Jump to content

Menu

IQs, testing, growth mindsets, and other rambling thoughts


Recommended Posts

There's been so much on here regarding testing recently. Talent searches require some tests. IQ test may be helpful for some things, it seems. Achievement tests seem popular or useful for other things. I don't really understand why you would choose one type of testing over another, unless you want to get into a program that requires a specific test. People talk about 8 yo's being wiggly and 5 yo's being bored and the tests are supposed to be accurate by ages 5-8, but earlier for a very bright child, but it's still normal for a kid to underachieve.

 

So I have all these thoughts swimming in my head right now (my husband likes to refer to this as "spaghetti brain", because everything crosses and spirals through other thoughts and it's all just mixed up), and I'm also reading the Mindsets book, which talks about IQ not being fixed and things some people did to increase their IQ in studies. (Obviously, there are things you can do to improve on achievement tests.) But how does this idea of a growth mindset, and that IQ is not fixed, fit in with IQ testing of children and how can an IQ test really be "accurate by age 8" (suggesting a fixed IQ that can be identified by age 8) if IQ can change? I guess I have all these questions (many of them too unclear to put into words right now, but will program come out down the thread as people help me start to process these thoughts! lol) and thoughts whirling around inside me as I try to decide how to process my own child's test results, and asking myself why I even did it and whether I would/should do it again in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how does this idea of a growth mindset, and that IQ is not fixed, fit in with IQ testing of children and how can an IQ test really be "accurate by age 8" (suggesting a fixed IQ that can be identified by age 8) if IQ can change?

The accurate by 8 is a relative term rather than an absolute term. IQ tests are not perfect and the tester is a human so you get variance there too.

 

Also there is test prep for IQ tests so some parents do game the system.

E.g. http://www.neuropsychnyc.com/Gifted_Programs.html

https://www.testingmom.com/tests/wisc-test/wisc-test-prep/

http://www.criticalthinking.com/articles/test-preparation-practice-for-wisc-assessment

 

In real life, this quote from Hoagie is real where I stay which was why screening for GATE (when it existed) was done in 2nd grade. Many parents send kids to academic preschools to get their kids reading at 3 and writing short sentences at preK.

 

"Meanwhile, there is truth to the oft-heard statement that "kids level out by 3rd grade." No, gifted kids don't level out, they continue to learn faster, and gain quicker, getting further ahead of their age-peers. But... Those kids who are "hot-housed," attend the most academic pre-school, are taught at home, flash carded (no, not those gifted parents who's kids *demand* flashcards, the other kind), and generally reach school already reading some sight words, perhaps even reading, doing some math... those kids often do fall back to "average" by 3rd grade, when the other kids have also learned to read."

 

When my kids were in public schools, they went through Curriculum Based Assessment (CBA). My kids have to hit 95% to subject accelerate so they went through afternoons of testing with their teachers to test out of math and science. My oldest for example was allowed to take algebra 1 and earth science (6th grade) at 4th grade, it was better than nothing because my kids enjoyed the social aspects of school.

 

"Students are passed from grade to grade with scores of 60% or better, but gifted students trying to skip levels are required 85%, 90%, 95% or even better to pass over material they already know"

 

My kids did the SAT and ACT for talent search purposes and also because my kids are interested in brick and mortar high school. Having those scores in hand open discussions. It gives high school principals and guidance counselors something tangible to start discussions on.

 

All quotes are from this Hoagies link http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/why_test.htm

 

ETA:

My wiggly DS11 wasn't able to even do a curriculum based assessment at 5 without walking around or standing or kneeling on the chair or swinging his legs. No way he would sit down for longer than 10mins without bribe unless he is eating while testing. My DS12 could sit down for 3hrs continuous testing at 4yrs 8 months (start of K) until it was the teacher that was exhausted.

Edited by Arcadia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's my understanding that with test prep, you can score up to 1 standard deviation higher on an IQ test than you would without test prep, but that you can't prep yourself to 2 or 3 or whatever standard deviations above what you'd score going in cold. 

 

That said, things like the Flynn effect are interesting too - how living in a world using more abstract reasoning leads successive generations to score higher on tests, even though, realistically, we're not really smarter than our grandparents.

 

I think the "accurate by age 8" thing mostly means that before 8yo IQ tests are a crapshoot - for example, my oldest scored a verbal IQ of 75 at 4yo (WPPSI), 108 or so at 7yo (WISC), and tested into CTY's gifted program at almost 9yo (SCAT) - but it's extremely unlikely that he'd ever score at a PG level, no matter what we do or what he does (and not just because PG level scores are very rare). 

