Hi:

A while back, someone posted a link with recommendations for the different levels of differentiation required for students all along the bell curve. I've tried a search and just can't locate it.

I thought it might be helpful with my advocacy with DS8's teacher, who doesn't seem to recognize what level of differentiation might be required. Also, does anyone have a link to a site that gives you frequency of IQs between 145 - 160 on the WISC IV?

Thnks,,

bk

Here's a link that goes a wee bit overboard with decimal accuracy, but I like it anyway....

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx

It does fall apart in the tails, but rough estimates are still worth throwing on the table, .

I don't understand what frame of reference they are using if the scores can't go beyond 202 yet are higher than the ceilings on current tests. Am I missing something?

That table is totally about statistics, and not about "real life"! It's a mathematician's view of the world, LOL! I'm not sure I understand your question though?

Dot-
looked at the table before without reading the blurb at the top. I see now that it does say that they are using Wechsler and SB norms, but these tests do not measure that high, unless you count the extended score on the SB V, which I thought was supposed to measure to 225.

Maybe it has been two and a half years since I slept for more than three or four hours at a stretch, but I still don't think I can be that fuzzy headed. Are they talking theoretical scores, as in too high to measure?

The table really has nothing to do with the specific Wechsler/SB tests, but rather is a statistical calculation of scores for standard deviations of 15 and 16. There could be no tests involved at all, and the table would still stand. The tests though, because they use SD's of 15/16 imply the "math" rules of that table (not the other way around).

So I guess in that regard they are talking theoretical scores all across the board. I think I remember reading that the guy stopped his table when it went beyond 1:6 billion, due to the current population.

However, we have reason to believe those tails are not as limited as straight statistics suggest.

IFFFFF humans followed the rules of statistics, and IQ's landed perfectly on the bell curve, then no....no person should have an IQ of 225, or even anything over about 195.

Obviously straight statistics doesn't apply in such rare groups, and should really only be used to suggest a general bell curve shape.

Once a child tests beyond say 3 SD's from the norm, other testing criteria should be used to differentiate amongst those children. (In short, IQ tests are doomed from the start, the more you think about it!)

Thanks, Dottie, that was helpful. I have to say that I am much more into practical applications and social/emotional aspects of giftedness. The more I know about testing, the more flaws I see.

Dottie,
Is additional testing criteria necessary? After 3 SDs, entrance to DYS, what more is needed or what more can be gained? Do you tell your kids their IQs? I haven't because I don't want it to cause trouble between siblings (and maybe also because I'm not sure what it means anyway other than potential ability). If you're lazy with a really high IQ, you might not be as successful or high achieving as if you're hardworking with a moderate IQ. My kids know they're 3 SDs because that's qualification to PEGS program at school, but beyond that I haven't disclosed. And what does it mean for parents?

I ask this in case I should be doing further evaluation to benefit my kiddos.

Oh I didn't mean to qualify for something, or prove "smartness". I meant more for educational purposes, like where to place the kid in math. Show me two kids with 145 IQ's, and they'll probably have very different needs in most subjects. At that point, you really need to think "individualized", which of course the schools rarely do.

It's a no brainer in our house that DS is the "highest". My girls argue regularly over who is the lowest. I'm not really sure myself, though of course I don't participate in those discussions!!!!! They all know they are GT because of school, but my girls are quite aware when others are brighter in different areas. They see this more so than their own strengths at times.

But no, I haven't told any of them actual numbers. The only "numbers" I share are percentiles on above level testing. For example, DS got a kick out of "passing" 8th grade last year.

To add to the above post, I was reading an (old!) article on Terrance Tao (?) last night, and he of course tests above +3 SD. I don't for a minute consider DS to have the same level of need!!!! It's funny, at age 3, I could almost balance their reading/math skills (from some quote that was surely less than accurate on TT's behalf!), but the truth is, TT is a few SD's beyond DS, and would have quite different needs. Lumping them together is not much different than lumping DS with MG age mates.