So we just got the letter that DD9 (4th) is eligible for the Duke Talent Search and to take EXPLORE. We are satisified(...ish) with her current school situation and have no plans to advocate for anything different. We do not want to after-school her because she is buried in homework, though we'd consider a summer class, perhaps. We also have a decent roadmap for middle school and high school. We do suspect that her IQ test was a bit mussy (it was the RIAS and she was six and refused to guess), but it got her in and that was close enough for government work, as they say.

Do we want to pay for this? Should she take this test? I admit to curiosity, but is that enough? Is there another reason that it's worth it at this age? It might be interesting to know if she is a killer achievement test-taker like her father. We have VERY little data on that--this is the first standardized test I have ever gotten data on for her. An award ceremony is of no interest to anyone here, though. DD read the letter but was very blase about it.

We signed ds11 up last year when he was in 5th grade. We did it for one reason: it gave him experience with a test for which he wasn't expected to know most of the answers, which was helpful to get him used to letting go of the idea of perfection--he could do poorly on it and it wouldn't be "his fault" but simply a test that was so far above him. Of course, after we received the results we realized we had underestimated him--by a lot--which led to him getting an IQ test done by the school. Which led to...
It's a good tool, if you need it, at a reasonable price and I've read somewhere that as children age, these above level tests become more of an accurate gauge of ability than IQ tests.
You could wait a year or two and see if your dd's situation changes...

Like KADmom, we signed our older DDs up when they were in 4th grade, but didn't test until 5th. We tested again in 6th. We will do the same thing with DD9. Both of our older DDs liked having the exposure to the test and we were able to see growth for both of them from the 1st year to the second.

Our former district used the Explore test for 8th graders, and I feel the early exposure played a huge part in my oldest DD having the top scores at her school. And, because the Explore format is so similar to the ACT, it helped her to feel comfortable with the ACT when she took it.

With our middle DD, we moved districts this year and honestly, her Explore scores played a big part in showing her need for math acceleration.

Let your DD take it. It is cheap, useful, and of good quality (as mini-ACT), though you might have to travel. I support all the reasons given upthread. (Oh - and DYS accepts it as an achievement test.)

My DD9 took it last year as a 4th grader. And EXPLORE score was used for DYS admission.

My DD is a good test taker. She plans to take it again next year and SAT in 7th grade.

For under $50 (Duke fee + EXPLORE testing), this is the cheapest way to see where our kids are.

We doubt very much that DD is DYS material, though I guess we could be wrong. I think her initial IQ test came out a little low, but I don't think by a whole lot. What she does have, and this is clear, is a very good working memory, which gives her a great advantage at school. She's also very well-rounded, which is nice.

I looked at the sample questions and I actually think DD will NOT do very well on the math, mainly because she has not been exposed to any math beyond a 5th grade level and is likely not to try very hard. (I know her. She'll just go "Agh--I don't know this!" and not attempt, when it comes to math--although she is a good guesser.) However, she is really good at grammar and writing, and will probably do very well on the English section. I also think she would do well on the Science section--that is really a strength for her. I keep telling her so, and she seems to not believe me. So, maybe it would build up her confidence a bit. But as I say, it is quite unlikely to do anything for us in terms of school options/choices. Which is okay--she's doing okay, and any other advocacy we would do would really be pushing way outside the box (keeping in mind that she is in a full-day GT magnet).

I don't know how excited she really would be about taking this, either!

What about the other benefits of TIP? Anything worth writing home about?

Ds11 took French through their discounted Rosetta Stone. I'm not sure how much he retained because it's been a year and we didn't do it again, but still, it's a great opportunity. There are other opportunities which are free, but unfortunately, ds had too much homework last year to add anything else to his plate.

I would never have guessed dd12 would have done as well as she did. It gave us the push to really consider meeting her needs better and ultimately led to a very successful skip. If not for the Explore scores I think we would have just plodded along.

Yes. Yes. Yes. So true for us, as well. I realized ds was gifted but not how much. And if not for the Explore results, I wouldn't have been on the computer frantically trying to figure out what it meant and subsequently found this forum.

I think you'll be surprised. If nothing else, it's good experience. DS wasn't taught much of the math either, but he did fine.

