My daughther went through some testing in school (TONI-3) and they came back stating she is potentially highly gifted and now want to carry out a WISC-IV which I understand is a more intense test.

Can someone throw light on gifted vs bright and how these tests are able to make out the difference? My daughther has always been a very good test performer, but on the other hand had been perfectly happy in her current class. She does not exhibit the dissatisfaction/unhappiness which I read is a charateritic of a gifted kid.

Can someone throw some light?

Ditto to everything mon said I'll also add that bright, gifted, dull, whatever... having the information from a WISC test is interesting and can give you a lot of info about your child re relative strengths and weaknesses. Schools don't usually offer up WISCs without good reason to think a child is gifted... and getting a WISC done privately usually costs a lot of $.... so I'd give the ok for testing

Best wishes,

polarbear

Don't worry about the terminology - it's just words and there's very little consensus on their meaning anyway (though round here, specifically, people usually mean IQ over 130 when they say gifted, roughly). You and the school need to look at your daughter more than the numbers - but I don't mean by that, don't test. If the school wants to do a WISCIV and will arrange it out probably means they'd be happier having a report from it. There's not much downside - most children enjoy the testing.

One reason for wanting the results is that if your DD's results are very high, this may make it easier for everyone to know she needs challenge. Going through school doing well without much effort is not benign - it can lead to perfectionism and stop children learning to deal with things that are hard for them.

While it seems to be very, very common for highly gifted kids to be dissatisfied with a conventional school environment, it is not universal. There are a few families on these forums with kids who are pg but happy with their age-peers in schools that do not specialize in gifted children.

If I were you, I would definitely go forward with the WISC-IV for the following reason. If she is highly gifted, there is a good chance that she does very well in school with minimal effort. A problem can develop over time if a student does not associate learning and doing well with persistent effort. Perfectionism and other related challenges have been well documented on this forum. It is far easier to address this early on by seeking an environment where a child is truly challenged than to deal with the perfectionism, etc. later on.

(My own dd is now 13 yo and has always scored exceptionally well (even by gifted standards) on standardized tests (Explore, MAP, SAT). She attends a neighborhood public school and has never had a full grade acceleration. She is quite happy with her circle of friends at school, and academics at school have worked out okay so far due to some great teachers (although this is hit and miss), subject acceleration in math, some accommodations in other subjects, and engaging interests outside of school.)

Personally, I tend to use bright as the opposite of dim.

My DD is apparently 'gifted' but I still prefer to use bright when describing her.

YMMV

Agree with what others have shared, and I'll just add that some have used these words to create a distinction between:
gifted as native intelligence or innate ability (a way of thinking and being), discernible by IQ tests
and
bright as what has been learned through opportunity and academics, discernible by achievement tests.

The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

The familiar hand-out is found several places online. Here's one.

In a Psychology Today magazine article dated January 2012, Christopher Taibbi discusses Bright/Gifted.

Thanks so much for this thread- I had been wondering the same thing, because there are more and more kids getting into the gifted class, and I couldn't understand why if there is an uneven development in some gifted kids, surely there had to be at least one other kid in my son's class that was similar to him-but it seemed like my son was getting all the grief from his teacher. I had heard they dropped the IQ standard to allow for a more mixed group of students in the classes.. so I was wondering if it was possible that most of the kids in his class were really smart and bright, above average, but maybe not necessarily gifted, and was wondering what the difference would have been.

Well, first of all, social or emotional maladjustment is not a prerequisite for giftedness. It bothers me a bit to constantly encounter the "correlation" between high IQ and unhappiness. Secondly, IQ tests are not that accurate/precise at the tails so it makes more sense to look at the confidence intervals rather than a single number, in which case the bright/moderately gifted labels would overlap. The terms "bright" and "gifted" are used differently by different people at different times as well. Personally, I actually use the term "bright" far more often than "gifted" in reference to my own children, including the DS who cleared the DYS minimums by a large margin.

IMO, there's no bright line between the two things.

It's a situational descriptor, in which "bright" is the synonym for the condition of being in the top quartile, but still fitting well enough within the expectations and culture in which one is operating that it feels GOOD, and comfortable.

"Gifted" is a bit of a misnomer, in my estimation, since I tend to think of this term as referring to the situation in which one's differences from the rest of the population cause one DIFFICULTY in terms of "fit." Being out of synch with peers/colleagues, having to choose between one's inner direction and motivations and those which are external (and feel unnatural or even wrong, or overly simplistic)-- that kind of thing.

Among a peer group which ranges from IQ 125-155, persons like my DH and I are going to find ourselves feeling "bright" but not "gifted."

On the other hand, regular day to day life, we are definitely operating as strangers in a strange land, if you see what I mean.


The higher one's LOG (relative to one's surroundings), the more likely the latter seems to be.

Conversationally, I stick my own concepts onto these. I tend to use bright to represent someone who is engaged and follows thoughtlines well. Sharp for someone who sees discrepancies well. Smart for good forward thinking skills, strategic and insightful things. Gifted as an adjective for a program at a school or to describe someone who has an ability that seems to lie well beyond what the limits of their level of education or training would typically impart upon them. Genius for awesome humor.

