Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Learning needs of those in different IQ ranges...

I get that the typical school system caters to the 80-120 IQ range. And could possibly cater to up to the 130 IQ range...

What, in your experience, would be the difference between IQ 130, versus IQ 145, versus IQ 160?

(Of course, there is also the difference between the auditory-sequencial learners and the visual learners. And there is also LD.)

So, if possible to keep it simple, just the regular gifted kids ... how much differentiation would be needed and how different would the teaching be to cater to those in the 130, 145, or 160 ranges?



I suppose I'm asking too about how/what would a school do to differentiate, if they could?

What about gifted schools? How do they manage the different levels of giftedness?

I completely agree. There are WAAAAAY too many factors to break it down to "Kids with this IQ need this adaptation."

I think IQ is one factor, and it can be very important. But it is only one factor among many, and just how important a factor it is varies from child to child.

And to add to the complication, no classroom or teacher is the same as any other. What would be standard practice in one place is high-level differentiation in another. Too much variation to generalize!

No answers here either, I'm afraid.

I suppose I'm asking too about how/what would a school do to differentiate, if they could?

What about gifted schools? How do they manage the different levels of giftedness?

Last year I attended a free lecture by a psychologist sponsored by UCI. Here is what is in his slides:

Those with IQ's between 115 and 130 or so may need additional accommodations /differentiation in order to stay challenged and engaged in learning.

Examples:
�Within Class Cluster Grouping/Ability Grouping
�Introduction of different levels of depth & complexity within content area/whole group instruction
�See Teaching Gifted Kids in the Regular Classroom �Winebrenner and Espeland
�Some opportunity for Independent Study/Project based instruction/cooperative groups
�Some opportunity for self directed learning (eg: choice within literature circles)
�Outside enrichment in areas of need/interest

Those with IQ's between 130 and 138/145 or so usually need �or benefit from -special programming and/or more intense differentiation/accommodation in order to stay challenged and engage.

Examples (in addition to or in place of previous):
�Between class/grade cluster grouping/ability grouping
�Multi age/combo classes
�Frequent use of higher levels of depth and complexity within content area/whole group instruction
�see Teaching Gifted Kids in the Regular Classroom
�More opportunity for Independent Study/Project based instruction/cooperative groups
�Replacement curriculum
�More opportunity for self directed learning (eg: choice within literature circles)
�Outside enrichment in areas of need/interest
�Outside GATE programming / distance learning to explore areas of interest and access higher level curriculum as needed (eg: Stanford EPGY; John Hopkins CTY)
�Summer Programming (eg: UCI GSA; SIG)

Those with IQ's of 145 (less than one out of 1000) or above almost always need �or benefit from -special programming and/or more intense differentiation /accommodation in order to stay challenged and engaged in learning. These kids
may be good candidates for more unusual or �radical� strategies.

Examples (in addition to or in place of previous):
�More than one year grade skip
�see accelerationinstitute.org/Nation_Deceivedfor research
�Other forms of acceleration �AP classes in high school
�Dual enrollment
�Davidson Young Scholars
�Special Schools (Public Magnet or Private)
�Home Schooling with participation in outside gifted ed programming (eg: Stanford EPGY; John Hopkins CTY; Davidson YS)
�Online Charter School Enrollment (eg: CAVA) with participation in outside gifted ed programming (eg: Stanford EPGY; John Hopkins CTY; Davidson YS)
�Early entrance (eg: CSLA EEP)

I hope this helps you, because I had the same question a year ago and his lecture had help me to understand ds's need.

I'll just agree with the others here . I don't think that one can universally say that all kids with IQs in the 145 range need something different or more than kids in the 130 range. There are a lot of other factors in play as well.

We have one probably HG kid who tested at the upper end of MG when she was younger. Many kids in her IQ range (somewhere in the 130s presumably) might do just fine in a GT pull out class or with AP classes. She has done well with starting school as one of the youngest, skipping a grade, and being in advanced classes. It may just be a combo of motivation, unusual direction, and other things in her instance that caused her to need or want more than the typical MG/HG kid or maybe her IQ is higher than we know.

