OK, time for the devil's advocate. One some site, read that Hiliary Clinton's IQ is 125. But I think she is a perfect example of someone who maximized her potential.
I'm always skeptical of statements about people's IQs. Where, exactly, would one get this information? From some dishonest psychologist? Did Hillary brag about it? Yeah, right...
So I'm not buying the example from the get-go.
I do think you're right, Ren, that--as kcab suggested--*achievement* can be optimized. I just don't think people can get "more GT." I just don't. That's ability, and it's part of the package or it isn't. You have the capacity or you don't. Neglect or abuse can ruin what you've got, but you can't get more ability. Either you had the capacity from birth or you did not. Aside from prenatal vitamins to ensure brain development in a fetus and obvious basics of that nature, I just don't believe you can "make" someone more GT. Anything you do helps them *achieve* more, and that's great. But it doesn't change their LOG. That LOG necessarily was present within them or else they couldn't attain it. It's the basic definition of ability. You have it or you don't.
On the flip side, we all know that "practice makes perfect," and that if you don't use your skills, they deteriorate. Are you still GT? Yes, the ability is still present. But you're not achieving.
Consequently, anything that gets schools to stretch GT kids sounds pretty good to me. Does it make them "more GT"? No. But it does allow them to maximize their abilities.
Otherwise, what is the difference between ability and achievement? Do you see them as the same, Ren?
