disparities in testing the gifted - Page 2

[boongirl]

I am truly stunned, shocked, and offended at the direction this thread has taken. And, on top of that, its direction has become totally useless.

I basically started this thread with the noble (I think) intention of letting parents know that tests are not the end all, be all of giftedness. Having taught gifted kids in a school that was almost all black and asian kids, I can tell you that this issue of testing is a huge one with parents of minority children. They are concerned about language differences when their children speak their own language fluently and do not speak English as well. They are concerned that the tests may not show how truly gifted they think their children are. Black parents are concerned about the cultural differences in the tests, that their children may be gifted in a way that is not in alignment with the group intelligence tests. As minority populations learn more and more about this, and it is a HUGE issue in Seattle Public Schools, parents are becoming more and more savvy with understanding their options.

My intent with this thread was to inform parents that their are limitations with regards to the tests and that if they feel in their heart and soul that their child is gifted but not showing that on the group intelligence test data, there are other ways to be tested. Group intelligence tests are kind of the quick and cheap way for school districts to test for intelligence. There are more and different tests and especially individualized tests are available which may show more and different data than the group tests.

I believe this thread has taken a very shocking divergence away from its intentions. I cannot fathom what the intentions of Roar would be and why she would think that this argument she is making is of any use to parents in this forum. The issues of intelligence testing and minority achievement are large and complex, too much so to do any good discussing them in a thread like this. There are many reasons children fail and succeed at school. But, this thread was started merely as a way of saying to parents of minority children: keep trying to get your child identified as gifted if you believe him/her to be so.

Purely and simply put, if you are a parent of a child who is not of Western European descent and particularly if your children are immigrants and/or speak a different language than English at home, then your hunch about your child's abilities may be right. If you believe your child to be gifted but the group intelligence test does not agree, try getting the school to do a non-verbal test or to have the school psych do an individual test. If you can afford it, take the child to be tested by a child psych. Those tests go into more detail.


Now, if you feel like arguing points with me, I am not interested. I have 10 years experience teaching gifted kids behind me and working with parents of gifted kids as their advocate was one of the primary functions of my job. If anyone disagrees with me in my points, so be it. But, I know from experience that my advice is truly helpful for children.

[Roar]

Originally Posted by boongirl

My intent with this thread was to inform parents that their are limitations with regards to the tests and that if they feel in their heart and soul that their child is gifted but not showing that on the group intelligence test data, there are other ways to be tested. Group intelligence tests are kind of the quick and cheap way for school districts to test for intelligence. There are more and different tests and especially individualized tests are available which may show more and different data than the group tests.

I agree. And, that is something that parents of white kids should know too. There are kids who don't do well on group IQ tests for a variety of reasons and will get more accurate testing one on one. And, any testing only really is a measure of how that kid can do on that day. Even with individual tests kids could be sick, etc. and underperform.

Originally Posted by boongirl

I believe this thread has taken a very shocking divergence away from its intentions. I cannot fathom what the intentions of Roar would be and why she would think that this argument she is making is of any use to parents in this forum. The issues of intelligence testing and minority achievement are large and complex, too much so to do any good discussing them in a thread like this. There are many reasons children fail and succeed at school. But, this thread was started merely as a way of saying to parents of minority children: keep trying to get your child identified as gifted if you believe him/her to be so.

You label yourself the "Dutchess of Digression". The thread evolved. If you only wanted to make your pronouncement and weren't interested in discussing it, it may be best to clearify that in your original post. Typically online threads and discussions evolve.

When we look at the poorer performance of minority children on IQ tests I think we should ask two questions. 1. How big is the gap? and
2. What causes the gap?
The gap could be caused totally by test bias in which case we somehow get a bias free test and boom, problem solved. Or, it could be that if a group of people have lesser access to nutrition, prenatal care, good education, safe housing, child care, etc. we are going to find lower IQ over time. Pretending that it has nothing to do with anything other than test bias means we will not accurately define or solve the problem.

[meowee]

This is why the district I'm in is so reluctant to embrace gifted programs-- all the other ones they've had have been accused of racism as the kids who end up in them are usually white. So they were ended under political pressure.

[eilonwy]

Originally Posted by meowee

This is why the district I'm in is so reluctant to embrace gifted programs-- all the other ones they've had have been accused of racism as the kids who end up in them are usually white. So they were ended under political pressure.

That's why teacher referrals shouldn't be the only way to get a child tested. Percentage-wise, a gifted program's demographics ought to be similar to (if not representative of) the demographics of the school/district in which the program resides.

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by Roar

The gap could be caused totally by test bias in which case we somehow get a bias free test and boom, problem solved. Or, it could be that if a group of people have lesser access to nutrition, prenatal care, good education, safe housing, child care, etc. we are going to find lower IQ over time. Pretending that it has nothing to do with anything other than test bias means we will not accurately define or solve the problem.

First of all, my new moniker has nothing to do with you. It is an inside joke.

Secondly, no one ever stated that the gap is solely a testing issue. No one. But, if you have a black child, for example, who has grown up with poor nutrition, poor prenatal care, unsafe housing, etc, and you still think he/she is gifted but not scoring high enough on the test, then perhaps it could also be a result of the cultural differences between his/her community and the majority community. You keep wanting to take this discussion into a much broader range than it was intended.

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by eilonwy

That's why teacher referrals shouldn't be the only way to get a child tested. Percentage-wise, a gifted program's demographics ought to be similar to (if not representative of) the demographics of the school/district in which the program resides.

Oh yes, teacher referrals should be allowed but they are in no way a good method of identifying gifted. On the contrary, teachers are usually surprised at who scores high on group intelligence tests. It is usually the kids who are either goofing off a lot because they were bored, which the teacher did not recognize, or the kids who were really quiet and withdrawn, or the kids who ask so many challenging questions (challenging the teacher with things like "why do we have to do it that way?") that the teacher kind of didn't like that kid.

I speak from my own experience and do not pretend to think that anything I wrote above could in any way be generalized.

[WuWei]

So, is there a final answer on the disparities in testing the gifted child? It seems not to be as defined as was represented in the most recent thread that I participated in; and I am unclear how I am either welcomed or not in this forum. My contention is that two standard deviations of an inaccurate measure doesn't indicate "intellectual giftedness"; and that part of this is because all variants of intellectual giftedness are not measurable by an IQ test. Thus it would seem that the proposition that "intellectual giftedness" is represented by IQ results is a false premise.


Pat

[littlest birds]

WuWei, I think the test is a moderately accurate way to measure indicators known to correspond with high intelligence. It is not a measure of actual intelligence or of every important facet of overall intelligence, just the best folks have been able to come up with for quantifying some measurable factors of highly intelligent people.

If a person is scoring extremely high in many areas, it becomes clear that they are functioning on an unusual intellectual level. However, is every fraction of a point accurate?--not possible. Definitely cultural bias is going to widen the margin of likely error. The test is generalized. That naturally leads to inconsistent fit among individuals of different backgrounds. How universal can it be made to be?

Simply do NOT assume the test is a numerically-accurate tool. It should reveal a general deviation from average intelligence and therefore offers some useful information.



Eilonwy, OT, but I remember when I took an IQ test I was quite young and had no idea what the picture of a war/battlefield was supposed to be--war was not part of my vocabulary. I can still see that picture in my mind and remember my uncertainty.