Quantitative Article Review

Published: 2021/12/17
Number of words: 947

Article Summary

This paper seeks to review an article titled “Do high school gifted programs lead to later-in-life success?” This article is written by Welsch and Zimmer (2018). The article was published in the Journal of Labor Research in June 2018. This journal publishes articles written in the US and on US issues. The review aims to determine the impact of the gifted high school program on the success of students after high school. -Deterioration in Oaxaca has been under control for a long time.

The author uses the 1997 National Longitudinal Youth Survey for sampling. Their examples include 2,773 people, of which 471, or 17%, were participants of the 1997 Talent program; this is closely coordinated with the program’s past 19% interest in research evidence (Welsch and Zimmer 2018). The data is taken from college records, so the operation is not explicit. The study design used is longitudinal regression, focusing on actions taken by subjects in college in 1997 and then comparing them to the three ratios of social-economic success using the regression and disintegration model in 2013 (Welsch and Zimmer, 2018). The three social-economic success ratios are that if an individual leaves a four-year school to prevent it from being used, their income is as if it were being used.

Need an essay assistance?
Our professional writers are here to help you.
Place an order

To decompose the data, the author uses a t-test to determine the average contrast between participants and non-participants. Whenever the standard impact of a skill item is not determined, they will try to determine that the impact can be clarified by family attributes, abilities, and academic qualities. Factors such as family income, tutor’s education level, and the number of organic tutors living with students are used to estimate family characteristics. Capacity is estimated by deciding whether most students achieve An and B in eighth grade, and school quality is estimated by deciding whether the school is private, offers vocational classes, offers IB classes, and the size of the school. To quantify this, they used a differential decomposition model to determine the amount of mode influence that can be added to these control factors. The deterioration pattern is like the disintegration of Blind Oaxaca (Welsch and Zimmer, 2018). However, this is a variation proposed by scientist Jonah Gelbach, and the calculations are referred to as Gelbach’s estimates throughout the article.

The baseline t-test without controlling for other factors proved the true key comparison between the two gatherings and the generous replacement student advantage in the talent program with a p-value <.05. The mitigation model monitors household attributes and capacity rather than being static. These control factors represent the real key measure of the impact of meters on each of the three categories. For graduation, controlling factors accounted for 51% of the impact measured. In terms of work and income represent respectively 100% and 57% (Welsch and Zimmer, 2018).

These results show that certain factors such as family income, tutor’s education, and current academic ability will affect students’ future success. There is still an incentive to believe skills programs increase success by controlling these differences in program variables. The consequence of these results is a strong positive correlation between development programs and the success of replacement students. These results induce more money than their non-participant counterparts do.


While this review has focused on controlling for factors that may affect the future success of students, there are still some shortcomings in this review. A downside of this article is that the federal government does generally not run gifted programs. This means that while these programs can tailor their plans to suit the students’ particular needs, there are also large fluctuations between the programs. This makes it difficult to determine interest when using the dichotomous investment ratio (Welsch and Zimmer 2018). Second, since this longitudinal review requires more than ten years of research on individuals, these results depend on the feasibility of qualified programs in the late 1990s. The Gifted program has been modified and rebuilt since the adoption of the No Child Left behind Act (NCLB) in 2001. We cannot summarize these results in the current program.

This review also contributes positively to current literature by estimating the success of programs that rely on long-term success rather only on the results of state-administered tests, like most of the different exams in this space. Therefore, it is both a positive and a negative part of the review. Future researchers should use this model to determine whether post-NCLB skills programs are convincing in determining replacement students at some point in the future.

Worry about your grades?
See how we can help you with our essay writing service.

Another thing to consider is that success can be an abstract term. Just because students do not continue to study from one-year, schooling does not mean they are ineffective. They may have gone to an exchange school or high school and graduated in two years, thus gaining a career that does not require a degree in four years; this is considered successful for some people.

Success is not usually social-economic either, so it can be argued that while getting more money is a positive result of interest in gifted programs, others may think they are more dependent on the gifted program based on personal happiness or closeness to their family. The family is looking forward to it. This review reinforces the belief that while gifted programs serve and form students’ foundation, student success also depends largely on their childhood, existing abilities, and academic strengths. This model and this exploratory configuration are essential and valuable for a future longitudinal sampling of gifted programs.


Welsch and D. M., & Zimmer, D. M. (2018). Do high school gifted programs lead to later-in-life success?. Journal of labor research39(2), 201-218.

Cite this page

Choose cite format:
Online Chat Messenger Email
+44 800 520 0055