Pushing and comparing Ruf's Levels of Giftedness

[nitascool]

I've been struggling with the olé' pushing issue lately. How do you know how much to push, when to back off and when to just let go all together. I thought that getting my dss' IQ would be helpful. Well, it has been, but only minimally. In some area's this is so easy. I just set the stuff in front of them let them devour it. But what about those things that aren't so fun. Like History. My kids could do tons with history, but they don't find it very fun.

 

I could just require their age equivalent in those areas of not so fun, but I feel like I'd be doing them a disservice. And playing into a just get by mentality. I don't want to do that, but I also don't want to pressure them too much. So I've been looking for some kind of scale to guide me.

 

I looked at Ruf's Levels of Giftedness and comparing what she has to say with my oldest two children. According to the Approximate Score Range my oldest's IQ would place him in Level 1 but when I read the Level Summaries. Level three and four descriptions seems to better fit them.

 

My oldest did all the things mentioned in level 1 and 2 all but two in level 3 and the same two in level 4; grasp skip counting, backwards, addition, subtraction, more and less, by 3 to 4 years (he just learned this a few weeks before his 8th birthday... though he understood the concept he couldn't do computations with addition or subtraction consistently) and “read†numerous sight words between 15 and 20 months (he did this at closer to 24 months he could read "Dear Zoo" and any of the words found in it elsewhere).

 

He's working at 2nd grade level in math. We are doing WTM rotation with history and science using both Grammar and Logic Stage materials, and he's doing 7th grade language arts. We have always insisted that he work at or close to the level across the board. So if he's using a 7th grade grammar book he has to do all the work asked in the book at that level. In writing we do make some allowances, penmanship wise.

 

My 6yo took an IQ test but was unable to finish it. When I compare him to level 3 there are three things he could not do. He could not print letters, numbers, words, and their names between 2¾ and 3½ years. (he has SPD and is getting OT for fine motor delay and is just learning to write at a K level now). He didn't grasp skip counting, backwards, basic addition and subtraction, by 3 to 4 years. (He just learned to do these things this year).

Many “read†numerous sight words between 15 and 20 months. (he was reading sight words at 24 months, no more then 10).

 

SO my question is, which is a better indication of they're level of giftedness the FSIQ, the summary or something else? How do I know weather I am not expecting enough of them, pushing them, pressuring them, or overwhelming them?

[Kay in Cal]

Check out the Gifted Development Center's website. They think that for most gifted children, the old SB-LM test is the way to go. That was our experience as well... the new tests have a much lower ceiling. They also offer a range of tests and services to discern ways in which your child might be "twice exceptional"--like gifted with a LD as well.

[Capt_Uhura]

I found IQ only minimally helpful as well. Also given the caveats of using FSIQ vs GAI of the WISCIV, if your child has a significant difference between FSIQ and GAI it's hard to know which number to use when looking at IQ scales.

 

Have you looked at Explore testing or SCAT testing? I've been told these tests can give you handle on where your child is functioning. Achievement/ability tests such as the WJIII can you give you an overall feeling on where on the gifted continuum your child lies - I've been told. I also don't think a child needs to be 100% challenged in every subject all the time.

 

Plus, w/ Ruf's I've never understood how many do you have to have at each level to be that level. 50%? 75% 95%

[nmoira]

Plus, w/ Ruf's I've never understood how many do you have to have at each level to be that level. 50%? 75% 95%

I have an even more basic problem with Ruf: Her research subjects seem to be primarily self selected (i.e. her clients) and well to do. I admire what she's trying to do, and see the potential of this type of framework to help identify children both from traditionally under identified populations and those who are under-performing in a school setting. However, IIRC from her case studies in the book, none of her clients seem to be from those populations.

 

Ruf's Levels represent a good start, but, IMHO, just a start.

[LisaKinVA]

SO my question is, which is a better indication of they're level of giftedness the FSIQ, the summary or something else? How do I know weather I am not expecting enough of them, pushing them, pressuring them, or overwhelming them?

