Oh, I will also add that it never pays to assume that everyone is using the same definition of PG. Ruf's scale, the various IQ tests, and DYS requirements do not line up neatly. Personally, I like the Davidson definition of "beyond the capacity of the current testing instruments to measure accurately" because a kid who fits that bill is almost certainly in need of some sort of special educational attention, but that isn't unanimously accepted as a definition. There are certainly level 4s and even some level 3s in DYS, not just level 5s. <shrug> The kids need help, so I personally don't see a problem with that.
A friend was just telling me that a tester who is experienced with testing HG+ kids recently told her that her child isn't PG because she doesn't have a 180 IQ. The WISC only goes to 160-ish, even with extended scoring! A different tester is sure the child is PG. Clearly Tester #1 has a more restrictive definition of PG than Tester #2.
Who's right? It depends entirely on how one defines the term PG. That the gifted/testing community(s) aren't all together on this issue only adds to the confusion.