 

I really think it doesn't matter - it's not so much about what your IQ is, as what you do with it. Someone who works hard will do better than someone who doesn't.

 

ETA: to be clear, my oldest has never done any test prep for an IQ test (other than a few sample problems CTY has on their website, but they expect you to have your kid do those, and they're supposedly simpler than the real test - so it's more of an anxiety-reducing feature). 

 

ETA2: and, as a further aside, my oldest's lower scores on his earlier IQ tests weren't for lack of effort - he actually was considered very co-operative by the test psychs.

Edited by luuknam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think the "accurate by age 8" thing mostly means that before 8yo IQ tests are a crapshoot - for example, my oldest scored a verbal IQ of 75 at 4yo (WPPSI), 108 or so at 7yo (WISC), and tested into CTY's gifted program at almost 9yo (SCAT) - but it's extremely unlikely that he'd ever score at a PG level, no matter what we do or what he does (and not just because PG level scores are very rare). 

 

 

 

So..just out of curiosity..why so many tests and why did you start so young?  I'm in no way questioning your decision for so much testing as I'm sure there is a perfectly reasonable answer..just wondering :).  We're considering testing once ds turns 6..mostly just to see how he does and to have the information on hand in the case he's ever eligible for any programs, etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There  is no such thing as an "accurate IQ". Any test is flawed. 

Ideally, you need a test where knowing more does not give one an advantage. You don't want to measure knowledge, but the ability to reason about unknown problems.

If the kids are too young, you run not only into problems with sitting still, concentrating, being motivated, but also have to deal with huge discrepancies from upbringing. Just take the million-word-gap thing; four year olds who are not being exposed to varied language at home will necessarily perform lower on verbal tests than children who have grown up surrounded by language. It has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, just with parenting.

If the test subject is too old, differences in knowledge will again skew the results heavily. 

It seems that around 8 y/o is considered a point in time where other factors are skewing the test results to the least degree, compared with younger or older subjects.

 

 

ETA: I would not put too much stock into test results. IQ is not destiny; it matters what one does with it.

Edited by regentrude
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how does this idea of a growth mindset, and that IQ is not fixed, fit in with IQ testing of children and how can an IQ test really be "accurate by age 8" (suggesting a fixed IQ that can be identified by age 8) if IQ can change?

 

I see the question of "when can a test accurately measure IQ" (aka when you can be fairly confident that "what the test says the child's abilities are" matches what the child's abilities really are) as *separate* from the question of whether IQ is fixed or not (aka the question of "are the child's real abilities fixed or changeable?").  AKA "accurate by age 8" means that the result on the test ought to be an accurate reflection of the child's *current* abilities.  If IQ is fixed, then the child's current abilities would be an accurate reflection of the child's *future* abilities.  But if IQ *isn't* fixed, then the child's current abilities *wouldn't* necessarily be an accurate reflection of the child's future abilities - but the test could still be an accurate snapshot of those abilities at this current point in time. 

 

Basically, the question of whether a test can take an accurate snapshot of a person's abilities at a given point in time is one thing, and the question of whether a person's abilities are fixed for all time or are changeable is another.  You can have fixed abilities that can't be accurately measured, and changeable abilities that *can* be measured (and the change tracked over time).  Whether you can accurately measure something doesn't determine whether that something can change over time.  Does that make sense?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So..just out of curiosity..why so many tests and why did you start so young?  I'm in no way questioning your decision for so much testing as I'm sure there is a perfectly reasonable answer..just wondering :).  We're considering testing once ds turns 6..mostly just to see how he does and to have the information on hand in the case he's ever eligible for any programs, etc..

 

 

He's special needs. We asked for *some* of the assessments, but the school threw in the IQ test at 4yo, and then again an IQ test at his triennial at 7yo, though I think that if it's up to the school they won't do one for his upcoming triennial at 10yo (to be done this summer break). I'm actually considering requesting they do another one anyway, since the last one was still under 8yo (it was done right around his 7th birthday, not when he was almost 8), and because his SCAT results were that much higher (but, the SCAT is not an official IQ test), and if something were to happen and he were to attend a school somewhere having IQ test scores in the gifted range could make the difference between being in the gifted program or not... of course, that assumes his score would be in line with his SCAT scores and not with his previous 2 IQ tests. Anyway, the SCAT was because I thought it was odd that he scored lower on the math section of the TerraNova* than on the reading/language section (and the SCAT confirmed that that was just a fluke, as his quantitative score was much higher than his verbal score), and because I still for some crazy reason thought he was maybe 2E - though maybe not so crazy, because he qualified for CTY on both verbal and quantitative.

