Jump to content

What's with the ads?


Photo

Level 2 verbal


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

What's with the ads?

#1 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 12:38 AM

So if a child is Level 2 gifted (I'm using that to get a low-end marker), and that giftedness shows up in verbal abilities, what would you expect the child's MINIMUM score to be on a vocabulary assessment for a child who is three years, six months? The test is scored in years and months. "Minimum" meaning, anything less and you would not assume (based solely on that one test, which is ridiculous, but go with me on this) the child was actually at least Level 2 gifted verbally, but was merely bright.

Nothing whatsoever is at stake here, I am just curious.

Thanks. :001_smile:

#2 dmmetler

dmmetler

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8189 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 07:21 AM

At 2, my languagy kid supposedly had the verbal skills of a 7 yr old (which, as I told my husband at the time, might simply be that 7 is when kids are supposed to be studying dinosaurs, since I think 3/4 of her conversation at the time included -saurus). At 4, she supposedly had a (grade) 10.9 vocabulary score. (Which, again, I suspect has more to do with scientific terms than anything else.)


She hasn't had a true FSIQ test yet (her testing at 2 was to rule out an autism spectrum disorder, and the conclusion was that she was "highly gifted", but with no numbers, and at 4 was for early K entry, where they did a bunch of quick tests, but no true WPPSI or WISC). The general conclusion is that she's gifted and qualifies for an IEP. No level of Ruf's seems to just SCREAM "That's my Child"-there's a lot that fits on all of them, and a lot that doesn't. I'm not sure if it's worth it to try to have her tested through them again-she'll have to be reevaluated if we want to keep her IEP when she's 7-8, but her IEP has been totally worthless so far, even before we started homeschooling.

Edited by dmmetler, 17 July 2011 - 09:34 AM.


#3 Crimson Wife

Crimson Wife

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12498 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 08:50 AM

At 3 1/2, I wouldn't worry about whether a child is gifted vs. merely bright. Not all gifted kids are "early bloomers", and getting a reliable assessment at that age is notoriously difficult.

My DS, when given the WPPSI at 3 1/2 as part of the special ed assessment for a speech & language delay, ceilinged on the puzzle assembly subtest and was headed for ceiling on the block design one until he got bored & decided it would be much more fun to build his own block creations. :lol: The psychologist stopped the test at that point because it was clear to her that his speech issues were not the result of an overall low IQ.

My DD's WPPSI score at 4 correlated highly with every other test she has taken later on, so it is *possible* to get an accurate assessment young with a cooperative child.

Early assessments IMHO are more likely to underestimate than overestimate a gifted child.

Edited by Crimson Wife, 17 July 2011 - 11:50 AM.
fixed grammar typo


#4 Heigh Ho

Heigh Ho

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6134 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 09:22 AM

So if a child is Level 2 gifted (I'm using that to get a low-end marker), and that giftedness shows up in verbal abilities, what would you expect the child's MINIMUM score to be on a vocabulary assessment for a child who is three years, six months? The test is scored in years and months. "Minimum" meaning, anything less and you would not assume (based solely on that one test, which is ridiculous, but go with me on this) the child was actually at least Level 2 gifted verbally, but was merely bright.

Nothing whatsoever is at stake here, I am just curious.

Thanks. :001_smile:


I wouldn't use a vocab as a gifted test at this age as many parents who read and coverse with their child have children who test very high in vocab, but aren't gifted. I'd use something that involved thinking and reasoning...puzzles, making his own puzzles, figuring out material aimed at children several years older by his own initiative..

#5 Purpledaizy

Purpledaizy

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 203 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 08:40 PM

I second the opinions here, I don't think tests at that age are accurate in determining giftedness. Especially where verbal skills are tested. Although I see it listed on many lists of gifted traits, I've not seen that play out many cases, and with my own children especially. My daughter was saying words at 10 months and conversational at 1 year. She amazed everyone with her ability to memorize the preamble and poems etc. at age 3. She is bright, but she is not gifted. She was on a regular track throughout school.

My son was four years old before he began speak and in aba therapy four hours a day four days a week for two years before he was fully conversational. However, his non-verbal reasoning scores (puzzles etc..) were off the charts. Today at age 8, he is 3-4 grade levels above his chronological age across all disciplines. He is gifted.

My advice would be to play, read and do normal stimulating things without being concerned about giftedness, yet.