Thanks for the reminder here - When I looked this up a year ago Duke TIPS seemed so far off as DD was in grade 2 and it didn't start until grade 4. Now that she skipped she can do this - cool!

If I read things correctly if she has qualifying WISC results from a test administered < 2 years ago she is eligible, right? Or did I miss something? I really don't want to make DD a performing seal and have her take more tests if I can help it but the TIPS program does appear to have some interesting stuff....

madeinuk--"Mental-ability tests must be no more than two years old." WISC GAI qualifying is 125. Registration opens 10/1 for 4th graders.

Rosetta Stone might be fun for her little brother, who is more in need of enrichment and afterschooling than she is. I forgot to think about him.

DD10 (grade 6) took EXPLORE last year as a fifth grader through NUMATS. I wanted her tested because Ohio Achievement Assessments are useless, and tracking in math starts in 6th grade in our district. I wanted her properly placed in math, and I didn't think the school would have recognized her ability without the EXPLORE scores. Because of her scores, she was identified as gifted in math, science, reading, and superior cognitive (Ohio has cutoff scores for gifted identification based on EXPLORE, SAT, or ACT scores). This year DD's in 7th grade advanced math and the 6th grade gifted cluster in language arts. This wouldn't have happened if I didn't have those scores to advocate for her.

You may want to consider having your DD take EXPLORE since her IQ results were "a bit mussy," but since you don't feel the need to advocate now, you can wait a year or two to have her participate just to see if you want to make any adjustments to her roadmap.

Or DD may benefit from taking the EXPLORE now while everything is going well. Taking the test once an educational opportunity (or need to advocate) arises, may add pressure.

If I understand correctly taking the EXPLORE through an academic talent search makes the scores available to both the family and the school. Has your school and/or district well-informed you of its future uses of the EXPLORE scores? This could be key to your DD's decision to take the EXPLORE. For example, in some districts the scores may be used to include your family in announcements about opportunities for which DD qualifies. Conversely, not taking the test may prevent your family from being notified or invited to join a possible future educational opportunity for which a qualifying score may be required. It is sad to learn of opportunities once they are in your rear view mirror.

No, so I suppose that's an interesting question.

DD is on track to attend (public) middle and high schools with competitive entry requirements. At this point, I see no reason why she would not be admitted other than a slight paucity of extracurriculars, but I guess the scores wouldn't hurt to have in our back pocket. However, I can't imagine 4th grade scores will matter to anyone for high school and she would have to really crash and burn next year to flub admission to middle school (she has never received any grade other than an A in any subject).

It's quite possible DD will not do all that well on the Explore. She did ceiling that qualifying test (it would in fact appear that she did not miss a single question) but it is an easy test.

we are having a similar debate about whether to have DS do the CTY test so he can do the programs - we did a sample science one and he said he learned a lot but he doesn't really like learning without a person - even considers the static nature of videos better because its a human being talking. But I think we still will have him take the test, but since he isn't super interested, we aren't really rushing.

DeHe

I'm going to the meeting tonight about our WATS -- Western Academic Talent Search, which is what we have here. I'm not sure it would really be useful for us, unless they have some good programs. They tout it for the SAT/ACT testing, but from what I've seen on those sites we don't need to be signed up with them anyway -- you can sign up to take the SAT/ACT at a young age and it doesn't go to schools in the future anyway, unless you want it to. At least, that's how I understand it. I'm hoping there are some good programs with WATS.

is there a way to estimate a score from giving her the sample questions?

On the other hand, in some schools/districts this would be a huge flashing light signaling a problem. If limited by finances or logistics such as severe illness of an immediate family member, there is a smaller but still meaningful number of extracurriculars in which a child might engage. Lacking that, there may be a presumption (right or wrong) that the child cannot handle extracurriculars while keeping up with her studies... which would be a huge problem if it is occurring in 4th grade.

EXPLORE is an 8th/9th grade test, so in some schools/districts it may receive more than a passing glance for entrance to high school... even if retaken during the intervening years. As others have said, it is a great experience for a child to take an out-of-level test on which they are not expected to know all the answers. EXPLORE may be a more difficult test to "game" as you say, therefore some may see it as highly credible.

Sounds like performance anxiety of the parental kind. Meanwhile many gifted kids approach these tests with their intrinsic curiosity egging them on, like an itch that simply MUST be scratched: they want to learn what kids in the 8th/9th grade are asked about knowing!

