Ahh, well, I guess I'm the big bummer here, because I've never been wild about Ruf's estimates. I find them to be too fuzzy in some places (example: the overlap in IQs in her five groups) and overly restrictive in others (the tooth fairy for example, and reading chapter books; I've heard people here report that their PG kids didn't start reading until five, but were on novels within a year). Honestly, and maybe it's just me, but I can never make head nor tail out of her groups. I think they're a good start...but incomplete.
I suspect that she was using more than IQ to define her groups, but I wish she'd been more explicit, had WAY more study subjects and had done some statistical analysis.
I've always thought it would be beneficial to adjust something like the Denver II Test for kids at either end of the bell curve. Denver II is the test that shows when, say, 25% and 50%, etc, of babies start banging blocks together, or talking or walking, or whatever. It would be extremely useful and interesting (to me anyway) to have something that tells you when 0.1%, 1%...98% and 99.9% of kids do something.
Eep!
Val
