Quick clarification about IQ scores [Archive]

Roar

08-05-2006, 07:51 PM

Thanks so much for posting this!

I also wanted to point out that IQ is not necessarily an indicator of giftedness ... a lot of people are under the false assumption that a high IQ automatically means the person is gifted. A lot of people with a high IQ *are* gifted, but the link isn't automatic.

Tell me more. I would agree that a high IQ doesn't mean high acheivement. And, that it is possible to be gifted and not score highly on an IQ test. And, possible to be high acheiving without being gifted. But by very definition a person who scores high on an IQ test is intellectually gifted. It isn't really possible to overscore.

catgirl

08-05-2006, 09:12 PM

Tell me more. I would agree that a high IQ doesn't mean high acheivement. And, that it is possible to be gifted and not score highly on an IQ test. And, possible to be high acheiving without being gifted. But by very definition a person who scores high on an IQ test is intellectually gifted. It isn't really possible to overscore.

Yeah, it's like a pregnancy test. You can get a false negative, but there's no such thing as a false positive. If you can answer those questions, then you earned the score you got.

LadyMarmalade

08-05-2006, 10:53 PM

Yeah, it's like a pregnancy test. You can get a false negative, but there's no such thing as a false positive. If you can answer those questions, then you earned the score you got.
Huh? You CAN get a false positive. It's much less likely than a false negative, but it happens. Just check the packet - it's written out clearly.

With regards to IQ tests, if you answer the questions, then you most likely deserve the score you got - but your score has very little weight with regards to your gifted status. IQ score and gifted status have VERY LITTLE to do with each other. As we all know, many gifted people don't get the IQ score they 'deserve'. And that's not even touching on the cultural bias inherent in IQ testing which also skews scores. It's yet another battle we have to fight. Advocacy and activism in giftedness is a challenge because it involves deconstructing and challenging so many things society has no idea about or sees as normal.

Tell me more. I would agree that a high IQ doesn't mean high acheivement. And, that it is possible to be gifted and not score highly on an IQ test. And, possible to be high acheiving without being gifted. But by very definition a person who scores high on an IQ test is intellectually gifted. It isn't really possible to overscore.
I remember having the same confusion when I first started looking more deeply into giftedness and its manifestations.

I agree with what you've said - firstly a high IQ doesn't mean high achievement, secondly that you can be gifted and not score highly on an IQ test, and thirdly that you can be a high achiever without being gifted. And yes, I also agree that someone who has a high IQ is intellectually gifted by common/societal definition... but it comes down to semantics again. Most people involved in gifted communities reject the view society has of giftedness. Being intellectually gifted isn't always the same as being 'gifted'. Intellectually gifted is really just another way to say "I have a high IQ", whereas 'gifted' means you've got a brain dysfunction. You can score highly on an IQ test and be intellectually gifted without having a brain which functions differently as it does in truly 'gifted' people.

A lot of kids with high IQs (ie intellectually gifted children) are automatically being given the 'gifted' label when they're *not* gifted at all. It's a big problem in schools, and it's done some harmful things to understanding the support which truly gifted children need.

I think the difference between 'gifted' and 'talented' is also important and should be recognised, especially when talking about labeling children.

Edited for a typo.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 02:55 AM

I just found this on a 'Myths about giftedness' page:

Gifted and Talented means the same thing:
Again, not necessarily. There is no rule that states that a child who is capable of scoring to the high ninety percentiles on group achievement testing must be considered gifted. We must remember that achievement tests like the Metropolitan Achievement Tests are "Grade Level Testing". Such a child is most definitely Academically Talented. But further individualized IQ and out of level academic testing must be given before we can define that child as "Gifted". At the same time, there is no rule that states a child identified as gifted should be Achieving to high standards in the classroom. This type of stereotyping can do serious and irreversible damage to both groups. ANY child can benefit from enrichment. Academically Talented Children can benefit from Honors (Grade Level) Classes. Intellectually Gifted children need a differentiated curriculum and possibly even a different environment.