 

From what I've read in the rest of your post (which I didn't quote), and your question -- here's my take.

 

FSIQ testing has been helpful in understanding how I can best approach certain things with my oldest son -- it really reinforced my intuition about my son's strengths and weeknesses, and helped me come up with a plan I was comfortable (mind you, I was already doing much of what was suggested, but I wanted more assurances).

 

As a general rule, I use standard expectations of what should be done for their age/grade -- regardless of the gifted-ness scale. That's my "baseline." These are things like -- how MUCH they should write, how long they should be in school, things like that.

 

Next, I make sure he's adequately challenged based upon the curriculum placement tests he's taken (we used K12 at www.k12.com). From there, I can see WHY he scored higher or lower on a section (because I was right there with him). Plus, since I go by the philosophy that history usually tracks with LA and science tracks to math level -- figuring out those levels much easier as well.

 

For a younger child, enjoying school is important. It's not that they get to pick and choose what they get to do soley because of what they like, but I wouldn't force a child to do "more" because their IQ level said they should, when they don't really don't like it. That can do more harm than good in the short and long-term. Know what I mean?

 

Some children (gifted or not) just aren't self- motivated. My oldest boy would rather do *anything* than school work -- and everything is a potential distraction. And that, to me, is the big difference between using Ruf's scale as a measure. Using Ruf's guidelines, my children (at least the oldest 3) fall easilly into the 3/4 areas. But they aren't doing work at a clip that will have them starting high school by the 3rd grade (at least my oldest isn't). And, that is due to a lack of self-motivation. My K-age daughter will begin 3rd grade math in August. She "gets" it -- and is motivated by learning new concepts. I let her fly. I wouldn't be surprised if she catches up to her older brother within 2 years because she's MOTIVATED to do math. My 4yo is quickly catching up to his sister in reading -- because he thinks it's fun, and he's easilly motivated (my K-age daugher isn't a reading slouch, it's not her passion). That said, none of my current children are showing any inclination to catch up to my K-age daughter in art and music -- something she is passionate about.

 

Back to my oldest -- He has the ability to get a lot more accomplished -- but not the desire. So, I have to pick my battles.

 

So, as long as you don't compromise on your MINIMUM standards you should be fine. Give yourself some flexibility -- and your child to explore.

 

When my son becomes engrossed in something, he won't stop -- and I let him fly. On the flip side, when he digs in because of the "I don't wanna" I dig in and make him -- and it gets done.

 

It's hard... just know you aren't alone. Those inner struggles still plague me, even after all of the testing and evaluations.

[Kay in Cal]

Back to my oldest -- He has the ability to get a lot more accomplished -- but not the desire. So, I have to pick my battles.

 

So, as long as you don't compromise on your MINIMUM standards you should be fine. Give yourself some flexibility -- and your child to explore.

 

When my son becomes engrossed in something, he won't stop -- and I let him fly. On the flip side, when he digs in because of the "I don't wanna" I dig in and make him -- and it gets done.

 

Oh my, this sounds familiar. Good to know I'm not the only one with a kid like this!

[summer]

Ruf's descriptions are definitely inaccurate.

 

DS6 fits level 4/5. His IQ tests there too.

 

DS13, DD12, and my IQ fit in level 5, but none of us read before kindergarten. In fact, DS13 was so far behind his age mates when he started kindergarten, we really thought the birth trauma affected him badly. He could not count past 3 (even though he turned 6 in Nov) and could not say his alphabet or write his name. By 5th grade, his IQ tests in level 5, he is in the public school gifted and highly gifted programs. His reading level ceiling'd out the tests available by 5th grade.

 

5 years old is not a good time to estimate the future of a child. In fact, I never taught my children much. I never pushed them. I did push DS13 to learn to count and learn his alphabet, it was fruitless. But once he learned to read, he way more than took off. Now, one of his hobbies is reading books on physics (he has college level books I got from the used book store or old ones from DH and I from college) and self teaching himself how to do C#.