#6 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 09:31 PM

At 3 1/2, I wouldn't worry about whether a child is gifted vs. merely bright. Not all gifted kids are "early bloomers", and getting a reliable assessment at that age is notoriously difficult.

Yes, but I had said that it would be for a child who DOES show their highest abilities verbally.

My DD's WPPSI score at 4 correlated highly with every other test she has taken later on, so it is *possible* to get an accurate assessment young with a cooperative child.

Of course. That still doesn't answer my original question, though. :tongue_smilie:

Early assessments IMHO are more likely to underestimate than overestimate a gifted child.


Yes, hence the "if " I made sure to include.

You know (this isn't directed at anyone in particular here), I get as much grief on this forum as I do on the main board. I wish there was just ONE place where a person could ask questions, and not have people decide for you if it's a valid question in the first place. This isn't any different than telling someone you shouldn't be using a particular curriculum because your child is too young. :( I don't know how many more qualifiers I could have possibly put on my post to make it clear that I was just asking a simple, direct question....

Edited by RaeAnne, 17 July 2011 - 09:55 PM.


#7 Crimson Wife

Crimson Wife

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12498 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 09:54 PM

But not all kids who are verbally gifted will show those gifts early. Some do, others don't. My mom is highly gifted skewed verbal but she was not precocious. She didn't read until she was 7, but once she did learn, she took off very quickly.

A child with a large vocabulary at 3 1/2 is obviously bright, but it's too early to say for sure whether or not that child is gifted. And I'm not sure why it even matters. :confused:

#8 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 10:11 PM

But not all kids who are verbally gifted will show those gifts early. Some do, others don't. My mom is highly gifted skewed verbal but she was not precocious. She didn't read until she was 7, but once she did learn, she took off very quickly.

But if a child was clearly not verbally precocious, why would I be asking the question in the first place? :confused:

A child with a large vocabulary at 3 1/2 is obviously bright, but it's too early to say for sure whether or not that child is gifted. And I'm not sure why it even matters. :confused:


I'm finding it incredibly difficult to respond to this without being completely sarcastic. I'm sorry you see ulterior motives in a parent's genuine interest in their child's development.

#9 quark

quark

    Celebrating Curiosity!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2115 posts

Posted 17 July 2011 - 11:38 PM

I don't know how many more qualifiers I could have possibly put on my post to make it clear that I was just asking a simple, direct question....


I'm sorry you feel this way. I think the problem is not that your question wasn't simple and direct but that it's difficult to offer a simple, direct answer to a question like this one.

Researching giftedness has become a passion for me and I have to say that I just cannot trust Ruf's levels because there's just too much room for ambiguity. I haven't met a single person who falls squarely into a level without significant overlaps. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why you are not able to get a direct answer to this. Take for instance, some of the thoughts in this thread: http://www.mothering...f-giftedness/20 (I just googled Ruf level 2 vocabulary to find this. You should be able to keyword search on google and get other hits too).

Don't know if this is helpful in any way. Take care!

#10 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:00 AM

I'm sorry you feel this way. I think the problem is not that your question wasn't simple and direct but that it's difficult to offer a simple, direct answer to a question like this one.

Researching giftedness has become a passion for me and I have to say that I just cannot trust Ruf's levels because there's just too much room for ambiguity. I haven't met a single person who falls squarely into a level without significant overlaps. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why you are not able to get a direct answer to this. Take for instance, some of the thoughts in this thread: http://www.mothering...f-giftedness/20 (I just googled Ruf level 2 vocabulary to find this. You should be able to keyword search on google and get other hits too).

Don't know if this is helpful in any way. Take care!


I do appreciate your response, because I know you are taking my question seriously. I feel like there must be an answer though, and maybe this is one of those situations where I'm not expressing my thoughts well enough.

Giftedness has to be defined as SOMETHING, right? There is a range that is average, and then there is something that is far enough beyond that to be defined as "gifted," not just "above average." The psychological field uses numbers to define all of this. People on this very board do, in fact, use testing to HELP them assess their children. These tests produce numbers that signify a below average, average, above average, or gifted range. The edges might be somewhat blurred, but it is still clear that a child who scores average in math, to the extent we can trust any given test scores to determine anything, which I was abundantly clear to emphasize in my OP, did NOT score in the gifted level for math. They just didn't. There is nothing complicated whatsoever about this. These same rules would apply for vocabulary abilities, I would think. So far, there have been no arguments here to say that they don't, just that you can't always infer giftedness from test scores. This is not the same as saying there is no such thing as giftedness shown in vocabulary. Hence, my question, how advanced is enough to be in the gifted range? Again, if a child scored exactly at their age level, it would be ludicrous to argue that that score is actually a gifted-level score. Could the child still be gifted? Of course. But that wasn't my question.

