Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Ruf levels vs. IQ scores

I'm going to be testing (for educational planning) that will find out the IQ scores this year on both DD6 and DD4. When I read the Ruf book I'm guessing my DD6 is a solid level 4 with some 5 sprinkled in as well. My DD4 I'm guessing is a solid level 3. It will be interesting to see if the IQ scores confirm this.

I think it is quite interesting to see others experiences with this. Good luck on their testing! It's hard to believe that soon I may be looking at her book for thoughts on DD (now 20 months). It seems a bit early to look for her...but yet I read it this time with DS and was shocked. Although, like with you I know she is not like him as much in that way...but still seems advanced/gifted to me.

I really liked how the book acknowledged what your child has access to... like the child who was doing advanced math - his mother was into mathematics. Because I think we can look at books like that and look more for reasons dd or ds "aren't" in then trying or hoping to see them at a higher level. Denial Rocks! I can alwasy look back and think, yes wow. But not forward... I have to believe it isn't us now because the path looks so uncomfortable.

I underestimated my DS5. I thought he was high level 3, with some 4s sprinkled in, and he was high level 4 with potential for 5 (depends on motivation later on). We had one of those early readers who the book works well for, and I enjoyed reading of others who had similar experiences. But the most important thing I learned was that there ARE different levels of giftedness. Before I read the book, I thought there was gifted like the people I knew who did well in school, and prodigies. Now I know better.

I'm a Ruf fan--she really helped me get over my GT denial. But I agree completely with Gratified3.

I think that if you think a child is level 3 based on her book, and you get test scores like those that you don't think are stemming only from some mistake in the testing, then I think you have to follow what you know.

Ruf is great for helping people overcome GT denial, but it is a VERY subjective system she sets up. It certainly has its limits!

Gratified3 - I think you stated it perfectly.

Davidson hasn�t abandoned the issue of early milestones. It is now just optional to submit ages rather than required.

As Kriston and others have stated often, I think the book is a great help to the parents of kids who do meet the early milestones, but not a reason to rule out giftedness if a child doesn�t.

I like Ruf as well. As a parent, I feel really grateful for her willingness to dedicate her life to helping kids and families who don't fit in the box. I've heard a time too many, that we're so lucky! Everything will be fine! True. But there are issues with HG/PG kids that are extremely challenging.

I think that if a kid doesn't fit the *profile* that certainly doesn't mean they are not gifted or a certain level of gifted. I don't think anyone would argue that the WISC is not the gold standard.

I was comforted after reading Ruf's levels. As much as I think you should toss Ruf's levels if they conflict with the gold standard of tests such as the WISC, I also think it's irresponsible to propose that her subjective data and findings aren't relevent.

There is simply not enough research available to say that her data on babies is simply behavioral, not related to intelligence. I have two kids that measured very clearly between 4 and 5 and both have exceptionally high IQ scores, and not on the Stanford Binet.

Obviously, if a kid doesn't figure out the Santa thing at age three it doesn't mean the child isn't exceptionally intelligent. But c'mon.....the kid that looks at the fireplace at three or four and says: "There is no way Santa can fit in the fireplace. His belly is too big and the chimney is too narrow. I don't buy for a second that it's not related to intelligence. Seeing patterns, making connections, applying them.......

I do agree that personality drives some of the behaviors that Ruf observes, meaning some equally intelligent children may never exhibit the behaviors. Logically, though, there are many babies/toddlers with same tempermant unable to do any of the things on Ruf's list. It's a combination of both, IMO.

Lastly, I certainly don't represent Davidson. I will say that these days, any knucklehead can read Ruf's levels on line and put it on the application. Logically, couldn't that be a reason they're not used anymore?

Crosspost with delbows.....thanks for clearing that one up. Good to know.

Neato

Agreed. Our kids are so unusual. If any of us can find something we identify with if only to say: "YES! That's my kid, why is this so difficult/unusual/perplexing I think it's valuable.