Those are still higher criteria than you see for most schools.
What criteria do you see for most schools?
I'm a big proponent of looking at the quality of all of the data
What is meant by the quality of the data?
... earning gifted IQ scores ...
Some would say that IQ is a measurement, much like height... not something one earns?
... achievement scores. She'd be in my program!
The criteria for that program is 92nd percentile, whereas her district is 98th percentile?
I think a program that fails to look at all of the data (including the quality of the data and very high scores, not just use a cut score formula), is going to miss some gifted kids that need the program.
Some may say it depends upon what "the program" consists of?
You raise a good point, blackcat - what about children who lack any environmental advantages (and perhaps many environmental DISADVANTAGES)?
Several posters have addressed the inquisitive mind which is characteristic of gifted children... the questions which they ponder, the curiosity they tend to possess... do not tend to go unnoticed.
They might be missed entirely. It would certainly be much more difficult for a child not living in an enriched environment to attain those achievement scores.
The curiosity-driven child may tend to out-perform expectations, possibly annoying more advantaged families along the way. In recent conversations many have said they were not looking for labels but rather the appropriate challenge-level educational experiences; Some have called this the least-worst fit. In considering changes to educational approaches, please consider a system in which each child may be placed at the best (or least-worst) curriculum level for each individual subject... working with intellectual peers of similar readiness and ability, rather than seeking labels or hoping some may be impressed with IQ scores as though labels or scores are a judgment of one's intrinsic worth or value.
