Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums GT Research PG? Husband is a skeptic, I am on the fence

I also want to say that I agree with almost everything that has been said in this thread, including the points that Val, indigo, and puffin have brought up.

Indigo, I apologize for taking a tangent into adult ASD. It's a slightly sensitive area for me, as I'm reasonably familiar with that community and know that there are many adults that do not have a diagnosis that will you with 100% confidence that they are on the autism spectrum (contrary to what was suggested in this thread). That said, I think adults generally have other motives for self identifying (i.e., for personal enlightenment) than parents of children do (i.e., labels don't really matter but they need services which require a label.)

We tested as part of an admission requirement to a gifted program. We honestly had no idea if he would even meet the program's minimum requirement.

The test results have absolutely helped us understand, raise, and advocate for our DS. Without question. Testing is valuable to gain insight. And I think that's what most of you are saying, too.

Absolutely.

The test results may not always be what we expect, or want to hear. But if done ethically and by a qualified person, they are a bit of truth.

Indigo,
I certainly don't mean to stoke the fires, but dusty has really rubbed me the wrong way, first with an (IMO) blunt accusation that someone posting on this thread is claiming their child is PG when they haven't been tested (I have yet to actually find this poster), and then with comments like this:

I'm left thinking that this person has an axe to grind.

This community has been so welcoming in so many ways. I don't want to see that change. It is my hope that my responses don't alienate, and if I have instead done so, then I do apologize.

I think I need to stop posting (at least on this thread about this subject) now.

One of the factors to consider is that until recently, the most commonly-used cognitive assessment instruments did not assess visual spatial ability separately from abstract-fluid reasoning. This was not really by chance. VS is the least K-12 school-relevant of the three cognitive areas usually assessed (verbal, quantitative/abstract, visual spatial), although, of course, it has a great deal of value in life, as well as much later in schooling. A quick scan of the literature finds quite a bit of overlap among discussions of/research on visual spatial learners, divergent thinkers, and those with learning differences/disabilities (dyslexia and ADHD, most commonly).

This is not to say that all VS-high learners are 2e, necessarily, but that school is designed for and by verbal (and quantitative) learners (not to mention compliance-high). Consequently, VS-high learners may not have latitude to display their greatest strengths in the school setting, and may perform only at the level of their verbal/quantitative abilities. As long as you continue to feed the strength areas outside of school, and your child is happy and growing in all cognitive, emotional, social, spiritual, etc. dimensions, that's fine. I think some VS-high children find community/peer-recognized channels in the fine and performing arts, robotics or anime clubs, VS-high games with social capital, like Minecraft, or sometimes in sports.

One could also specify the area of giftedness, to avoid some of the cultural accretions that come with the label of global PG-ness. E.g., PG in visual spatial ability (possibly in the context of global MG). Much like one might describe an individual as an exceptional athlete, talented entrepreneur, or unusually empathetic friend.

You're relatively new here. It's good to have an expressive group in which people can share rather freely. Please do not let any posts get under your skin. People mean well. This is not the first thread which has discussed some aspect of comparing pg with gifted. When any of us feel riled, annoyed, or frustrated, we might want to word our posts in a way we would like to read them if they were written to us, because hurting anyone really hurts the gifted community.

I'll just say it is known to happen. There are also some whose child/ren test as high average, average, and/or low average, who claim PG. There are also those whose child/ren may take an IQ test without waiting the appropriate interval between tests thereby artificially boosting test scores. There are some who claim PG based on behaviors which may also indicate ASD (see article linked upthread).

This forum does change depending on the mix of posters at any given time, the dilemmas presented, and the types of responses provided. When the mix is more 2e, it may be less beneficial to someone whose child does not present with a second exceptionality.

The DYS qualifications have indeed changed, becoming less stringent. Additionally there have been posts celebrating students being admitted who've not met the published minimums. Selective enforcement of rules in any environment tends not to foster trust.

Some may wish to cultivate understanding that a person in the gifted community is experiencing pain, which could beset any one of us.

In general, any community benefits from self-monitoring, seeking clarification, holding other members accountable, etc.

I'm sure this feeling is shared by most if not all of the posters who "put ourselves out there"... we are trying to help make the world a better place, by helping parents of gifted children navigate the turbulent waters... without unnecessarily adding to the turbulence.

Thank you Solaris. Your son sounds similar to mine and sounds like we've had some similar journeys as well! You've described it beautifully.

Please know I'm not intending to be disrespectful in asking, but has your child tested as PG?

Thank you Solaris for sharing! No, I don't see it as bragging, I have similar feeling when trying to describe my DS to outside the GT community, so we have not come out at school nor with most of my own friends who also have children. It seems that your DS had very consistent results between the subtests, where as mine is more on the asynchronous side. I need to figure out what these all means. By any chance does anyone know how long it takes for Pearson to publish the extended norm? And how useful is the extended norm for us if he hit the ceiling of both WISC V and WAIS and cannot be scored on WAIS because of underage? But then any new information might not be that useful for us, right, extended norm might push his FSIQ and GAI further up but doesn't really change the conclusion. I am also interested in info on why a kid this bright might score that low on speed - his symbol search percentile is very low; psychologist also told us that he interrupted his work to reconfirm that rotations were not exact matches, etc. But it was 25 percentile; this is way below median. It is too low to make any sense, none of his other scores is like this. So his PSI is 63 percentile because symbol search drags everything down. He doesn't present himself as slow learner or thinker in daily life - it is actually the opposite at home - and at school he's been doing ok, so I am baffled. I just want to be sure that there's no medical issue or special need we overlook, such as vision issues, that might hurt him at school in the future. We did get him checked by ophtalmologist when he was four, and he was ok.

Pearson is working on the extended norms. They were anticipated earlier this year, but it looks like it will be longer, based on the research update from March. I would think the extended norms would be valuable for your DC. The likelihood of hitting the absolute ceiling (max raw score) on the WISC-V is quite low (though it is possible), because one not only needs to complete all of the designs accurately, but also quickly enough to obtain all bonus points for every item. If he did, the extended norms would be quite interesting.

http://giftedissues.davidsongifted...._Extended_Norms_data_col.html#Post231489

As I mentioned upthread, I don't think I would worry too much about the low Symbol Search score (not normatively low, BTW, just in comparison to his other scores; 25%ile is considered within the average range, certainly not way below median). His Coding score has to have been respectable to net a PSI at the 63rd %ile.

Also, I would reiterate that, though your examiner may be a competent and knowledgeable professor, that was not a standardized administration of the subtest, and is almost certainly a low estimate of his actual skills on that type of task. (Honestly, it's the kind of small administration error that someone who only does a handful of evals a year might make--not having done sufficient volume to see the children who will stop to erase if there is even a tiny vestige of an eraser, or who will panic if they change their minds and don't know how to indicate the correction. Your examiner may be very experienced and well-regarded, but it doesn't mean they are flawless. I certainly am not.)

The plethora of test observations reported by the examiner strongly suggests that this result does not mean what it usually would be expected to mean (regarding speed); that is most likely why the examiner is reporting them--not to say he has a weakness in speed, but to say he does not.

Thanks again aeh for the education! I am not quite sure what the raw scores are but he got 19 in both VS subtests of WISC V. He completed all but one block design in WISC V, and the same case in WAIS (completed all but one). He didn't meet the discontinuation criteria in all three (block design WISC V, visual puzzles WISC V, block design WAIS). Sorry for being such a newbie in this!

Trying to figure out if I should get ready for a wild ride in the future.