I'm happy my post has provided some interesting (And funny!) discussion. Just looking back at it, I realized I wrote it in a way that didn't really explain what I was looking for. I have so little time to get on the computer, I usually just rattle off without looking back or editing what I'm writing. (Toddler in the house)
I wasn't looking for how each 145+ IQ level should be differentiated. I agree the tests and scores just aren't that finely tuned to really say numerical score X means this kid is smarter than some other kids with a score x-1.
I was looking for info setting out differentiation for an IQ -range- (3+ SD, essentially) that was based on the 160 max scores available on the current common IQ tests. I've found info based on older test scores, where there are much higher numbers, and thus the info is less helpful to me advocating for a kid in the currently available 145-160 range.
What I like about one chart I saw was that it listed both SD +3 and SD-3 on the same level and just discussed what radical differentiation might be necessary. I think most educators recognize the importance of tailoring education for a child with disabilities. Too many seem to think that smart kids (if there even are any at their school) don't need anything different, or that providing anything different is somehow providing an unfair "extra." I thought that admin, accustomed to IEPs for children who need extra help might finally get that DS needs something radically different, too.
I would love to make a LOG argument, because I agree that IQ only gives part of the picture. For a LOG argument to work, admin would need to understand the IQ score, believe my reports of DS's developmental milestones, AND trust the author of the LOG stuff.
