I can see that gatekeeping of some kind is needed, because lots of people want their kids to be in the gifted program, but I'm uncomfortable (as a parent of a 2E) with any one measure being used.
I would definitely not like to see IQ used as the only measure; achievement does seem more important to me. But I agree with CAMom that that can't be the only measure either. Ideally the school should look carefully at what each kid needs (with the parents' help) and make sure the needs are met.
If you're talking mainly about classroom groupings, if a child can achieve at the level that's necessary to function well in an accelerated classroom (with or without supports appropriate to their disability if they have one), then they probably belong there. I don't care if a kid's IQ is "only" 129 and they don't make the cutoff; if they can do the work in a particular subject happily and well, schools should group them so they get the appropriate work for them. They should pay attention to the actual functioning and potential of the child, not only to the numbers.
It seems to me that most school programs won't ever have a whole class that addresses the needs of PG kids, because the sheer numbers of kids aren't usually there-- so offering a class to meet the MG-HG pool's needs, along with any outliers who can keep up there, and then grade accelerating PG kids to meet their rarer and more specific needs is a reasonable strategy in many school settings. It won't meet everybody's needs perfectly, but IF the school were ideally flexible about planning for individual kids (ahem) it could be OK.
DeeDee