Roar

08-06-2006, 09:10 AM

I just found this on a 'Myths about giftedness' page: Gifted and Talented means the same thing:
Again, not necessarily. There is no rule that states that a child who is capable of scoring to the high ninety percentiles on group achievement testing must be considered gifted. We must remember that achievement tests like the Metropolitan Achievement Tests are "Grade Level Testing". Such a child is most definitely Academically Talented. But further individualized IQ and out of level academic testing must be given before we can define that child as "Gifted". At the same time, there is no rule that states a child identified as gifted should be Achieving to high standards in the classroom. This type of stereotyping can do serious and irreversible damage to both groups. ANY child can benefit from enrichment. Academically Talented Children can benefit from Honors (Grade Level) Classes. Intellectually Gifted children need a differentiated curriculum and possibly even a different environment.

This is really different than saying that a child can overscore on an IQ test. Yes, a child can be a high acheiver and score highly on a group acheivement test without being gifted. What this quote is saying is that type of testing alone doesn't determine if a child is gifted.

Roar

08-06-2006, 09:21 AM

Huh? You CAN get a false positive. It's much less likely than a false negative, but it happens. Just check the packet - it's written out clearly.

Packet?

A child can't overscore on an IQ test. A child can score as being a high acheiver on tests of acheivement without being gifted, but overscoring isn't a significant issue on individual IQ tests. It isn't like a multiple choice test where a person can make lucky guesses.

With regards to IQ tests, if you answer the questions, then you most likely deserve the score you got - but your score has very little weight with regards to your gifted status. IQ score and gifted status have VERY LITTLE to do with each other.

What you are suggesting is not what I've read or heard anywhere else about this subject. Would you care to post a link?

Being intellectually gifted isn't always the same as being 'gifted'. Intellectually gifted is really just another way to say "I have a high IQ", whereas 'gifted' means you've got a brain dysfunction. You can score highly on an IQ test and be intellectually gifted without having a brain which functions differently as it does in truly 'gifted' people.

Huh? How is being gifted a brain dyfunction? Dysfunction is impaired functioning as in something not working well.

A lot of kids with high IQs (ie intellectually gifted children) are automatically being given the 'gifted' label when they're *not* gifted at all. It's a big problem in schools, and it's done some harmful things to understanding the support which truly gifted children need.

If you said that a lot of schools do pretty poor testing and make placements on the basis of not very accurate group testing or on the basis soley of acheivement I agree. If you said many schools have gifted programs that are really more about being academically advanced that gifted, I agree. I don't agree though that many children are given individual IQ tests, score high and aren't really gifted.

eilonwy

08-06-2006, 09:33 AM

It's possible to be a gifted musician and not be intellectually gifted. It's possible to be a gifted athlete and not be intellectually gifted. What makes gifted musicians and athletes similar to intellectually gifted folks is the intensity and drive that they so often exhibit from an early age. A mathematically gifted child will find a way to incorporate/use mathematical concepts as often as possible. A musically gifted child will drive teachers and tutors to distraction with their raw talent and refusal/inability to channel said talent in typical directions. They're driven in ways that most people don't understand and can't accept.

It's possible to be gifted and not score very highly on an IQ test, but it's not possible for someone who scores very highly on an IQ test not to be gifted.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. ;)

For the record, while it is possible to get a falsely low score on an IQ test, they are designed so that you can't get a falsely high one. Any IQ test score in isolation should be regarded as a baseline, rather than an upper limit.

allgirls

08-06-2006, 10:01 AM

That's how I understand it too Eilonwy..

When I think of gifted musicians I think of Ashley MacIsaac, the fiddler...of all the fiddlers in Cape Breton(and there are a LOT) he's a genius...just pure genius...and he's troubled and wierd and driven and crazy. But as far as I am concerned, pure genius. Your definition fits him perfect!

Sharlla

08-06-2006, 10:06 AM

Both DH and I have high IQs but I don't consider either of us to be "gifted".

allgirls

08-06-2006, 10:11 AM

Both DH and I have high IQs but I don't consider either of us to be "gifted".

why not?

boongirl

08-06-2006, 11:47 AM

It's possible to be gifted and not score very highly on an IQ test, but it's not possible for someone who scores very highly on an IQ test not to be gifted.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. ;)

For the record, while it is possible to get a falsely low score on an IQ test, they are designed so that you can't get a falsely high one. Any IQ test score in isolation should be regarded as a baseline, rather than an upper limit.

I agree with this. A child who is mathematically gifted but not verbally, for example, will not score high in verbal areas of the test. But, they still may be very much gifted in math. And it would be highly improbable for a child to get a high score on the test through guessing at answers. Thus, false high scores are unheard of.

