Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 334 guests, and 26 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    Emerson Wong, Markas, HarryKevin91, Gingtto, SusanRoth
    11,429 Registered Users
    May
    S M T W T F S
    1 2 3 4
    5 6 7 8 9 10 11
    12 13 14 15 16 17 18
    19 20 21 22 23 24 25
    26 27 28 29 30 31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 2 of 2 1 2
    Joined: Jan 2010
    Posts: 206
    J
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    J
    Joined: Jan 2010
    Posts: 206
    Update - I went ahead and had my older son re-tested with a different test (SB). His overall score was 139. His demeanor with the tester was very different too - he really enjoyed being with her.

    I was impressed with the other psychologist, but I'm going to conclude that it just wasn't a good fit and my son's performance was affected.

    I think it's interesting that his score varied so much. At this point I'm about 99% confident that the lower score is not reflective of his ability.

    I've taken a lot of standardized tests myself and I've been around enough bright people to be confident that my son is very smart. I am also confident that my sons are not almost two standard deviations apart. One is smarter, yes. But not THAT much smarter. So I pushed and had the additional testing done. But not everyone is going to be as confident in their judgement nor have the ability to get extra testing. So it's disturbing to see so much variation. I thought these tests were more reliable.

    I realize we are lucky he wasn't getting sick the day of the most recent evaluation. If his perfomance had been impaired a second time I would have concluded that the lower scores were accurate. So I would STRONGLY advise people to take care in selecting testing dates/times/environments.

    Last edited by JaneSmith; 01/28/10 08:09 AM.
    Joined: Jan 2010
    Posts: 206
    J
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    J
    Joined: Jan 2010
    Posts: 206
    It's high enough that it won't keep him out. Even if he gets through whatever subjective screening they use for kids in the 130 - 145 range he will still have to get a good number in the lottery.

    But we have been told that if his brother gets in for 2010-2011, they will be more likely to view him favorably the following year.

    Page 2 of 2 1 2

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Technology may replace 40% of jobs in 15 years
    by brilliantcp - 05/02/24 05:17 PM
    Beyond IQ: The consequences of ignoring talent
    by indigo - 05/01/24 05:21 PM
    NAGC Tip Sheets
    by indigo - 04/29/24 08:36 AM
    Employers less likely to hire from IVYs
    by Wren - 04/29/24 03:43 AM
    Testing with accommodations
    by blackcat - 04/17/24 08:15 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5