Unfortunately, I've seen a trend here to extend subtest results or GAIs or FSIQs to what could be called the whole child. My child is PG! IMO, this isn't a good idea.
I agree with this.
I also agree with this:
I do care, because making a claim about being "PG" when it isn't true can lead to all kinds of problems. For example, if people are fabricating giftedness, their posts can't be trusted. Yet we can't know who's making it up, and so parents here may be believing advice based on experiences that never happened. This could tend to harm their children rather than help them.
Also, if a false claim of giftedness is made in real life, it can make teachers cynical when an actual HG+ kid comes along. How many of us have had to convince teachers that our kids really are gifted in the face of a belief that parents make it up? That belief isn't formed in a vacuum.
...
(And if anyone here is fabricating giftedness, please stop that.)
and this:
As a scientist, I've learned to be careful about calling something y until some kind of test confirms y. As an example in medicine, there is often much evidence to suggest condition y in a person who turns out to have condition x upon testing. Suggest is not confirm.
One can't confirm everything with a test, but in the case of IQ, it's possible.
There's also confirmation bias (a tendency to seek or interpret information so as to confirm a belief while ignoring evidence to the contrary). So that's a problem and leads us back to the need for an objective measure (e.g. an IQ test administered by a competent professional who doesn't know the child and has no stake in the score).