#11 Embassy

Embassy

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3149 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:01 AM

So if a child is Level 2 gifted (I'm using that to get a low-end marker), and that giftedness shows up in verbal abilities, what would you expect the child's MINIMUM score to be on a vocabulary assessment for a child who is three years, six months? The test is scored in years and months. "Minimum" meaning, anything less and you would not assume (based solely on that one test, which is ridiculous, but go with me on this) the child was actually at least Level 2 gifted verbally, but was merely bright.

Nothing whatsoever is at stake here, I am just curious.

Thanks. :001_smile:


What test? Are you talking about age equivalents? Vocabulary (receptive and expressive) can give you a good idea about the child's abilities, but they are very limited in their scope. Vocabulary is only a part of verbal skills. You need to look at sentence complexity, grammar usage, and ability to communicate appropriately with others.

I don't think you can determine gifted based on age equivalents. You would need to look more at standard scores and confidence intervals. If the standard score was 140 (14) or over I would assume gifted verbally. I have no idea what that would translate out to for age equivalents though. You would have to look at the individual test to see how they score and use age equivalencies.

#12 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:43 AM

What test? Are you talking about age equivalents? Vocabulary (receptive and expressive) can give you a good idea about the child's abilities, but they are very limited in their scope. Vocabulary is only a part of verbal skills. You need to look at sentence complexity, grammar usage, and ability to communicate appropriately with others.

It was an assessment she took as a part of a research study she participated in. This is terrible, but I can't remember the exact name of it. I know Peabody and Vocabulary were in the title. I didn't think to ask more about it at the time, because I knew it wasn't anything official that I would be putting in her records. I agree that it is a very limited test.

I don't think you can determine gifted based on age equivalents. You would need to look more at standard scores and confidence intervals. If the standard score was 140 (14) or over I would assume gifted verbally. I have no idea what that would translate out to for age equivalents though. You would have to look at the individual test to see how they score and use age equivalencies.


That was how the test was scored, by age. Maybe, since most tests aren't scored this way, age equivalency isn't common knowledge like more typical scoring is? I think I'm going to try asking the tester and see if she can figure it out for me (or see if this data has been worked out in the first place). I just know she's busy, and I didn't want to bother her when her position isn't paid in the first place. :001_smile:

#13 quark

quark

    Celebrating Curiosity!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2115 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 12:52 AM

Hence, my question, how advanced is enough to be in the gifted range?

Just my own 2cents but depending on the type of test and child's age: For the WiscIV, there's a call to lower the gifted range from 130+ to 120+ - so we're talking **gifted starting at 120-ish. From lurking on this forum: http://giftedissues....ngifted.org/BB/, I have read that 150+ on the WISC IV's VCI subsection is considered verbally PG. So I'd guess a child who's scoring about a year ahead would be considered gifted and about 1.5-2 years or more highly to profoundly gifted. Just hazarding a guess and my math is probably wonky. But as you've pointed out in your OP, I'm just "going with you on this" based on my limited experience with my only child and newfound passion researching these things.

Sorry that I'm not able to cite sources as I'm in a hurry but the Gifted Development Center and Hoagies websites are good places to read more.
This might also be a good question to ask on the davidson forum.

All the best. Hope you discover enough to give you peace of mind.

Edited by quark, 18 July 2011 - 01:06 AM.
**I'd mentioned plain vanilla gifted and thought it might not be the best term to use


#14 quark

quark

    Celebrating Curiosity!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2115 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:10 AM

That was how the test was scored, by age. Maybe, since most tests aren't scored this way, age equivalency isn't common knowledge like more typical scoring is?

Ask for percentile if available. Depending on the test, giftedness would probably fall in the 95% + range. Another guess.

#15 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:11 AM

Just my own 2cents but depending on the type of test and child's age: For the WiscIV, there's a call to lower the gifted range from 130+ to 120+ - so we're talking plain vanilla gifted starting at 120-ish. From lurking on this forum: http://giftedissues....ngifted.org/BB/, I have read that 150+ on the WISC IV's VCI subsection is considered verbally PG. So I'd guess a child who's scoring about a year ahead would be considered gifted and about 1.5-2 years or more highly to profoundly gifted. Just hazarding a guess and my math is probably wonky. But as you've pointed out in your OP, I'm just "going with you on this" based on my limited experience with my only child and newfound passion researching these things.