A lot of the confusion about who is gifted comes from the definition of giftedness. Like the word 'art', gifted means different things to different people. For most school districts in the USA, gifted means academically gifted, in particular in the areas of math and verbal skills. Related to this, a person could be "gifted' in a sport or dance or music, but there are rarely gifted programs in school for these gifts. Usually, these kind of gifts or talents are taken care of at home through private lessons or specialized athletic instruction.

So, for the sake of argument, when public schools discuss giftedness, they are meaning giftedness related to the tests they use. For example, both school districts where I have worked use the CogAt which do not give you an IQ score, per say, but they are roughly translated to an IQ score. The percentile a child scores is roughly translated to mean an IQ of between X and Y. Scoring high on the CogAt means you are academically gifted in the areas of logical-mathematical intelligence and verbal-linguistic intelligence.

In my experience, it is possible to score high in one area only, but that is very, very rare. It is also possible for a gifted child to not score high on the test if the test is in a different language than the one they are speaking most frequently, if the test is testing them in areas different than their gifts, and if they are just not interested in playing this game and purposely answer questions incorrectly. I have had children in all of the aforementioned areas score too low for the programs. If this happens, and parents and/or teacher complain that the child really needs to be in the program, I have given retests. The ESL child can be retested with a nonverbal test. The child purposely scoring low on the test can get some counseling and can be given a retest, at which time we hope they will take the test more seriously and actually try. The culturally different child is the hardest one to retest but they sometimes do better on the nonverbal test as well.

boongirl

08-06-2006, 11:53 AM

Huh? How is being gifted a brain dyfunction? Dysfunction is impaired functioning as in something not working well.

I don't agree though that many children are given individual IQ tests, score high and aren't really gifted.

For once, I agree with you. It does gifted children and adults a disservice to say they have a brain disfunction. Their brain may be functioning differently than the brain of an average person, but it is not disfunctional.

And I also agree that there is really on such thing as a false high score on an IQ type test. There may be children who guess at a few questions and guess correctly, thus putting their score higher than their actual intelligence, especially when they are very close to the cutoff for programming. But, who cares? They are still intelligent enough to hang out with the kids who really are scoring high enough to be in the program. And, it is not like it is obvious, as a gifted program teacher, who scored falsely high.

lckrause

08-06-2006, 12:49 PM

When I think of gifted musicians I think of Ashley MacIsaac, the fiddler...of all the fiddlers in Cape Breton(and there are a LOT) he's a genius...just pure genius...and he's troubled and wierd and driven and crazy. But as far as I am concerned, pure genius. Your definition fits him perfect!

See, I knew there was a reason I liked you. I LOVE Ashley MacIsaac! :thumb

allgirls

08-06-2006, 05:09 PM

See, I knew there was a reason I liked you. I LOVE Ashley MacIsaac! :thumb

Isn't he the greatest...you know I saw him in concert when I was pregnant with Sophia and my friend said "that baby is going to be a genius from one concert" he was that great. He mesmorizes me. :love

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 05:46 PM

This is really different than saying that a child can overscore on an IQ test. Yes, a child can be a high acheiver and score highly on a group acheivement test without being gifted. What this quote is saying is that type of testing alone doesn't determine if a child is gifted.
I'm having trouble understanding where the problem lies. I agree with everything you said here - you just repeated everything I said: that a child can be a high achiever and score highly without being gifted, and that the testing alone isn't enough for a diagnosis of giftedness.

Roar

08-06-2006, 05:51 PM

I'm having trouble understanding where the problem lies. I agree with everything you said here - you just repeated everything I said: that a child can be a high achiever and score highly without being gifted, and that the testing alone isn't enough for a diagnosis of giftedness.

What I disagree with...in an earlier post you said.

I wanted to point out that IQ is not necessarily an indicator of giftedness ... a lot of people are under the false assumption that a high IQ automatically means the person is gifted. A lot of people with a high IQ *are* gifted, but the link isn't automatic. Also, some gifted people don't have a high IQ.

I disagree with this. A high IQ means that a person is gifted. It isn't possible to overscore on an IQ test.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 05:57 PM

Packet?
Yes, the box it comes it. It clearly states that false positives are possible.

