Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 591 guests, and 14 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    streble, DeliciousPizza, prominentdigitiz, parentologyco, Smartlady60
    11,413 Registered Users
    March
    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
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 46
    K
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    K
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 46
    SS

    Last edited by Klangedin; 05/19/23 08:19 AM.
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    Good to hear from you again!

    It's generally best not to overinterpret subtest differences... but if one were to look at the nature of the verbal tasks you've named, the main difference between Si and In/Co is that Si consists of minimal receptive language demands (two words), while In & Co both have more language comprehension requirements, as the stimuli consist of complete sentences. Consequently, it's easier not to get lost in the weeds with Si, and individuals with any kind of vulnerability in auditory attention or receptive language processing have the possibility of differences here.

    Si and Co have in common that both have significant verbal reasoning dimensions to them, but Co is more social reasoning, which was more likely to be one of the skills impacted in your case, at the specific time you were assessed.

    In is more affected by academic language, and thus by access to instruction and complex text. Again, disruption in access for any reason, including transient or intermittent emotional conditions, can affect performance.

    So based on the nature of the tasks and on your particular history, one might speculate that some functional implications with regard to language might be,

    1) higher abstract reasoning than socially-contextualized reasoning, which would look like being better with ideas than with practical applications of language.

    2) stronger verbal expression than verbal comprehension, which would look like more effective expression of one's own ideas than comprehension of other people's communications.

    Takeaways for the real world: it might make for more effective mutual communication to make a point of paying careful attention to the verbal expressions of others, and to use one's expressive relative strengths to ask short clarifying questions, or to reflect one's understanding of what they have said in concise restatements (e.g., "so what I hear you saying is...," "if I understand correctly..."). These practices generally help one to check for accurate comprehension in real time, rather than walking away with an inadvertant misconception. It can also help with perspective-taking and the social comprehension aspect, since it gives the conversational partner additional opportunities to add emotional nuance or illustrative details.

    Also, keep in mind that most people use their verbal (or other) cognition very much in a social-emotional context, so that a conversation that feels to one like an emotionally-neutral intellectual discussion about academically-interesting ideas, may be experienced by the other as a heated argument about personal values. So it would be important to be responsive to the emotional expressions of one's conversational partner, and be prepared to back off of winning intellectual points at the expense of social-emotional costs. ("We can talk about this later, at a better time for both of us." "Let's agree to disagree.") Or work on focusing on points of consensus.

    Note that we are speaking here only of relative strengths, since none of the scores you listed are remotely weak. And, again, one should be cautious about overinterpreting subtest scores, since their reliability is not as strong as that of index-level scores.


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Oct 2014
    Posts: 675
    P
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    P
    Joined: Oct 2014
    Posts: 675
    Wow aeh - even by your usual standards, this is a stunningly helpful understanding both of some potential real-world expression of these differences, but also of practical ways of living more happily with them. Thank you!

    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,047
    Always happy if anything I say is helpful to someone!


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 46
    K
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    K
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 46
    SS

    Last edited by Klangedin; 05/19/23 08:19 AM.

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    California Tries to Close the Gap in Math
    by thx1138 - 03/22/24 03:43 AM
    Gifted kids in Illinois. Recommendations?
    by indigo - 03/20/24 05:41 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5