Fair enough. Thanks. :001_smile: It really is an interesting topic, isn't it? Is your child gifted?

Sorry that I'm not able to cite sources as I'm in a hurry but the Gifted Development Center and Hoagies websites are good places to read more.
This might also be a good question to ask on the davidson forum.

As you can probably tell, I always end up with the one question that is way too specific to be answered on a website. :lol: And the last time I asked a question about identification on the Davidson forum, I got a whole bunch of people who just gave me examples on how much more advanced their own child was than the child I had described. :lol::lol::lol: If that's what having a profoundly gifted child does to a person, I am SO glad I don't have to worry about that with this one! :tongue_smilie:

All the best. Hope you discover enough to give you peace of mind.


Oh gosh. I'm more worried about people judging me here than I am about this topic. Like you, I just like to research and understand what is what. :001_smile: But thank you for your help.

#16 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:13 AM

Ask for percentiles if available. Giftedness would most likely fall in the 95% + range.


I'll see if this information is available. The tester may have assumed I wasn't interested in that information, and just didn't mention it.

#17 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:16 AM

This is the test, in case anyone was wondering: http://www.pearsonas...tm?Pid=PAa30700 It appears the newest version is scored in different ways, but the one the tester used didn't appear to be in any way new. Yes, I will definitely just ask the tester if she can give me any more scoring information.

#18 dmmetler

dmmetler

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8189 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 08:25 AM

The other thing to consider is that even if verbal skills are your child's greatest area of giftedness, that doesn't mean that that's the area where you're going to need to focus your efforts. Language is my daughter's area of strength, absolutely. But the areas where I have the most difficulty finding materials that work for her, and where she sometimes struggles and gets frustrated are the areas that aren't easily expressed in words. I've noticed that psychologists, testers, and the folks in gifted programs tend to jump on the HIGH test scores and talk about them, but I've found that it's the ones that are lower that tell me the most.

#19 Crimson Wife

Crimson Wife

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12498 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 08:38 AM

RaeAnne- the reason I keep bringing up the fact that not all kids who are gifted are "early bloomers" is because those kids will eventually jump percentile ranks and ultimately wind up ahead of kids who are merely "hothoused" (NOT saying that's what you are doing, just talking about the Jr. Kumon crowd).

When my DS took the WPPSI test at 3 1/2, his verbal IQ was calculated in the low-average range. But if he were to take that same test today, his verbal IQ would come out much higher because he has overcome his speech & language delay. This is a kid who went from not being able to speak understandably at 3 to reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone at 5 3/4.

Some kids with a large vocabulary at 3 1/2 will turn out to be verbally gifted. Others will turn out to be merely bright and fall in percentile terms behind the "late blooming" gifted kids. Only in retrospect can the reliability of early assessments be determined.

If you could have access to a crystal ball and see that your child has a true IQ of, say, 125 (level 2 gifted) vs. say, 115 (high average)- what exactly would you change about the types of things you are doing with her?

*THAT* is what I mean by saying I'm not sure why it really matters at this point.

#20 Embassy

Embassy

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3149 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 09:28 AM

It was an assessment she took as a part of a research study she participated in. This is terrible, but I can't remember the exact name of it. I know Peabody and Vocabulary were in the title. I didn't think to ask more about it at the time, because I knew it wasn't anything official that I would be putting in her records. I agree that it is a very limited test.

That was how the test was scored, by age. Maybe, since most tests aren't scored this way, age equivalency isn't common knowledge like more typical scoring is? I think I'm going to try asking the tester and see if she can figure it out for me (or see if this data has been worked out in the first place). I just know she's busy, and I didn't want to bother her when her position isn't paid in the first place. :001_smile:


It sounds like the PPVT Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. It does have standard scores. You may have just been given the age equivalent. I've given this test numerous times. If she scored very high I would consider other behaviors or other testing to determine if your child is gifted. This test alone isn't a great predictor especially at a young age.

Edited by Wehomeschool, 18 July 2011 - 09:39 AM.


