nomination of gifted students affected by socioeconomic status (SES), are highly valuable. However, in the results of our review, as well as in the discussion and interpretation, we have only included articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. From the suggested study, we were only able to find a research report.

We have made every effort to address all the recommendations provided.