Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment I.Q. and grade levels ahead-strong correlation?

When reading about the young scholars program, it says that a child needs to have a score of 145+ in one area or be 2-3 grades ahead, which suggests that profoundly gifted plus kids that scored 145+ are also usually 2-3 or more grades ahead. Is this a real world correlation?
I'm just curious if it's common for a child to be 2-3 grades ahead and not get a score of 145 or more in at least one subject?
I remember a mom posted awhile back about a child who read at 2, was 3 grades ahead and his score were MG. My first reaction is that this child's scores don't make sense.

I believe that you need to have both IQ >= 145 and achievement globally at an equivalently high level (which may or may not be +2-3 years, and being ahead in one area isn't sufficient), not one or the other. My personal guess is that there are a large number of kids who have one but not the other, for one reason or another.

I'm curious how you concluded that +3 was the achievement cutoff. The DYS cuts for 7th graders are well above the 50th percentile for 11-12th graders, which would be +4-5.

2-3 years ahead is actually what is mentioned as part of the criteria for a DYS portfolio.

It's trivial to be 2-3 grades ahead in reading, but unusual to be 2-3 grades ahead in math. Tons of K or 1st grade kids can read Droon or Rainbow fairy books, which are grade 3/4. I suspect the kids who are 2-3 grades ahead in math are significantly more than the PG cutoff, while kids reading a couple of grades ahead are much closer to the mean.

Here is one example of a simple chart commonly referenced: http://vcbconsulting.com/gtworld/iqgrade.html

Knowing an IQ score can allow prediction of achievement. However the corollary is not considered to be true; Knowing achievement is not said to be predictive of an IQ score.

If I recall, there was a fabulous Working Memory, fueling the high achievement?

ETA: Here's a previous thread on Working Memory, hat tip to squishys for sharing great articles.

DD6 has a FSIQ of 138 on the WISC IV which makes her MG, I think? She's been formally assessed as two years ahead at maths but got everything in that test right and her teacher said that within each maths subtopic she could easily comprehend and answer questions correctly 3-4 years ahead. She has a fantastic working memory (141).

However there's no way she's 2-3 years ahead in English. She does read at that level - her preferred fiction is marketed at 9 year old level and her non fiction books on Space are at 12 year old level. Her spelling, grammar and punctuation are great but her creative writing is very like that of a 6 year old. Her inferential comprehension is also probably age appropriate, in my opinion. She still got an 'A' for English in her school report which means that she's well above national standards but I don't think that gifted 'sparkiness' is there for her in this subject.

While it is true that the DYS Qualifications page mentions "working two to three grade levels above age peers", it also mentions "at least two to three grade levels above age peers", and the Qualifications page itself is referred to as "minimum Qualification criteria" on the How To Apply page and the FAQ page.

I agree - these are only minimum qualifications for DYS, and I merely referenced them to answer the question of where this comes from.

The WISC/WIAT charts used for discrepancy analysis provide an idea of what is "expected" achievement-wise at different I.Q. levels. Still, these tests don't claim to measure other factors, such as motivation or exposure to material, which also play into achievement scores.

This was an observation I had from looking at the WJiii test. For the same normal score the grade level equivalent was two years lower in reading compared to math and writing. So looks like the bell curve for reading migh be a little flater