#21 EKS

EKS

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9986 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 09:31 AM

In glancing though your other posts on this thread, I see that your child was given the Peabody and that you have an age equivalent score. The problem with trying to convert an age equivalent to a percentile (which is essentially what you want to do) is that different skills produce different "widths" of the normal curve. You see this quite strongly on achievement tests: a child performing 3 years above level on a reading test will not be remotely at the same percentile as the child performing 3 years above level on a math test. The curve is wider for the reading (at least at the upper end) and therefore, the percentile is lower (I believe the curve is wider for reading because kids tend to self-teach reading, particularly beyond a certain point whereas they don't do this with math as much and most kids' scores will be clustered around their grade level). For example, when my son was 7yo he took the WJ-III, an individual achievement test, and he scored at the 99.9th percentile for math calculation which equated to age 10-5, but only at the 97th percentile for reading which equated to age 12-2. If you use the ratio method for converting age equivalent to standard scores, you get 144 for math and 168 for reading, but the actual standard scores were 153 and 128 respectively, with only the math score being in the gifted range.

So, I guess my point is, even if she got an age equivalent of 7.0 (double her age), it doesn't necessarily translate into a gifted percentile. And even if it is a gifted percentile now, that may (or may not) change as some of the less verbal kids become more verbal and cross percentiles thereby making less "space" in those top percentiles.

Edited by EKS, 18 July 2011 - 09:38 AM.


#22 zaichiki

zaichiki

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3082 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:09 PM

Yes, hence the "if " I made sure to include.

You know (this isn't directed at anyone in particular here), I get as much grief on this forum as I do on the main board. I wish there was just ONE place where a person could ask questions, and not have people decide for you if it's a valid question in the first place. This isn't any different than telling someone you shouldn't be using a particular curriculum because your child is too young. :( I don't know how many more qualifiers I could have possibly put on my post to make it clear that I was just asking a simple, direct question....


Maybe your question is too general and people are thinking of their own kids/experiences in their answers?

Be more direct. Ask specifically about your child and her experience. What exactly do you want to know. Be brave! :001_smile: (*I* won't tell you whether or not it's a valid question.)

ETA: After reading through the whole thread -- it sounds to me like you honestly want to know if your child would be labeled as gifted and, if so, what range. Why not do an IQ test? (It's not a bad thing to do. I think really wanting to know is an adequate reason for testing, especially if it's important enough that you are thinking about it regularly and wanting to extrapolate other test scores to guess at the answer.)

Edited by zaichiki, 18 July 2011 - 01:22 PM.


#23 zaichiki

zaichiki

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3082 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:12 PM

I have to say that I just cannot trust Ruf's levels because there's just too much room for ambiguity. I haven't met a single person who falls squarely into a level without significant overlaps.


Oh I agree! I remember the first time I read her level descriptions: I was thoroughly confused! How could each of my children seem to fit some (and not all) of every single level?!

ETA: It wasn't long after I read Ruf's descriptions that we ended up doing FSIQ for our older two. I'm so glad we did: it gave us useful information about specific strengths and weaknesses, an objective person's perspective, and a baseline that we later used to discover dyslexia. The Ruf levels just confused me and offered no information about *my* child.

Edited by zaichiki, 18 July 2011 - 01:24 PM.


#24 Embassy

Embassy

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3149 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:24 PM

Oh I agree! I remember the first time I read her level descriptions: I was thoroughly confused! How could each of my children seem to fit some (and not all) of every single level?!


I wonder how parents know all those things. I certainly never paid attention to exactly when all those milestones happened.

#25 zaichiki

zaichiki

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3082 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:29 PM

I wonder how parents know all those things. I certainly never paid attention to exactly when all those milestones happened.

A lot of parents do. It's very common, in my family, to keep a baby book and write this stuff down as a keepsake.

#26 Embassy

Embassy

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3149 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:43 PM

A lot of parents do. It's very common, in my family, to keep a baby book and write this stuff down as a keepsake.


It must be me then:tongue_smilie: I certainly don't remember when they first did puzzles with x number or pieces or first started "reading" names on signs or stores or when they could count to 10 or know their colors or when they first understood multiplication. What does "know their colors" mean anyway? Know red, yellow, and blue or be able to name colors like chartreuse and vermilion?

#27 quark

quark

    Celebrating Curiosity!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2115 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 01:47 PM

Earlier in the thread, I included a link to another message board where parents mentioned Ruf's book being a lot clearer and detailed than the snippets available on the web. I feel that I already know enough at this juncture and don't require the book but anyone reading this who is just starting out researching giftedness might benefit from reading it. If you don't plan to have your child take an IQ test now but think your child fits Ruf's levels 3/4/5, the next step may be to try to get your hands on Miraca Gross' book.

