Good points. I don't know if the apparent problem is lack of sufficient data, gross over-generalization, or what. The Ruf levels don't seem to account for different flavors of 2E, delayed verbal development of some exceptionally math-talented children, etc. The Ruf levels (in the overviews I have read) seem to potentially have conflicting criteria, as well as to place extreme emphasis on early precociousness (which I think is certainly quite telling but just as certainly not the whole picture in predicting maximum potential in any area).
I also read some comments elsewhere on the web questioning the accuracy of the Ruf levels on various grounds, which whether true or not, made me feel in the end that I just wasn't interested enough to pay to read her book. But maybe I am grossly oversimplifying myself-- I know of the Ruf levels only from browsing websites.
I did notice that the Ruf website says that parents can get the main thrust of the Ruf classification from her book, so if I were interested, I would probably buy that instead of subscribing to the website. I am a book person, though.
Last edited by Iucounu; 07/23/10 07:23 AM.