A child can't overscore on an IQ test. A child can score as being a high acheiver on tests of acheivement without being gifted, but overscoring isn't a significant issue on individual IQ tests. It isn't like a multiple choice test where a person can make lucky guesses.
I think you've read too much into my post - I wasn't talking about overscoring at all. I agree that overscoring isn't a significant issue.

What you are suggesting is not what I've read or heard anywhere else about this subject. Would you care to post a link?
I've just returned a few to the library, I'll hunt them down again and get the details to you. You can also find some good journal articles in gifted education which deal with it a lot more clearly than I seem to be doing.

Huh? How is being gifted a brain dyfunction? Dysfunction is impaired functioning as in something not working well.
Most experts classify giftedness as a brain dysfunction (the definition is something which is working abnormally - giftedness fits this perfectly because the gifted brain DOES work differently to a normal brain).

If you said that a lot of schools do pretty poor testing and make placements on the basis of not very accurate group testing or on the basis soley of acheivement I agree. If you said many schools have gifted programs that are really more about being academically advanced that gifted, I agree. I don't agree though that many children are given individual IQ tests, score high and aren't really gifted.
Again, I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying that children who get high scores aren't gifted - I'm saying that it can't be used as the only indicator. More needs to be done to give a diagnosis. A lot of the children scoring highly *will* be gifted, but a few won't. Not many will fall into that category, but there are enough that it's an issue (ie them being diagnosed as gifted when they're not).

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 05:59 PM

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 06:01 PM

Both DH and I have high IQs but I don't consider either of us to be "gifted".
My DH and I both have high IQs - he's gifted but I'm not. I simply have a high IQ, whereas he has all the baggage which comes with giftedness.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 06:03 PM

I agree with this. A child who is mathematically gifted but not verbally, for example, will not score high in verbal areas of the test. But, they still may be very much gifted in math. And it would be highly improbable for a child to get a high score on the test through guessing at answers. Thus, false high scores are unheard of.

A lot of the confusion about who is gifted comes from the definition of giftedness. Like the word 'art', gifted means different things to different people. For most school districts in the USA, gifted means academically gifted, in particular in the areas of math and verbal skills. Related to this, a person could be "gifted' in a sport or dance or music, but there are rarely gifted programs in school for these gifts. Usually, these kind of gifts or talents are taken care of at home through private lessons or specialized athletic instruction.

I think it's really important to distinguish between gifted and talented ... and I agree that a lot of confusion comes through how it's defined differently by different groups.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 06:07 PM

For once, I agree with you. It does gifted children and adults a disservice to say they have a brain disfunction. Their brain may be functioning differently than the brain of an average person, but it is not disfunctional.
According to the definition (and also physiologically), giftedness is a brain dysfunction. I actually think it NEEDS to be presented as such in order for society to understand better the challenges, problems and special needs associated with giftedness. As we've seen here at MDC many people think it's a good thing - they have no idea what it involves. They think it's equal to being smart (and being extra smart must be extra good). They don't understand that having a brain which works abnormally (ie dysfunctionally) can be really difficult. They understand if it's a 'bad' thing (ie ASD) but since the automatic assumption is that giftedness is good, there's lots of misunderstanding from people who don't know what it's really all about.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 06:09 PM

What I disagree with...in an earlier post you said.

I disagree with this. A high IQ means that a person is gifted. It isn't possible to overscore on an IQ test.
No, a high IQ test is an excellent indicator that a person is most probably gifted. However, more testing needs to be done before a diagnosis can be given.

Obviously a person with an extremely high IQ will automatically be gifted, but someone who scores on the lower end of the 'high' bracket isn't automatically gifted.

Roar

08-06-2006, 07:02 PM

According to the definition (and also physiologically), giftedness is a brain dysfunction. I actually think it NEEDS to be presented as such in order for society to understand better the challenges, problems and special needs associated with giftedness. As we've seen here at MDC many people think it's a good thing - they have no idea what it involves. They think it's equal to being smart (and being extra smart must be extra good). They don't understand that having a brain which works abnormally (ie dysfunctionally) can be really difficult. They understand if it's a 'bad' thing (ie ASD) but since the automatic assumption is that giftedness is good, there's lots of misunderstanding from people who don't know what it's really all about.

What does the word dysfunctional mean to you?

To me it means unhealthy or impaired. Many gifted people have brains that are opposite of this. The gifted person may think especially quickly, deeply or well.

