|
|
|
0 members (),
220
guests, and
11
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,167
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,167 |
I think that most PG kids stand out like a sore thumb although there are a few quiet exceptions. At 18 months it was obvious to everyone that our son wasn't within normal ranges.
Kids in the MG and HG ranges are not quite so easy to identify. It has to be taken on a case by case, or kid by kid basis. At 3, I would just relax and enjoy, there is lots of time to stress later!
Shari
Mom to DS 10, DS 11, DS 13
Ability doesn't make us, Choices do!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 383
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 383 |
The test was the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. It is not in any way meant to test for giftedness. It was given as a part of a research study, and the tester gave the results in a year/month format. I was simply curious to know if there was an understood typical versus possibly gifted range for such a test. This correlation may not have been done though, because again, it wasn't meant to test for giftedness, for obvious reasons. My little guy 2yr 10mo just had a similar test as part of his follow-up with the speech language pathologist. He was a late talker and said very little until February of this year (maybe 10-15 words?). Towards the end of the receptive language part of the test, the SLP was flipping through pages two and three at a time trying to find where it got 'too hard'. She gave up somewhere after 4 years. I would have liked to know where he did cap, just for curiosity's sake. His older sister is HG+/PG and 2e. I can't comment on how this vocab test correlates with IQ. I do remember DD having a similar test at 3.5 (also a late talker... very late!), but I do not recall what the results were. It could not have been too outstanding, though, or I would have remembered.
Tomorrow is always fresh, with no mistakes in it. — L.M. Montgomery
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,432
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,432 |
Interesting question. I would think that the number of years ahead would vary depending on age. Obviously, vocabulary is one and only one measue of verbal intelligence. However, as vocabulary is one of the subtest on the WISC IV, it should be simple to use a raw score/scaled score conversion chart/software to figure out 50 percentile for which age corresponds to 98 percentile for a given age.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 741
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 741 |
The test was the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. It is not in any way meant to test for giftedness. It was given as a part of a research study, and the tester gave the results in a year/month format. They could just as easily have given you a percentile score, or a "same scale as a full-blown IQ test" score. I don't have a conversion chart, but I've administered the PPVT for psych research studies, and the scoring conversion was part of the post-administration process.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,207
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,207 |
I have heard that there is a strong correlation between a teacher's verbal ability and their strength as a teacher - There is extensive research supporting higher admission standards, including 1)research spanning six decades showing a strong correlation of teacher "verbal ability"2 and student achievement (verbal ability being generally measured by the verbal SAT, ACT or other vocabulary tests) (sorry I don't have a link to the actual research itself) So no, we 'can't say' that high vocabulary means gifted in children, but we do know it makes a big difference in teachers. We can't say because who would fund a study of looking at 3 year old's vocabulary to predict future IQ score? ((shrugs)) Grinity
Coaching available, at SchoolSuccessSolutions.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
