We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum. CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.
Connecting the dots: It seems that a reliance on external factors, such as AI, would thwart the development of self-sufficiency or internal locus of control.
Brief quote from article: "It is a common misconception that everything is super easy for gifted children. But everyone needs appropriate stimulation and understanding throughout their lives, and highly able learners can sadly have their unique talents dimmed by the pressure to fit into environments that simply haven't been properly designed for them."
Fortunately, the child's mother is aware that gifted children, like everyone, have a need for appropriate stimulation and understanding throughout their lives.
indigo has already posted useful contextual information about cognitive assessment.
I will add that understanding the concept of regression to the mean can be helpful. By this, I don't mean that some of the high scores are somehow false, but simply that it is extraordinarily rare for the same rare event to occur multiple times. Very high scores are rare events, affected by factors in addition to true intelligence (whatever that is). Multiple factors must align in order for low frequency scores to occur. Many of these factors become more predictable as children mature, and as their learning experiences become more uniform (e.g., through schooling).
Regression to the mean is also part of understanding how test performance varies on different tests (in addition to the actual differences in the test structures). When comparing tests (both cognitive to cognitive and cognitive to academic achievement), tests typically have correlation coefficients, which are one way of expressing how similar the results of the two tests (or readministration of the same test, in the case of reliability coefficiencts) are likely to be. An example: a high correlation between two gold-standard instruments (such as the DAS-II and WISC-V) might be in the neighborhood of 0.8. As a back-of-the-envelope approximation, this would suggest that a 124 on the first test could quite reasonably show up as a 119 on the second test--which is almost exactly what you see on the two verbal measures, which are the most similar across the two comprehensive measures (which isn't actually saying much, as both tasks on the DAS-II are different from both tasks on the WISC-V).
Leading to the more important consideration, which is that the areas labeled with similar constructs are actually sampled from very different tasks, in most cases: The DAS-II verbal tasks have visual supports or manipulatives, and include a picture vocabulary task and a task of following oral directions (which is extremely sensitive to fluctuating attention). The WISC-V verbal tasks are both purely verbal (for the most part).
The DAS-II Nonverbal Reasoning has one task that is much like one in WISC-V Fluid Reasoning, but the other tasks are quite different from each other, with the DAS-II task more of a visual analogies task, and the WISC-V more of a quantitative reasoning task.
The DAS-II Spatial tasks do share a similar task-type with the WISC-V Visual Spatial, but then there is also a relatively complex fine-motor/pencil skill task, versus and motor-reduced spatial thinking task on the WISC-V. So the DAS-II has a fine-motor involved task and an even more fine-motor complex task, and the WISC-V has a fine-motor involved and a motor-free task. You can see how someone fine motor speed is assessed a bit lower than there highest area of strength might be at a bit of a disadvantage on the DAS-II. (Note the WISC-V PSI is actually about the same as the DAS-II SC.)
And then, of course, the WISC-V has the WMI and PSI, which have no analogs when computing the DAS-II GCA.
Plus, the NNAT-3 is essentially like one DAS-II Nonverbal Reasoning or one WISC-V Fluid Reasoning subtest. And splits the difference between those two not-entirely-the-same index scores.
And then to throw in an entirely different twist...if your DC is in fact dyslexic (which your neuropsych says she is), then you may see even more fluctuation over the years as her reading vocabulary alternately lags or catches up to her "true" verbal cognition. In order to minimize these types of impacts, and to maintain appropriate cognitive challenge, I would highly recommend that, in parallel to good phonetic-based Orton-Gillingham-based reading intervention such as Orton-Gillingham itself, Wilson, Barton, or one of the open-and-go home-based programs (e.g., All About Reading, Logic of English, Nessy.com), you continue to expose her to high-level vocabulary and language through any oral means available, such as conversation (obviously!), high-interest videos on topics of her choosing, and audiobooks at her listening comprehension level. If she enjoys writing, let her use whatever modality of expressive communication poses the fewest barriers to her language formulation (dictation/scribing, speech-to-text, typing, etc.) especially to do self-selected writing, so that she has maximum access to using and developing language and vocabulary at her native level.
You ask great questions. While parents with gifted kids would tend to be inclined to seek schools in which their children would have true intellectual peers, what is seen on the surface may not be the same as what lies beneath the veneer.
My first thought would be to look at the school district's website and see what you can find about "gifted." For example, the district may tout activities or acceleration for gifted students, run a group for parents of gifted students, and/or have policy related to identifying gifted students and/or meeting the needs of gifted students. Look for chess club, robotics club, and other activities which could be created in your school district.