I certainly am willing to buy that being gifted doesn't mean a person necessarily won't have brain dysfunction. I'm not understanding though how disfunction is an inherent part of giftedness.

Roar

08-06-2006, 07:09 PM

No, a high IQ test is an excellent indicator that a person is most probably gifted. However, more testing needs to be done before a diagnosis can be given.

What is the "more testing" you refer to. All over this country there are children being given individual IQ tests and getting an assessment that says they are gifted.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 08:44 PM

If you don't know what the 'more testing' I'm referring to entails, perhaps you should do some reading about giftedness before you post on a support forum for it.

And yes, in YOUR country, there's a trend of giving children the 'gifted' label after an IQ test without further investigation. We've spoken about this very problem here at MDC before (many times). It's not the same all over the world, and it doesn't happen in *this* country. An IQ test is simply a way to determine whether a child is potentially gifted or not. With highly gifted children you can tell straight away, but it's still a good idea to do more comprehensive testing. For average high scores or borderline high scores, more testing is essential.

I realise this is not done in the US, but that's not my problem ;). I'm thankful that here, if a child's IQ score result indicates they may be gifted, they are assessed in other ways before an official diagnosis is made.

Roar

08-06-2006, 08:57 PM

I would still like to hear more about what the further testing entails.

boongirl

08-06-2006, 10:36 PM

ng.

Most experts classify giftedness as a brain dysfunction (the definition is something which is working abnormally - giftedness fits this perfectly because the gifted brain DOES work differently to a normal brain).

I have been a teacher of gifted kids for 10 years and I have never seen giftedness categorized as brain dysfunction. I would like to see the references. I have the following:

The official meaning of learning disabilities is given in EL. 105-17 (1997) and states:

The term "specific learning disability" means a disorder in one or more of
the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using
language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in
imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do
mathematical calculations.

This term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.

From: The Gifted/Learning-Disabled Child: A Guide for Teachers and Parents. Gifted Child Today; 7/1/2000; Fetzer, Erin A.

As being gifted is not a learning disability, it can not be a brain dysfunction. However there is also literature out there discussing how the profoundly gifted are often misdiagnosed as having learning disabilities and/or actually have learning disbilities AND are very gifted such that the giftedness often goes unnoticed at first.

Many gifted and talented children (and adults) are being mis-diagnosed by psychologists, psychiatrists, pediatricians, and other health care professionals. The most common mis-diagnoses are: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder (OD), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), and Mood Disorders such as Cyclothymic Disorder, Dysthymic Disorder, Depression, and Bi-Polar Disorder. These common mis-diagnoses stem from an ignorance among professionals about specific social and emotional characteristics of gifted children which are then mistakenly assumed by these professionals to be signs of pathology.

source (http://www.sengifted.org/articles_counseling/Webb_MisdiagnosisAndDualDiagnosisOfGiftedChildren. shtml)

boongirl

08-06-2006, 10:43 PM

According to the definition (and also physiologically), giftedness is a brain dysfunction.

Would you mind, please, citing your sources? I searched the whole Hoagies Gifted website in several ways and did a few google searches and I could not find anyone labelling giftedness as a brain dysfunction except to have that pointed out as wrong. It was pointed out in several places that many gifted children are incorrectly labelled with a learning disability, by definition a brain dysfunction, whereas they should be gifted or perhaps both. But, nowhere could I find giftedness defined as brain dysfunction.

I think this is a very important point. If we label giftedness as a brain dysfunction, by that very definition we are stating that to be gifted is to have a brain that has abnormal or impaired functioning. While I would be the first person to say that truly gifted people do, at times, have brain function that is different from the average person, I do not think it to be abnormal. That is a negative term, whereas gifted is a positive term.

We can call learning disability a dysfunction because we try to teach the person to overcome it or accomodate it. But, we do not try to teach gifted children to overcome or accomodate for their giftedness. That is the distinction.

boongirl

08-06-2006, 10:47 PM

What is the "more testing" you refer to. All over this country there are children being given individual IQ tests and getting an assessment that says they are gifted.

Correct.

