Maybe I'm learning something here, but is it a general practice to lump art and athletics in with the term gifted? Gifted for this board is above intelligence with ranges from MG to PG. I always have considered this separate from the topic of artistic and/or athletic abilities. I guess I'm saying it is apples and oranges.

Most official definitions (ie. at the state level) that I've seen acknowledge artistic, athletic, and leadership domains as well. The programming in our district is different for artistic than for academic areas. Athletic is generally handled pretty well by teams and sports! I don't think there is anything specific done for leadership, at least until high school

Usually I've seen it the other way around, MON, as in that a child should get accommodation in the relevant areas. If everything is a relevant area then they get everything.

I have a boy is very gifted in math, but bit advanced in reading, and even bit delay in speaking

He was struggle learning to speak, did not speak well until he was 3.

He started reading at 3, but only read like year 2 now(will turn 5 end of the year)

But his math skill is in top range, he is learning grade 5 or 6 math concept

He hate drawing, but his music ability amazed his teachers all the time.

Dottie you remind me of an article that I read either here or on Hoagies (or possibly in Ruf) about your son but not of yours students, which said that highly gifted verbal were usually gifted across the board but that math giftedness did not necessarily correlate with verbal giftedness. But I think it referenced PG not MG. I should go find the article, I remember reading it initially because my 4.5 yr old is strongly verbally gifted with a prefernced for science but was showing no interest in math and we never saw the spontaneous evidence of math skills or math interest, like the people here talking about needing to count and categorize everything. But I was finding it so odd that he could be super interested in science with no interest in math. Now I think it was like when he hardly talked while learning to walk - he literally could not focus on 2 developmental stages at once!

DeHe

Cool. I like to read the artical

Many verbal kids catch up with math later on once they get interested in it.

This is the crux of the issue for me. Most schools define "gifted" as high achievement coupled with something else (behavioral characteristics, teacher recommendation, a high-ish score on any one part of a group ability test -- which isn't an IQ test). There are certainly bright kids who achieve highly in one area but not another. Those children might be called gifted by schools, but they aren't gifted in the same sense that we're likely defining it here.

I think it's obvious that one can be prodigiously extremely gifted in a certain area and non-gifted in another. Different centers of the brain perform different functions, and we have examples of people prodigiously gifted in only certain areas. To say that the prodigiously gifted only express their talents in certain areas due to interests is to assume the answer to what we are trying to assess here, based apparently on guesswork.

ETA: Mmm, I guess by a DYS standard of PG or HG+ that is true: you can't have a weakness in any area. I think that is not really what the OP is asking, though. In a general sense I certainly think that one can be profoundly gifted in a certain area. A proper answer to the OP's question requires a broader perspective than that of a parent of a DYS acceptee.

For the record, I also find the notion that great artists are not highly intelligent to be absurd. I certainly think that one can be an artistic genius, and prodigiously artistically gifted. Can one's prodigious artistic talent be scored by the sorts of tests needed to become a DYS scholar? Probably not.

Katelyn's mom I agree with you that those identified as HG + would generally be globally gifted. To get the sort of test numbers you need to be to be identified in the HG+ category you'd need to do extremely well in most categories tested perhaps allowing for one weak area which from what I've read tends to be processing speed for HG+.

I'm guessing the MG are far more likely to have an area of particular strength backed up by being perhaps a bit above average across the board. Dottie or Aimie may be able to provide evidence one way or the other on this one.

Given statistically there must be far more MG than HG+ it makes sense that a school might argue that gifted kids excel in one or two areas because that is what they see most often. I certainly wasn't aware of the levels of giftedness until confronted with my DS's test results and the reading I needed to understand them, which thankfully included finding this board!

Dottie's approach seems perfect because it doesn't get the school offside but allows you to make the case that your child is different because they are globally gifted.

DeHe I would also love to see the article you mention. I'd say my DS is very verbal but not overtly mathy yet he loves science particularly engineering. As Mathboy suggests we've just started pointing out to him the importance of maths to the things he wants to build. Not sure using his dad's first year university engineering text was the way to do that but he seemed to be right into it!

Was this the article?

http://carrefoursagesse.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/the-cognitive-profile-of-the-precocious-student/

You're welcome...now about that blind squirrel...