I don't think it's ever too early to research all this. As long as you have your feet set firmly on the ground, that is.

#28 LittleIzumi

LittleIzumi

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6276 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 02:17 PM

Earlier in the thread, I included a link to another message board where parents mentioned Ruf's book being a lot clearer and detailed than the snippets available on the web. I feel that I already know enough at this juncture and don't require the book but anyone reading this who is just starting out researching giftedness might benefit from reading it. If you don't plan to have your child take an IQ test now but think your child fits Ruf's levels 3/4/5, the next step may be to try to get your hands on Miraca Gross' book.

I don't think it's ever too early to research all this. As long as you have your feet set firmly on the ground, that is.


Maybe I should try her book, because I agree that the couple of pages I've seen are a bit confusing. The dds have bits of most of the levels, and for myself I seem to fit Level 3 except the only IQ test I had (so says my dad, no details) puts me at 124, which is solidly in Level 1. My actual behavior and abilities are levels higher. Plus trying to remember when I figured out division is a bit hard, lol. So trying to peg any of this down without a professional is :confused:.

#29 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 02:28 PM

If you could have access to a crystal ball and see that your child has a true IQ of, say, 125 (level 2 gifted) vs. say, 115 (high average)- what exactly would you change about the types of things you are doing with her?

Nothing. :001_smile: Well, I might feel a little more motivated to do more enrichment activities, because I would feel that she needed them more than I realize. I really, truly am just interested because it's, well, interesting. I think children's minds are absolutely fascinating, and I like to know as many details as possible.

*THAT* is what I mean by saying I'm not sure why it really matters at this point.


I appreciate your clarification. I understand that there are a great many parents who care entirely too much about a label. There are many parents who don't understand the difference, as you mentioned, between a hothoused child and a gifted one. There is no way for you to know what is in my head, so you can only reply based on what I have said. For the future, I hope it provides clarity to know that I have read about this topic a great deal, but because I see no benefit in labeling a child gifted when they are not, and because I have no PRACTICAL experience in seeing what is typical or not in children, I ask a great deal of questions to help me clarify things in my head. Unfortunately, I am a very detail-oriented person, so simple things can end up quite complicated, as you can see by this thread.

It sounds like the PPVT Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. It does have standard scores. You may have just been given the age equivalent. I've given this test numerous times. If she scored very high I would consider other behaviors or other testing to determine if your child is gifted. This test alone isn't a great predictor especially at a young age.


I agree. Having observed the test being given, I am quite sure it wasn't completely accurate for my child in assessing even what the test was MEANT to evaluate. :lol:

#30 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 02:37 PM

So, I guess my point is, even if she got an age equivalent of 7.0 (double her age), it doesn't necessarily translate into a gifted percentile. And even if it is a gifted percentile now, that may (or may not) change as some of the less verbal kids become more verbal and cross percentiles thereby making less "space" in those top percentiles.


If this is how it is, then I'm just going to accept it and move on at this point. :lol:

ETA: After reading through the whole thread -- it sounds to me like you honestly want to know if your child would be labeled as gifted and, if so, what range. Why not do an IQ test? (It's not a bad thing to do. I think really wanting to know is an adequate reason for testing, especially if it's important enough that you are thinking about it regularly and wanting to extrapolate other test scores to guess at the answer.)


I do, ultimately, want to know this, but it feels vain to me to pay for a test that isn't necessary other than to satisfy my own curiousity. :tongue_smilie: She will be able to take the Peabody in a year and a half, and I figure we will just go from there. But that doesn't stop me from wondering along the way. Honestly, I did a decent job of just shelving it, but then I kept getting comments from a mom with three eg/pg kids, and it just fueled the fire.

Oh I agree! I remember the first time I read her level descriptions: I was thoroughly confused! How could each of my children seem to fit some (and not all) of every single level?!


Thank you for saying this!!! I thought I was just too inexperienced to "get it" or something. I'm glad to know it isn't just me.

I wonder how parents know all those things. I certainly never paid attention to exactly when all those milestones happened.


Again, glad it's not just me! :D

Maybe I should try her book, because I agree that the couple of pages I've seen are a bit confusing. The dds have bits of most of the levels, and for myself I seem to fit Level 3 except the only IQ test I had (so says my dad, no details) puts me at 124, which is solidly in Level 1. My actual behavior and abilities are levels higher. Plus trying to remember when I figured out division is a bit hard, lol. So trying to peg any of this down without a professional is :confused:.