But I'll adapt to whatever use the natives have, because communication trumps most things ideological in my book.

I try to keep it narrow- intellectually gifted by definition means attaining a certain score on an IQ test. 130+ seems to be the US public school standard.

Is there a discernible difference between a child with a result of 128 and another with a result of 130- I doubt it. There are probably major differences between a child at 128 and another at 150. Mine is in between the 128 and the 150, and I will need to advocate for his education. However, he's not so out of sync that traditional school doesn't work- which is what I think parents of pg kids are facing.

I use these differently in different cohorts. Here on this forum and with other more HG parents, I use "bright" for the high-achieving to mildly gifted group and "gifted" for the higher LOG folk. In everyday life I often use them interchangeably because there is usually no awareness of LOG. Well that is when I engage in any such conversation because I more often avoid conversing on the topic with others.

My understanding is that gifted meant that you are in the 99.5% plus IQ range, which translates to 150 IQ. Is that a wrong definition?

Well people in that range are certainly gifted but 130 is a more usual cut-off. The Davidson Institute which says it caters to PG has a cut off of 145 or 150depending on the test. By the time you get to 145 you are 3 standard deviations above average. How many people do you know with an IQ of 55 who would flourish in a mainstream classroom WITHOUT any help.

The 'US Public school' and many G&T programs definition is 2 standard deviations above average or 130 (SD=15) which nets roughly the top 2 percent.

Hi VR00- 150 IQ is higher than the 99.5%. More like 99.9% and something past that. 150+ is verging on "profoundly gifted."

I think "gifted" in terms of "meaning" is subject to individual interpretation, while gifted in terms of "definition" is objective (at least as it applies to intellectual giftedness). It's typically an IQ of 130+ in US public schools. The top 98th percentile, give or take.

It's possible and common for children to be gifted in some areas, typical in others, and may even be lagging in some spots. The 130 IQ cutoff (full scale) is less informative than the subtest scores.

I was referring to http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx for the percentiles.

Just got the report on the TONi-3 test (non-verbal intelligence) it just states 99 percentile plus. Based on recommendation of the group will go ahead with the WISC-IV test.

Thanks!

This thread shows the importance of understanding there may be many equally valid views and definitions... and taking the time to see what knowledge base and definitions others are operating with, especially when advocating for our children.

I think you missed a 9 when you read it.

99th is good score. I hope the wisc goes well.

Got definitions from our school district:

- Gifted 98%
- Highly Gifted- 99.5%

I think this translates to 130 and 150 IQ respectively.

That's because emotional adjustment or maladjustment often depends on the social-emotional environment.

And the issue is really the individual's developmental arc over a lifetime across various domains.

Exactly.

Having an IQ > 150 wouldn't be a big problem if it weren't for the fact that human beings are inherently social animals, and that such a cognitive state of being is rare by definition. Being an outlier is hard, and when life is hard, most individuals respond with maladaptive coping strategies of one kind or another.

So no-- maladjustment isn't about being gifted. It's about being out of step with the rest of the world.

Thanks puffin. I did miss a 9.

Basically while a lot of folks on the forum seem to see dissatisfaction/adjustment of high potential kids in standard class what I am hearing is that it is not necessary. Kid can be perfectly happy but still have the high potential.

Ds is 158 and while I think he is starting to get frustrated it has taken nearly 2 years. Some kids are fine all the way - you need a good school, a self starting and social child though.

There are lists of traits of gifted kids, and parents are often relieved to find that the "quirks" or behaviors which their kids exhibit, while not typical, are "normal" characteristics among gifted kids.

One example may be a child's dissatisfaction with the classroom arising from correctly observing that s/he is significantly different than his/her classmates in their interests, accumulated knowledge, sense of humor, ability to converse, and/or needing scant exposure to new concepts and information to retain them and make connections. These kids may be at risk.

While some boredom or dissatisfaction with not learning new material in school may be one characteristic common among the gifted, kids will not necessarily exhibit all characteristics, the characteristics they exhibit may change somewhat over time, and no one characteristic is definitive. Gifted kids who do not grow restless with school may be at risk in a different way: risk of "hiding" and underachievement.

Some links which may be of interest - http://tip.duke.edu/node/99, http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10114.aspx

Indigo second link is an excellent link articulaing the types of gifted kids. Especially showing that 90% plus kids are well adjusted externally. One always get the impression from reading forums that all gifted kids have adjustment issues :-)

Agreed. Discussion on forums may tend to focus on problems, inconsistencies, etc... little time on banality or that which does not need a solution.

Reading gifted forum topics may tend to give the uninitiated a distorted, fun-house-mirror view of things... from which they may develop misconceptions about students, parents, and teachers. Some may miss the dedication, creativity, and solution-oriented flow of most threads.

May I add... a world that too often does not want to see the gifted at peace or happy, but rather feels a need to bring the gifted down a notch. Being happy or contented, accepting the differences which make us outliers... may be seen as exclusivity or bragging... punishable offenses!