In both school districts in which I have taught gifted kids and both private schools, children have been identified by the CogAt test alone. Nothing else. If they did not score high enough for the program but were close, their parents sometimes take them to an educational or child pysch who will do a whole battery of tests to see if they can get a score that will enable the child to be in the program. Sometimes they are successful. Once or twice in my career, I have given an ESL child a non-verbal IQ test. I do not recall the names.

LadyMarmalade

08-06-2006, 11:02 PM

boongirl

08-06-2006, 11:12 PM

You're a teacher in the US, right, Boongirl?

Things are different elsewhere in the world - I'll get some sources to you, but as someone who worked in research in gifted education and diagnosis at a university, and also teaches gifted children, I'm in shock that you've never heard of the stuff I'm talking about.

Gotta run though, will be back later.

I am sorry but I tend to think that most of what is being stated here applies to North America. Usually, people state something otherwise when they are from a country outside of North America, like "in France we do ______."

Where are you and at what University do you do research?

And, I am obviously very surprised by what you are stating also. That is why I asked for references. Did you read the ones I linked? Comments?

I look forward to reading your references.

boongirl

08-06-2006, 11:20 PM

You're a teacher in the US, right, Boongirl?

Things are different elsewhere in the world

I also wanted to point out that things are different elsewhere in the world, but that does not mean they are right. Or, wrong. They could just be different. When I lived in France, I learned that it is rude to ask for the bill at a restaurant before you are done eating. In the USA, it is common to eat and run. It is not uncommon for research to vary by country, as well, particularly in the field of education.

In the US, we think of brain dysfunction as leaning disabilities, as a negative asset, that special education helps one overcome or accomodate for. We think of giftedness as a form of special education because the learning disabled occasionally also have a high IQ and because the profoundly gifted can at times exhibit learning behaviors that are very difficult to work with, as a teacher, and require them to be in specialized instruction. But, we do not think of giftedness as a brain dysfunction or learning disability.

So, please cite your references. But, be prepared for them to not be applicable to the way we identify and teach gifted children in the USA.

Perhaps this would be a good time to point out that we should be identifying our country of origin, since these things obviously vary by culture, etc.

LiamnEmma

08-06-2006, 11:33 PM

Boongirl, I'm confused that you'd be giving a student a nonverbal IQ test? Why would you do that? And I've seen lots of kids score very high on only one subsection of the CogAT but not others.

LadyMarmalade, the refered you initially give refers to an achievement test when it warns against labeling gifted based on that test, not a test of intelligence. The only thing I can imagine you then giving a child after a test of high intelligence is perhaps a test of personality to assist in determining drive and ambition, which would likely help you differentiate in terms of levels of giftedness but not in terms of answering whether or not a child is gifted. Intellectual giftedness refers to scoring two or more standard deviations above the mean on an acceptable test of intelligence. As such, a child who scores at 130 or more would then be considered intellectually gifted, whether or not s/he then becomes a scholar...

Nice link eilonwy. I've read Ruf's (she's referenced in that first link) Losing Our Minds book, I thought it was okay. I got a little tired of it toward the end.

boongirl

08-07-2006, 12:17 AM

Boongirl, I'm confused that you'd be giving a student a nonverbal IQ test? Why would you do that? IF a child does not speak english fluently, you can give them a nonverbal test. That way, language does not matter. In schools where I did testing, this was our only option for kids who did not speak English fluently.

And I've seen lots of kids score very high on only one subsection of the CogAT but not others.

This is not uncommon. I've seen it several times. Parents find it frustrating since these test scores do not usually qualify a child for gifted programming. This is a case where I would retest in a month or so, if the parent asked me. I wish gifted programming would be such to meet these kids needs. This is also a case where I, as the gifted teacher/advocate, would push to have the child tested for math/reading ability and try to find appropriate curriculum to meet that child's abilities. I've had kids working independently on a higher grade math, for example, or doing higher level reading. Not gifted programming, but higher level in the area where they are scoring high.

LiamnEmma

08-07-2006, 02:41 AM

IF a child does not speak english fluently, you can give them a nonverbal test.

I'm sorry, I was not clear. What I meant is that I'm confused about the qualifications needed to give and interpret an IQ test since I don't remember you ever saying anything about being a psychometrist or psychologist.

In my experience, it is possible to score high in one area only, but that is very, very rare. And I'm not sure how this goes with this
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiamnEmma
And I've seen lots of kids score very high on only one subsection of the CogAT but not others.