I completely understand (although I have no idea what my IQ test said, just that I qualified for the GT program; I certainly don't know when I passed those milestones!)!

#31 Sevilla

Sevilla

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 816 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 02:43 PM

Testing for true giftedness (vs. just being an early bloomer verbally) is most accurate after age 7. Testing between 7-8 is your best and clearest glimpse into scores that will stay consistent throughout the rest of their development.

Testing a 3 year old is like scoring 11 month olds on their athletic ability - some will be walking and appear 'super coordinated' but that turns out not be the case a few years down the line (my DS was like that - early gross motor milestones until he was 2-3 and now he's in the bottom half of athletic ability).

#32 boscopup

boscopup

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10761 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 03:04 PM

First, I have to say that I totally did not understand the original question until we got to about page 3. :lol:

I think you'll be able to figure out more once your child is "school age". At that point, the differences start to show themselves more. I don't think you need to do anything different based on whether she's gifted or not. At age 3, every child should be read to, go on nature walks, help parents with houswork and yardwork, be talked to a lot, and again... read, read, read. I'm sure you're probably doing all those things. ;) At 3, I could tell my oldest was certainly doing some things that most of his same-age pers weren't (in the reading/math departments), but I didn't change anything because of that. There was nothing to do differently from a kid that's not learning to read or learning to add/subtract, etc. My middle son was not doing the same things (speech delay has made him slower to learn than his brother, though I suspect he may be more analytically "gifted" than his big brother... time will tell). I still did the same things that I did with my oldest. We read, we talk, we learn to do chores, we play. And when he showed interest in learning to read and do math, we started learning to read and do math.

Anyway, I think a bit of patience in order. And I say that because I know it's hard to be patient. Trust me, I really wonder how my middle son will end up - he's such a strange bird in general. :lol: I'm just waiting a few years, and time will tell how he'll turn out. It's really hard to tell the difference between "bright" and "moderately gifted" at ages 3-5. And reading those Ruf descriptions... my oldest wasn't verbal early (he didn't talk until 2 years old, and my youngest did the exact same thing... middle child didn't talk until 3 years old), but he's excellent with language now. People sometimes say grammar is too abstract for first-second graders, and I look at my son's understanding of grammar and go :confused:. He has no problem with it. He thinks abstractly enough to understand it, I guess. Likewise, he understands mathematical concepts such as negative numbers and even imaginary numbers. He was able to multiply/divide at age 5, which is on the "Level 3 list", yet he wasn't doing anything that required talking before age 2 (he may have known his letters/numbers/etc. before age 2 and just couldn't tell me... I do remember him recognizing letters at the same time that he started to talk, and he knew all the sounds very shortly after that). I have no clue what "level" he's supposed to be on that list, nor do I know at all what his IQ is. We haven't had a good reason to have him tested, beyond curiosity. He's pretty easy to read for the most part, unlike his younger brother. :tongue_smilie:

In short, don't worry what the test says at this point. Just continue to follow her lead. You'll know soon enough whether she's gifted or not. They grow up fast! ;)

#33 quark

quark

    Celebrating Curiosity!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2115 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 03:09 PM

I do, ultimately, want to know this, but it feels vain to me to pay for a test that isn't necessary other than to satisfy my own curiousity. :tongue_smilie: She will be able to take the Peabody in a year and a half, and I figure we will just go from there. But that doesn't stop me from wondering along the way. Honestly, I did a decent job of just shelving it, but then I kept getting comments from a mom with three eg/pg kids, and it just fueled the fire.


FWIW, you're not alone in feeling this. And I don't think it's vain. Possibly, unnecessary if you're going to be homeschooling and read your child well and are able to customize, enrich, accelerate appropriately. But good to test if you need much more than that, if your child is significantly diff from the norm and showing it, very voriacious in appetite to learn that you suspect he/she will outstrip your ability in teaching/ guiding very soon and/or if you tend to second guess all the decisions you make and the second guessing is stressing you out.

Personality of parent/child counts for a lot also. But I think the need to know can be very strong and finding out in the end will be more helpful than most realize.

I don't think the Peabody will help give you more complete answers though. Like Sevilla, I'd suggest waiting till the child is at least 7, but preferably not older than 8 and a half.