[nmoira]

Ruf's descriptions are definitely inaccurate.

 

DS6 fits level 4/5. His IQ tests there too.

 

DS13, DD12, and my IQ fit in level 5, but none of us read before kindergarten. In fact, DS13 was so far behind his age mates when he started kindergarten, we really thought the birth trauma affected him badly. He could not count past 3 (even though he turned 6 in Nov) and could not say his alphabet or write his name. By 5th grade, his IQ tests in level 5, he is in the public school gifted and highly gifted programs. His reading level ceiling'd out the tests available by 5th grade.

That's not how Ruf's levels work. There is overlap of IQ ranges between levels, and more than one child with a 141+ IQ was placed in lower levels in her case studies, IIRC including at least 1 placed in Level 3. She uses other factors than just IQ scores including early childhood markers, personality, and drive/rage to master.

 

5 years old is not a good time to estimate the future of a child.

Of course it isn't, but the group of children with the best chance at bright futures are the almost gifted and moderately gifted kids, not the Level 5 or PG kids anyway.

 

Edited to add: I have my own problems with Ruf and her methodology, but I appreciate what she's trying to do. It will be interesting to see where this is 10 years down the road.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Oh my, this sounds familiar. Good to know I'm not the only one with a kid like this!

 

We should start a club. :001_smile:

[summer]

My now 6 yr old was reading before 4. He was tested 6 months before kinder and placed in to 1st grade as his lowest subject, but 3rd grade for reading. I never taught him or pushed anything at all. I only would answer his questions if he asked. I do not know for sure how he learned to read on his own. His IQ hit the ceilings for even his age. So he fit what she listed perfectly.

 

My now 12 yr old did not fit anything at all from her early years of explanation. She was also hearing impaired so she knew some sign as well as was learning to speak English when she was 4 yrs old and such.

 

Frankly, Ruf's levels of giftedness makes no sense to me. Basically, it appears she is trying to make kids fit in to these little boxes of catagories and then making huge explanations based on how our very different children fit in to one of 5 boxes. As we all know, children rarely fit in to neat cute little boxes. Gifted children especially cannot be stuffed in to a nice, square box. And that is all Ruf's levels of giftness is. Just another attempt to fit kids in to a box and give them a label rather than letting kids be kids and be who they are and will be. I would leave Ruf's levels as interesting, but qualify it where I put Astrology-the cute little box with perfect edges and perfect angles where I stuff all the fun and interesting things to read, but do not really apply to real life, but was fun to read and think about when there.

[nmoira]

My now 12 yr old did not fit anything at all from her early years of explanation. She was also hearing impaired so she knew some sign as well as was learning to speak English when she was 4 yrs old and such.

Your daughter does not remotely resemble any of the children Ruf used as case studies, so this isn't surprising. :) That's the problem with a small sample.

 

Frankly, Ruf's levels of giftedness makes no sense to me. Basically, it appears she is trying to make kids fit in to these little boxes of catagories and then making huge explanations based on how our very different children fit in to one of 5 boxes.

I agree her Levels are not there yet and perhaps never will be (though I should be surprised if someone else added and refined down the road). But what she's trying to do it come up with a way to recognize giftedness on more than just the basis of IQ scores -- to make the lines fuzzier, not sharper. She has problems, the fact that her samples are too small and self-selected being primary among them.

[nmoira]

 

I could just require their age equivalent in those areas of not so fun, but I feel like I'd be doing them a disservice. And playing into a just get by mentality. I don't want to do that, but I also don't want to pressure them too much. So I've been looking for some kind of scale to guide me.

Some subjects lend themselves well to self pacing, like math, science, and foreign language. For history we choose to move at the same pace we would otherwise, but use more challenging materials. However, if the interest isn't there in a particular subject, I personally wouldn't push a child to do more work than" average," with the exception of using materials that meet their reading and comprehension level.