I would be curious to hear everyone's reaction to this part of the FAQ:
"Sometimes the Ruf Estimates indicate a lower result than previous testing indicated. There are three possible explanations for this:
* The parent couldn�t fill in enough of the questions on the Ruf Estimates form to make it possible to estimate the child�s relative intelligence, strengths and weaknesses. Remember, it is important to have good records or a reasonably good memory of your child�s early interests, behaviors and milestones in order to make the Ruf Estimates effective for you.
* On very rare occasion an assessment professional will score children too high. In my experience, you will find a surprising number of parents who report exceptionally high scores for their children and it will trace back to a particular assessment professional. This is very rare but it does occasionally occur.
* Most test companies, such as Riverside Publishing and Counseling Psychology Press, recommend waiting at least six months between testing sessions for the same child so as to rule out "practice effects." Very bright children should wait at least one year, however, because their memories are so good. Finally, some gifted children remember too much even when more than a year has passed, and the resulting higher score will not indicate a more valid assessment for that child."
Wow!! That is REALLY interesting, essentially she is saying that her computerized assessment is more precise than a tester who actually saw and interacted with the child one on one.
Yes, certainly some testers test higher than others, but I don't think that would account for most of the discrepancies. As PP have said, there are some kids that fit the Ruf mold very well and others that do not. I know many gifted children who were early in physical milestones and many that were not.
I am pretty sure that the assessment would not provide me with a close estimate of where my DYS is. While she is certainly not PG (other than by the DITD definition) she is HG+. Her current achievement levels (both formally tested and simply observed by the type of things she is doing, would not be predicted by the LOG she would probably get from the assessment. She misses many of the level 4 marks from her lists in the parts of earlier development, but checks most from when she was 5. The things that stood out with her were items that are not found in Ruf's list like imagination, pretend play, problem solving, etc.