Originally Posted by boongirl
This is not uncommon. I've seen it several times. It seems contradictory to me.

eilonwy

08-07-2006, 07:03 AM

I totally agree with everything you said, but I want to add one more thing: while it's not possible for someone who scores very highly on an IQ test not to be gifted, it's possible for someone who scores higher than average not to be gifted. It's the lower end of the high scoring people who need further testing before being given the gifted label.

:scratch Just how are you defining the phrase "high scoring?" Of course there's a "higher then average but not gifted" range of scores; there's even a "high average" but I've never heard of anyone saying, that an IQ score of, say, 125 was "high," to say nothing of "gifted." :shrug

I'm also wondering if we're talking about the same tests. There are many achievement tests and tests of cognitive function which are often (seemingly) used interchangably with IQ tests, but the fact is that while there are often correlations with IQ, those tests are notoriously unreliable for detecting giftedness, particularly among profoundly gifted underachievers, minorities, and people for whom English is not the/a first language.

boongirl

08-07-2006, 11:24 AM

I'm sorry, I was not clear. What I meant is that I'm confused about the qualifications needed to give and interpret an IQ test since I don't remember you ever saying anything about being a psychometrist or psychologist.

And I'm not sure how this goes with this It seems contradictory to me.

I am not sure why it seem contradictory for me to say that it is rare to score high in only one area of the test and that I have seen in a few times. I've tested hundreds of kids. As for the nonverbal test, I did not score it. I gave it to them and sent it to the district office for scoring. For the life of me, I cannot recall the name of it. The gifted test I have experience scoring is the CogAt.

boongirl

08-07-2006, 11:27 AM

:scratch Just how are you defining the phrase "high scoring?" Of course there's a "higher then average but not gifted" range of scores; there's even a "high average" but I've never heard of anyone saying, that an IQ score of, say, 125 was "high," to say nothing of "gifted." :shrug

I'm also wondering if we're talking about the same tests. There are many achievement tests and tests of cognitive function which are often (seemingly) used interchangably with IQ tests, but the fact is that while there are often correlations with IQ, those tests are notoriously unreliable for detecting giftedness, particularly among profoundly gifted underachievers, minorities, and people for whom English is not the/a first language.

I have had kids in my classes who scored in the 97th percentile of the CogAt and did not seem as "gifted" as the kids who were scoring in the 98th and 99th percentiles. I would say that there is a possibility that the kids scoring in the 97th percentile can have higher than average intelligence but not be gifted. This is not a given, but it can happen. And this notion is so entirely subjective, up to the opinion of the viewer, that it would be futile to try to argue it. There is no general agreement on what being gifted means.

97th percentile on the CogAt would be roughly translated to an IQ of 130. There is a chart in the scoring packet you can use to compare score to IQ but I was taught to always say that it is a rough translation. It is not an IQ test, however, and you are correct about the unreliability. However, let's not get into that discussion again since there is already a thread for it.

LiamnEmma

08-07-2006, 03:35 PM

Boy, I must be about as clear as mud. These two statements from you are contradictory to me;

In response to a pp, you said, In my experience, it is possible to score high in one area only, but that is very, very rare. (bolding mine)

When I differed and said I'd seen it many times--the high scoring in one area only, you then said, This is not uncommon.

So it seems that you contradict yourself. You either think it's rare or you think it's not uncommon, but the two would seem to have different definitions. It's really silly, I suppose, for me to call you on it...

boongirl

08-07-2006, 04:15 PM

So it seems that you contradict yourself. You either think it's rare or you think it's not uncommon, but the two would seem to have different definitions. It's really silly, I suppose, for me to call you on it...

Okay, first of all the nature of chatting online is such that you sometimes write before you really think things through. So, forgive me for not being totally clear. I will try to explain my thinking on the topic more thoroughly.

In my experience, it has happened that a child will score high only in one area of the CogAt (the only test I have given). It can happen. It happens rarely. I should have written that it is not common. It is rare. I have only had it happen a few times and I have tested hundreds of kids.

Is that better? I am not sure what you meant by It's really silly, I suppose, for me to call you on it... but I hope this clarifies my thinking on the subject.

