How narrow do you go for the narrow definition though? And what is the measuring scale?
There seem to be quite a few people around here with children (even children in the DYS program) who managed not to make it into some school or other's gifted program, because while their PRI or VCI is in the 1-in-a-thousand range their FSIQ isn't in the 2-in-a-hundred?
There I'm just not sure and it is so much harder when you are dealing with a kid who is in the 99.9th on PRI or VCI and seriously lower on everything else such that neither his GAI nor FSIQ is at the 98th.
I guess that I was, overall, looking at a GAI or FSIQ around the 98th, but I'm not sure.
IMO anybody who thinks that 10% of a population represents the masses is seriously deluded.
lol! I'm not sure that I'd call it the masses either, but I have seen where what amounts to 15% of the kids being GT identified (what we have locally) being something that is actually much broader than the sheer # would sound at face value. We could easily have most kids who are average and hard working identified at gifted b/c achievement plays so much into it. The only reason it is limited to 15% is b/c it is the kids with pushy parents or teachers who truly misunderstand the difference btwn, say, reading above grade level by a bit and giftedness who get pushed for ids. The less hard working kids are no less able. The kids with less pushy parents are no less able. However, they are less likely to be ided as gifted.
