Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment TalentIgniter (Dr. Ruf)

I know I'm late coming to this thread but I've read through the responses so far with great interest. About a year ago when I first came here, Ruf's book was the first thing recommended to me. I got it and it did help a lot. It was fun to hear about the other kids and it also was a little eye opening that maybe DH and myself weren't just "hard workers" as I also thought but possibly higher up on the gifted spectrum than we thought (after know more about giftedness and comparin test scores that I know I've had, at least, it seems to confirm this). So I'm thankful in that respect. It showed me that I needed to learn how to be more of a hard worker and that I was in fact coasting by a lot of the time.

As for how it relates to DD. I read it with a grain of salt, but then again I knew already that it was possible to have even large delays in your milestones and turn out gifted (because that's exactly what happened with DH). But I could definitely see how a parent who had a kid that for whatever reason was a slow starter could read that book and get the wrong impression. But then again, I doubt that parent would be as likely to pick up that book, you know?

So as for the online test... I guess, sure it has its flaws, which most of you have pointed out well already but I still think it could have some uses. We're not going to fork over the money ourselves, because, well, I'm cheap! But I could understand why somebody would do so. I'd rather pay for real testing when DD is a lot older and it's needed for school (if we go that route).

I also wanted to add....


That sounds EXACTLY like DH. When it comes to work related things his memory is great but for DD's milestones, watch out! I've heard him talk to other people and they are all over the place. I've actually kept records of them so I have a good idea of when she did everything but he can be anywhere from 1 month to half a year off! He certainly doesn't do it on purpose, because he'll go both directions with them, it's just that he doesn't worry to much about them.

If I had seen this and believed it when my child was a preschooler it would have been step one down a totally messed up and inaccurate path. I haven't done this test but I have read the book thoroughly. If she uses the same measures what I would have been told is that my kid was MG at most when in fact he's high level PG. This type of inaccurate tool may have led me to not have him individually evaluated or to believe that he needed something totally different educationally than he needed.

I think people with more experience are EXACTLY the ones who should feel free to speak out about this and discourage reliance on this sort of tool. If was posting about my four year old I may well have said "great tool, loved the reports, appreciated getting this information" because I might have had no idea the information I got was totally wrong.

Yes, that's exactly my problem with it.

Perhaps she needs to add to the list as possible explanations

1. LOG are just something I made up and have barely studied with a small fairly homogeneous sample of kids so they might not be at all accurate.

2. This tool is not accurate for kids with disabilities which is a big problem given the large percent of the gifted population that is 2E.

3. An online predictor tool that you pay $45 for is simply not as accurate as a complete educational assessment conducted by a trained individual who has actually met your kid using instruments that have been studied and used on thousands of people. Duh.

My child has had two totally independent comprehensive educational evaluations. They were not with testers who are known for high scores. (let's read between the lines and guess she's likely suggesting the GDC). Our child tested on different instruments more than a year apart and has subsequently been tested on out of level instruments like the SAT. His results have been absolutely consistent from one test to another and consistent with his extremely high level of acheivement.

As we had developmental concerns from the beginning of his life we have comprehensive notes on milestones. So, not one of Ruf's excuses for the inaccuracy of her levels applies. They simply do not work for our asynchronous kid. Perhaps that wouldn't be much of a problem if asynchrony wasn't widespread in the gifted population. I hate to think about parents seeking out this kind of tool and absolutely being led down the wrong path to understanding their child.

I'm not saying don't speak up. I'm saying don't judge it as if you were using it today, when you already know a lot of these things. Two very different issues. I think it's absolutely fair to criticize. But it's not fair to say that "of course it's a range," when a lot of newbies don't know that.

If you feel that it would have led you down a terrible path, that's important to say.

I can't speak for other parents but I can say that we were picking up any and every book we could find. Books about giftedness, autism, auditory processing, Einstein syndrome, sensory processing, etc. You name it. We knew there was *something* but really had no idea exactly what it was. Given the many posts I've seen from parents in similar situations here I think that is probably not too uncommon.

My biggest worry, frankly, is the 2E issue. That tends to be a glaring hole for pretty much all methods of IDing giftedness, however, to some extent. I'm not sure this is worse than any other. I'm also not saying it's better than any other.

More options are better than fewer. That is always my standard line because I think all kids are different and what works for one doesn't work for another. We need more choices.

To me this seems clearly worse than any other. With an individual assessment with someone interacting one on one with our child they were able to give us very clear interpretations not just of the data but also of their observations of the child's behavior during the exam. They can provide analysis of patterns in subsection scores and how those may have been influenced disabilities. This confirmed some of what we knew and gave us further directions for testing and treatment. We also got very honest feedback about what was perceived to be accurate and inaccurate in the testing. I can't imagine anything remotely like that coming from this site where she's telling you if something doesn't work it is that your memory is faulty or that you had a bad assessor.

I guess, I'm surprised by this. This is completely anecdotal but I do have some friends whose kids had delays... none of them went in the direction of giftedness (at least that I know of). I'm curious... what made you think to pick up books on giftedness/Einstein syndrome? Was there giftedness in your family or where there some signs that might have been but weren't something as obvious as what Ruf discusses (stuff like early talking/reading etc.)? I guess, if DD had had delays in the beginning it's not something I would've thought of (then again, I knew very little about giftedness before having DD).

Oh, I'm probably only on step 2 or 3. But I'm not saying that it's silly to explain that an IQ score represents a range. I'm saying that it's silly to claim that a range is better than an IQ score. I don't think this is shorthand for beginners who might otherwise have trouble understanding; I think it is intentionally inaccurate and meant to deceive.



I wonder if making that statement would have an impact on her bottom line?

This might cheer you up, PTP: Perhaps because her program doesn't have much more information than her list of milestones did, it seems she's removed the list from her website. Perhaps that'll make her schema less prevalent rather than more. I'll also note that an online "test" for $45 that will tell me how smart my kid is sets of my b*llsh*t alarm big time. This isn't the only one out there, and it's probably not less accurate than most (not that I've beta tested any of the others).

Did your friends kids turn out to be gifted?

Yes, I'm sure some of our suspicion was due to family history. However, I suspect we also sought out information because there was an odd and confusing mix of behaviors. It was hard to know - are these sort of tricky savant behaviors or signs of something more indicating giftedness? If I read the first book I found on the subject didn't bother to discuss 2E kids or presented a list of milestones like in Ruf's book I might have been more inclined to dismiss it.

It has been a while since I read it, so correct me if I wrong, but it was not my recollection of Ruf's book that she says that one specific ability in a sea of developmental delays would still place a child at a high level of giftedness.