I agree with acs 100%, and I put Ruf up there as one of the two most important books for my development as a parent of a GT child (or two) that I read.
I think her book is good for giving us an *idea* of what ND is and what PG is and what the levels in between are, but strict lines between the levels are hard/impossible to draw--especially when kids can even float between them!--and aren't very useful for anyone. Does it really matter if my son is PG or EG or even HG, if the local schools won't give him what he needs?
I'd say no!
I'm with Dottie that HG+ is the way to go, and I'm with the Davidson Institute in defining HG+/PG as those kids who are beyond the capability of our tools to measure. (To paraphrase badly...)
To use the often mentioned (and often criticized) example of Mozart, would we say he wasn't PG because he was "only" GT in music? Even though he was composing at age 3 or whatever? That seems like a silly restriction to me...