#34 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 03:25 PM

First, I have to say that I totally did not understand the original question until we got to about page 3. :lol:


I've heard that before about my posts. :lol:

I don't think the Peabody will help give you more complete answers though. Like Sevilla, I'd suggest waiting till the child is at least 7, but preferably not older than 8 and a half.


We could do the WJ-III instead, but I was told younger children who aren't at risk of hitting the ceiling will show their strengths and weaknesses better on the Peabody, while the WJ is better for kids who need a higher ceiling. Is this not the case?

#35 Nart

Nart

    Hive Mind Level 4 Worker: Builder Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 08:41 PM

I would never recommend the WJ-III cognitive or academic assessment for a three year old because it is not an engaging test. The Peabody tends to be a more engaging test and can be used for very young children to very old (2 1/2 yrs. to 90+).

I have the Peabody Manual and will try to answer your question, if I understood correctly. (If you have the raw score, I could tell you the percentile rank but you would also have to know if they used form A or form B ). Age equivalents can be tricky because they are NOT even increments. If you score two years above your peers at age 2 that is impressive. If you score two years above your peers at age 15, you might still be in the average range.

So if she took the test and was 3 years 6 months to 3 years 7 months the average (50th percentile rank) raw score ( how many points you earned) was 53 on Form A.

A raw score at that age (3 years, 6 months) of 79 converts to a standard score of 120 which is in the 91st percentile rank. The age equivalent for this raw score is 4 years, 11 months. So if they told you her age equivalent was at least 4 years, 11 months then she would have scored higher than or equal to 91 percent of children her same age (3 years, 6 months). Hopefully that made sense to you.

If at age 3 year, 6 months you receive a raw score of 92, this equates to a percentile rank of 130 which is in the 98th percentile rank. This is the average score that a child at 5 years, 8 months received.

So roughly - a 3 1/2 year old who has the vocabulary skills of a 5 1/2 year old would have be in the top 2 percent of kids her same age on the Peabody.

Is that what you were asking?

#36 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 10:32 PM

I would never recommend the WJ-III cognitive or academic assessment for a three year old because it is not an engaging test. The Peabody tends to be a more engaging test and can be used for very young children to very old (2 1/2 yrs. to 90+).

I have the Peabody Manual and will try to answer your question, if I understood correctly. (If you have the raw score, I could tell you the percentile rank but you would also have to know if they used form A or form B ). Age equivalents can be tricky because they are NOT even increments. If you score two years above your peers at age 2 that is impressive. If you score two years above your peers at age 15, you might still be in the average range.

So if she took the test and was 3 years 6 months to 3 years 7 months the average (50th percentile rank) raw score ( how many points you earned) was 53 on Form A.

A raw score at that age (3 years, 6 months) of 79 converts to a standard score of 120 which is in the 91st percentile rank. The age equivalent for this raw score is 4 years, 11 months. So if they told you her age equivalent was at least 4 years, 11 months then she would have scored higher than or equal to 91 percent of children her same age (3 years, 6 months). Hopefully that made sense to you.

If at age 3 year, 6 months you receive a raw score of 92, this equates to a percentile rank of 130 which is in the 98th percentile rank. This is the average score that a child at 5 years, 8 months received.

So roughly - a 3 1/2 year old who has the vocabulary skills of a 5 1/2 year old would have be in the top 2 percent of kids her same age on the Peabody.

Is that what you were asking?


YES!! Except for the fact that the first part of your message leads me to believe you are talking about the PIAT, and not the Peabody Vocab. test. But it works either way. Now I'm rolling my eyes even more over the fact that she got bored at the end and was giving dumb answers. When they're getting "swimming," "brain," and "knee" wrong, you know they're just done. :lol: Oh well.

But the PIAT can't be done until they're 5, can it? :confused:

#37 Nart

Nart

    Hive Mind Level 4 Worker: Builder Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 11:16 PM

I listed age equiv. scores for the Peabody picture vocabulary test - 4th edition. The examiner says a word and the child points to one of 4 colored pictures. Glad that the info was helpful.

#38 EthiopianFood

EthiopianFood

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2318 posts

Posted 18 July 2011 - 11:17 PM

I listed age equiv. scores for the Peabody picture vocabulary test - 4th edition. The examiner says a word and the child points to one of 4 colored pictures. Glad that the info was helpful.


Oh good! I just didn't want to get too excited. Thank you so much for your help.


What's with the ads?