I've seen the middle school application--there is one line for extracurriculars. She will only be entering 6th grade! Lordy. I'm not too concerned. She is in a few clubs at school, etc.

I guess my point about her not doing too well was that I didn't want her to take it and feel discouraged or alienated.

Regarding gaming, others on this board have said that they have their children prepare for EXPLORE (this is not something we would do). In fact it seems pretty easy to game, if one wanted to.

Exactly. Two different but interrelated thoughts on this:
1) This is why some parents encourage taking an out-of-level test on which it is not expected the student will know all the answers, and doing so early on in one's schooling: growth mindset.
2) The concept of fixed mindset vs growth mindset is nicely summarized in these youtube videos:
Ashley Merryman & Po Bronson: The Myth of Praise (link- ) and
Teaching a Growth Mindset (link- ) by Carol Dweck whose research was mentioned in the Bronson video clip. These links provide quick summaries, their books contain more info. One aspect or application of a fixed mindset is that gifted kids, in order to be seen as "right" or "smart", may stop taking appropriate risks, possibly shunning a challenge and preferring easy work which may represent a level of underachievement. A fixed mindset may work against them and be exhibited as a lack of resilience.

It is my understanding (and I may be wrong) that both ACT and CB issue past versions of their various achievement tests for purposes of prep. An achievement test is different than an IQ test. Legitimate prep for an achievement test is not considering "gaming" the test and does not invalidate the results. Having someone else sit for the test, using electronic devices to look up answers, or other forms of cheating would be considered "gaming" the achievement test.

ACT Explore Test info here ~ http://www.act.org/explorestudent/

Hmm. I guess I don't really think this is an appropriate achievement test to prep for. Isn't the point simply to see what your child is capable of at this moment w/o prepping? The stakes are not high like they are for the actal ACT or SAT, or even the PSAT. I do consider studying for this test to be gaming it in some sense, since I would say there is a bit of a gentleman's agreement/assumption that this is a "let's see what you can do" test, not a "study your damn little heart out" test.

I'm familiar with Po Bronson and Carol Dweck. I don't think they quite apply here.

I gave DD the sample science questions and she did extremely well, so at least for that category, I appear to be off base anyway. (So maybe I am a hypocrite. I just wanted to see if she would tank it or do okay, and if she would panic. She did in fact panic and said she was getting everything wrong. She got one wrong.)

...giving parents the opportunity to apply the work of Bronson and Dweck, encouraging a growth mindset!

We did not prep. We went over the sample questions provided to familiarize ds with what was expected but that is all. It was important for him to know there was no pressure and no expectations. Prepping him would have negated that.
Now later on, when it's no longer an above-level test then it's appropriate to prep.

I think the mindset question is tricky with gifted kids.

To me, we're really triumphing over a fixed mindset when DD get shown some new material she can't possibly do without help, freaks out, is taught it, fails a bit, freaks out again, keeps trying, and eventually succeeds and feels proud.

We're not necessarily triumphing when DD gets shown some new material that looks harder than she's used to, panics, keeps complaining at me about how it's hard because she's DD, then gets almost everything right because of innate ability, not because she has been taught anything new. I mean, it's better than usual. She had to try. But.

KADmom, I am on the same page.

Different concepts. Cheating is cheating. Gaming is something else. I've always considered gaming to mean maximizing within the rules of the system. To my definition any prepping beyond gaining familiarity with the test format is gaming.

Yes, I agree. Gaming a test is not cheating. You're not breaking the rules, but are you using the test as it is meant to be used? The line may be gray in some or many cases.

Well, I'm not impressed with the WATS thing at this point. I really don't think we need them for either part of what they offer, which is the SAT/ACT testing and summer programs. The programs are offered through Colorado School of Mines, and you don't have to be signed up with talent search for those (just have to have lots of money, urgh). They push the testing through them, but you don't have to be signed up with them for young-age testing, either. In a couple of years, perhaps they would be useful, when it could help to keep the scores from being reported later on -- but under 13, they purge the scores at the end of the academic year unless you request otherwise, so I don't need WATS for that. The lady told me I was wrong (she did say she would check, but she didn't think so) about that.