I want to pick this up, not to pick on you G3 but because it's often suggested as a thing schools could do, but seems to me counterproductive (after about the first couple of years, at least). Why? Because it means you can't have those subjects being taught by subject-specialists, and I think that's *crucial*, at least for maths which is what I know most about.

Many primary/elementary school teachers are very uncomfortable with maths beyond the basics. (I don't know how it is in the US, but IIRR, here they have to have at least a grade C at the qualification normally taken by 16yos, and as part of their training they have to pass a "numeracy" test, but they can take it as many times as they need to, and many do need to retake. For comparison, that C is in the same qualification where Arran Fernandez, aged 5, got a grade D a few years back - and TBH it's clear that the reason more kids don't do this is the need to be able to sit 1.5-2hr exams, not the need to absorb the concepts. One could argue about exactly what a grade C at GCSE shows, but I certainly contend that you do not want your HG+ mathematically inclined child taught maths by someone who has only that level of mastery of maths.)

It seems to me that it's really important to have children taught by people with a deep understanding of and love for the subject in question, as soon as possible. DS's school moves to all specialist teaching by age 8, I think. But obviously, that means they can't timetable all the maths lessons together, because there aren't enough maths specialists.

Why isn't this point obvious to everyone who suggests this solution? Is it that people don't agree that teaching by subject specialists is important, that it doesn't happen in US schools, that there's something I'm missing...?

I think the break down of IQ and educational reccomendations are only a starting point. There are so many factors to consider. But this information is so valuable becuase it is so hard to explain to a school your 140 IQ child can do so much more than a 115 child if given the chance.

If a child has a IQ score of 140. and the GAI is 146. What does this mean? I do understand the processing speed is dropped out.

Much of what I read about gifted refers to 145IQ as score to make particular reccomendations. I would like to show these references to the school as starting point. But how do I address the 5 points.

I would also say to them these are to get us started, it's not about the numbers it's about appropriate education.

This Testing thing has been a bit confusing. It seem all so important to have kids tested. But after the test...what does it do for the child. I think it is just suppose to get the schools attention but then they really don't get it.

Have you applied to DYS for him? Maybe they can do the explaining for you & it might hold more weight coming from someone other than the parent, unfortunately. We've had terribly obtuse GT coordinators at times & wonderful ones at others. The less helpful or less knowledgable ones seemed to be more interested in hearing from people other than me such as school GT teachers, psychs, etc.

When dd#1 was being evaluated to skip a grade (at the school's recommendation), the GT coordinator for the district looked over the breakdown of her IQ scores and stated that dd wasn't really gifted b/c she was really only gifted in one area (the one part of the PRI index where she got a 19+/99.9 percentile). Apparently, all of the subtests other than PSI being in the upper 90s, the total score being at the 98th, and the various other 98th and 99th percentile scores w/in subtests didn't register as gifted with her.

[quote=ColinsMum]
I want to pick this up, not to pick on you G3 but because it's often suggested as a thing schools could do, but seems to me counterproductive (after about the first couple of years, at least). Why? Because it means you can't have those subjects being taught by subject-specialists, and I think that's *crucial*, at least for maths which is what I know most about. [/quote=ColinsMum]

Actually, depending on the size of the school, you could easily do this and use specific subject credentialed teachers instead- creating a better depth of knowledge and comfort level. It would take some chunking of the schedule and you'd need to be very careful in screening teachers. But it could be done!

For example, I hold a single subject credential in Social Studies, Spanish and Russian. So I can teach any of those subjects but I can't teach an elementary "self-contained" class. I have friends that have dual credentials in Biology and Math, Chemistry and Math, Language Arts/English and Social Studies etc. In fact, just due to economic reasons, most of the teachers I know hold more than one teaching authorization.

The difference is you have to remove the framework that requires you to hire teachers with a multiple subject "self-contained" credential.