My second thought would be that while "desirable" districts may drive up housing costs, correlation does not mean causation. Consider two neighborhoods: one community may have building/zoning requirements for larger lot sizes, homes with particular square footage requirements, and certain percentage of brick or stone. This community may have stringent municipal code enforcement for permits, lawn care and landscaping requirements, and regular property inspections. This community may therefore attract people who can afford the constant cost of upkeep at a fastidious level and lead to the turnover of homes purchased by those who cannot keep up at the mandated level. Any higher property tax generated in this neighborhood may be used by the local government (municipality and/or school district) to create favorable branding/marketing campaigns, forge bonds with local realtors (competition for housing leads to bidding wars and raises prices), manage the press and influence social media. The amount which each family contributes to fundraisers may be tracked, and favoritism shown to high-dollar-donors in the form of additional opportunities and awards/accolades for their students. A carefully contrived and controlled narrative, funded by taxpayer dollars.
An interesting exercise is to practice stating any simple occurrence in both positive/favorable and negative/disfavorable terms, by use of different tense, adjectives, perspectives, and selectively including or omitting details. Strive for opposing narratives which are both true, but emphasize different elements. This exercise may be seen as being related to lists of gifted characteristics, portrayed in both positive and negative light. One example of such a list - https://gifted-studies.com/ptp/wp-c...ren-Positive-and-Negative-Behaviors-.pdf
Congratulations to Mike Wimmer for his incredible achievement, all while being the CEO of several companies!
At best I could start a bachelor's at the same age he had finished his PhD... and I am also evidently intellectually gifted.
He clearly outclasses the "ordinary" gifted...
Hopefully, people will hire him for research even if there are some labor and legal restrictions due to his age! (even though we can see his developmental level is clearly very, very mature). No wonder why I felt that people infantilize the smart kids too much!
It appears that AI is on track to replace jobs at an ever increasing pace. Something that parents may need to know, to help guide their children into fulfilling careers and lives of self-sufficiency.
Title of YouTube video with length 2:32:09, complete with transcript, posted May 12, 2025 by "The Diary of a CEO": AI AGENTS EMERGENCY DEBATE: These Jobs Won't Exist In 24 Months! We Must Prepare For What's Coming!
The discussion is presented in chapters, allowing viewers to select topics of particular interest, and to easily return to viewing topics of interest at a later time.
Updating this thread to encourage others who may be interested to apply for a patent. While it is a long and sometimes difficult process, it can result in success with a patent being issued. I am now a "patentee."
I hear you. We have done a lot outside of school to support math skill and he’s set up to start accelerating next school year. He currently has gifted pull out. He’s done some math circle meetups and robotics this year. We’re not ignoring the strengths, just balancing it with other needs and interests. He shifts back and forth in his math interest. His strongest strength is visual/spatial so that helps with math, but he’s a bit more interested in how things work - mechanics, physics, chemistry, science, etc. So math will likely support his primary interests. This summer he asked me to help him work through algebra, so we have a plan for the coming months.
He has a lot to manage with a learning disability in writing and auditory processing disorders. So, getting him in college classes faster is not ideal. I’m more trying to support across all those needs so when he does get past high school he has a lot of knowledge and confidence navigating systems and knows what his needs are - both gifted & disability - and can plan for those needs and leave time for recovery. He has so many more things to manage with the contrasting skills, he needs experience, strategies and support and we’re using these years to let him navigate the school system and life with our guidance/support. People can go to college at 16 or 18 or 20 or 30 and learn throughout their lifetime… what I want is for him is to feel confident, successful and in control when he gets there. Or he might decide to do a trade like be a mechanic or electrician because he really likes 3D, hands on, physical work. Whatever he decides, I want him to be confident in navigating independently when he gets there.
For visual/spatial development, I highly recommend speedcubing, which has been very worthwhile as a pastime for DS, not only for visuospatial awareness (blindfold cubing is particularly helpful) but for finger dexterity which has served him well as a self taught musician (another example of him pursuing his interests entirely on his own terms). DS also played chess in primary school and though he did not actively compete in high school, his father, an avid chess player over the internet, shares chess puzzles with him, so he has matched strongly rated players at college.
He is currently enrolled in engineering and pivoting towards electronics, having recently been commended for the elegant layout and functionality of his FPGA and circuit chip designs, which very much draw on 3D visualisation skills.