It's possible, and I'll have to check and see, that WATS may have scholarships to the programs that we couldn't get anywhere else. That's about it, if that's the case.

Point well taken. On the other hand, the two are often used interchangeably as in this article by the National Bureau of Economic Research: http://www.nber.org/digest/jun03/w9307.html Gaming is sometimes also used as a euphemism for cheating, or in celebration when the cheater has not been caught and has gotten away with it, or has exploited a loophole not yet addressed by the rules.

Understood. The point originally made was the distinction between an achievement test (OK to prep and ACT/CB provide questions from past exams for this purpose) as contrasted with an IQ test (intended to measure native intelligence and prep may invalidate results).

In closing, looking back at the OP's question, it seems most respondents have been quite positive about the value of the experience of participating in an out-of-level test.

SAT scores are purged at the end of the year if you are younger than HS (so if you are 10, but you report that you are in 9th grade, the score will likely be kept). While my kids did not take the ACT, I hear kids say that their 7th grade scores still appear on their ACT account when they are in 12th.

If you want to use the SAT scores for a program later on, you might want to sign up through the program (CTY, TIP, WATS). You will have the scores sent to them so they have the official report. I don't know if they will accept a paper report from a test a few years old (and the score was not stored).

Also, the CB and ACT have become more security aware in the past year or so and require photo ID. I think they shouldn't require it for a younger kid, but they might. The testing programs supply paperwork which allows kids to get through the check-in process without ID.

Yes, SAT says no photo for under 13, not needed and don't send one, and ACT appears to want photo ID but accepts school IDs.

ACT says you can choose which test date and location's scores to send to colleges, so presumably you would just use the later one (if it was better, of course). The scores would still be there, but they wouldn't go anywhere you didn't want them to. Theoretically.

One thing I found disturbing about the WATS presentation -- she was explaining how they help you to understand where your child's test scores are in relation to other gifted kids in the region, as opposed to in relation to the whole nation of kids who are required to take the tests regardless of their ...inclinations, I suppose. She had this "apples to oranges" thing, saying that if you get your young gifted kid's score (on the ACT) and look at the whole nation's scores, you think, "my kid is a wizard", or you get the score (on the SAT) and think, "my kid's not as smart as I thought", but if you get their score report comparing to the population of young gifted kids in the region, it puts it in perspective for you. Reasoning being, ACT test takers are mostly required by schools to take the test, so it's everybody regardless of college aspirations, intelligence, interests, etc., and your kid's score looks better by comparison. SAT is mostly college-bound, intense students, so your kid's score looks worse by comparison.

But even if you accept the premises of who takes the tests and why, it's not graded on a curve! Your kid's score is the same no matter who else takes the test or why. I didn't argue, but I just couldn't quite see the logic. I may have explained it badly here, as it didn't all stick in my head.

SAT doesn't report raw scores, just like IQ, they report their own variation of standard scores where 500 pts is the 50% mark and 100 pts is one standard deviation. The meaning of the score depends on the population sample they used to normalize the data. SAT uses a sample based on their target test takers, i.e. college bound students.

I was trying to see how her argument plays out... but with no official basis for the self-selected same age, locally gifted taking the test I don't see any conclusion to be reached from the comparison they are offering.

Say what? So they do grade on a curve, then?

I was going off of the practice/study book we were using over the summer before DS got sick of it -- it had a calculation method using raw score, (let me think now) number correct times ten, minus 1/4 of number missed times ten, nothing for ones not answered at all. I think I said that right. I assumed that was how the SAT was scored. I never took it, myself, and I have no idea whatsoever how the ACT is scored, but I'm not impressed with either one of them if they grade on a curve.

I think they need to be graded on a curve because one SAT/ACT test administration could be more difficult than another. If you scored the test strictly on a percentage correct basis, then had colleges compare kids who took the tougher test with kids who took an easier one, the comparison is unfair.

Grading on a curve for these tests doesn't mean the same thing as grading a math class test on a curve. In fact, to get an 800 on the SAT math you need to get all 54 questions correct. The math curve is harsh - my eldest got two wrong and skipped one question - that earned her a 730. When she took the ACT the math curve was better - two wrong out of 60 questions and that was a 35 (36 is the highest score). The reading curve was harsher - one wrong out of 40 was a 34 (could not get a 35 on that ACT test).