LadyMarmalade

08-08-2006, 05:25 AM

I would still like to hear more about what the further testing entails.
Seriously, I'm struggling to understand what you need to hear more about. Weschler himself said that anyone getting a score over 130 on an IQ tests needs further testing. Why is there such surprise at the fact that after an IQ test further investigation needs to be done if a score of over 130 is returned? Specialised assessment is done on every child returning a score over 130 - it makes sense since Weschler said his scales are not appropriate for anyone with an IQ over 130. Ignoring his caution seems really negligent. As I said before, IQ tests are meant to be used as a preliminary indicator to see whether someone may be gifted or not - they're not a diagnostic tool. It makes sense that for an official diagnosis to be made, some diagnosing needs to be done ;)

I have been a teacher of gifted kids for 10 years and I have never seen giftedness categorized as brain dysfunction. I would like to see the references.
I'm not just pulling stuff out of my arse, I've done 4 years worth of university study to get my degree, plus the years of work and research I went on to do at that university, plus a decade of teaching of gifted kids as well (not even counting parenting my gifted child) ... it's not a forgien concept, it's something which is spoken about all the time. I'm happy for you not to believe me, I really don't have time to get into it, sorry.

As being gifted is not a learning disability,
It is classified as a learning disability in some places. I don't necessarily agree with the 'disability' part but the wording has been rewritten in some areas to secure more funding for these kids.

boongirl

08-08-2006, 10:15 AM

Specialised assessment is done on every child returning a score over 130 - it makes sense since Weschler said his scales are not appropriate for anyone with an IQ over 130.

I'm not just pulling stuff out of my arse... it's not a forgien concept, it's something which is spoken about all the time. I'm happy for you not to believe me, I really don't have time to get into it, sorry.

It is classified as a learning disability in some places.

This must be specific to your country. In the USA, at least in my state, there is usually not money in the public schools to further test children beyond the grouped intelligence test. None of the children I have taught in 10 years have had any testing beyond the grouped intelligence test unless they were identified through private testing.

I am beginning to understand more and more that giftedness is defined and dealt with differently in your country of origin as opposed to the USA. In the USA, giftedness is not defined as a dysfunction or learning disability. I think we both need to accept the fact that things are different in your country. You obviously have expertise in the field that differs from mine, a fact that can be explained by our different nationalities.

LiamnEmma

08-08-2006, 11:15 AM

I can see what you're saying Lady Marmalade, but I'd say that Wechsler said that because he knew that his test was not meant to test the upper and lower limits of the intelligence continuum, and after the two standard deviations, it's not sensitive as some of the other tests are. So I'd say that he's not saying a child is not intellectually gifted, he's saying that his tests cannot differentiate amongst the levels of giftedness. As such, I'd say that a 130 on the WISC-IV still means intellectual giftedness, but perhaps does not give you an adequate portrait of the shade of giftedness.

kate~mom

08-08-2006, 11:23 AM

I'm sorry, I was not clear. What I meant is that I'm confused about the qualifications needed to give and interpret an IQ test since I don't remember you ever saying anything about being a psychometrist or psychologist.

jumping in here - in a number of districts i've worked in, the gifted ed teachers and/or guidance counselors have adminsitered the pre-screening measures. on the other hand, i'm finding it very intereesting that a district qualifies children based soley on the cogat! :dizzy:

boongirl

08-08-2006, 12:28 PM

jumping in here - in a number of districts i've worked in, the gifted ed teachers and/or guidance counselors have adminsitered the pre-screening measures. on the other hand, i'm finding it very intereesting that a district qualifies children based soley on the cogat! :dizzy:

I would agree with what I presuming you are stating, that there are better ways to identify gifted kids than one grouped intelligence test. But, it is also a cheap test to give. You only have to photocopy the score sheet and give the kids an original copy of the test itself and the teacher can score it. Once the district buys a few copies, there is no money to put into testing other than the teacher's time. While this is not ideal, with money woes in public schools today in the USA, it is a reality.

kate~mom

08-08-2006, 12:42 PM

I would agree with what I presuming you are stating, that there are better ways to identify gifted kids than one grouped intelligence test. But, it is also a cheap test to give. You only have to photocopy the score sheet and give the kids an original copy of the test itself and the teacher can score it. Once the district buys a few copies, there is no money to put into testing other than the teacher's time. While this is not ideal, with money woes in public schools today in the USA, it is a reality.

which is only perpetuating the under-identification of under-represented groups AND breaking copyright law. :shrug