 

*He took the TerraNova for state homeschooling requirements - sure, I could've written a narrative, but then I would've had to figure out what to write... giving him a test was relatively easy in comparison.

 

P.S. My youngest has never had an IQ test, and probably won't ever get one either, since I'm not going to spend money on that (those IQ tests the school gave my oldest obviously didn't cost me anything). Though I might have him take the SCAT when he's old enough.

 

ETA: part of the reason I'm consider requesting they do another IQ test this summer is that he *has* 2 tests on record... if he didn't have any on record, that'd be one thing, but he *does* have tests on record, which say way below average/average and average/high average respectively for verbal and nonverbal - any school he might transfer to in the future is going to see those scores. Not that I'm planning on putting him in school, but, all sorts of things can happen.

Edited by luuknam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP, it helps to compare IQ tests to a photograph of a person - an IQ test is a "snapshot" of the workings of the brain taken on a particular day at a particular instance of time - a photograph of a person can reveal their personality candidly or it can be unflattering or it might not reveal anything special at all. Similarly, an IQ test may or may not predict accurately the IQ of the child (the reason there are margin of errors in the report). In my opinion, IQ tests are useful for 2 things: evaluation of issues like dyslexia/ADHD etc (the 2nd E) or for admittance into an academic program which requires certain levels of IQ scores as qualification.

Your question about the changing IQ of a child is the subject of a long running debate titled "nature vs nurture" and the proponents of both sides of the debate are vocal and dispute the other side's theories! Many resources claim that IQ is predetermined before birth (when the baby is evolving). And many books and research papers have also been written about brain plasticity and of IQ evolving because of "nurturing" the brain with: school education (2 point increase in IQ for each year of school attended), eating more "brain food", the early start and continued learning of a musical instrument to a high level, "brain training" using apps specifically developed to train the brain, encouragement, positive attitude, sports, playing chess, memory training, flash cards for babies etc etc.

My personal opinion is that the brain is plastic and it grows in many ways, some of which is still unknown to experts. So, it is possible that weaknesses can be worked upon to improve the brain to function optimally. Many companies publish products that help in this aspect as well as to improve specific brain functions like memory, visual spatial reasoning etc. They are used by many people to game the IQ tests so that their kids can get into competitive programs.

My son has taken 2 IQ tests - some numbers from the test taken at age 4 improved drastically during the second test. There were many things in the IQ tests that my son was not aware of because of his lack of exposure: think of an iron for ironing clothes (mom never ironed clothes), an ink bottle for a fountain pen (never had one of those), a typewriter (I am not posting the exact same things that appeared in the tests even though the tests he took have newer versions out now). We came to know of these things over many years when he casually mentioned seeing pictures of such things in a long ago test!

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally put little stock in them. It's a snapshot in time and all testers are different.

 

My oldest has taken an IQ test 3 times, and never scores as high as his achievement. We are relaxed homeschoolers, I'm way too lazy to hothouse, test prep or game the system, so it makes no sense. (He tests solidly in the EG range so this isn't me driving the bitter bus.) He also probably have some executive functioning stuff going on, like MANY gifted kids, so it's hard to really judge the scores. The creators of these tests explicitly state that they aren't good for identifying outliers. Alas, it's the only thing we have so we continue to use them.

 

I don't plan on testing my younger kids at all unless they feel strongly about gaining admission to a program.

 

ETA: or what Mathnerd said more intelligently than I. ;)

Edited by Runningmom80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accuracy in IQ testing is a different matter to whether a person's IQ is fixed.

 

Accuracy refers to how well the test measures the IQ of the subject at any one time. The error in test measurement, typically 5%, can be higher or lower based on the score achieved. For example, a near average score will have a smaller error, as the evaluation is based on more similar measurements. A score near the end of the bell curve will be less accurate. Additionally, a young child's scores are generally less accurate than an older child due to testing difficulties. 

 

Stability of scores over time is another consideration. In general, test scores obtained after age 8 are significantly more stable than test scores obtained earlier. That results in part from the inaccuracy of the test at younger ages.

 

The principle of fixed IQ relates to how much of a person's IQ depends on their genetic makeup, versus how much of their IQ results from enrichment and life experience. In general for the middle class and above, heritability of IQ explains approximately 75% of a person's score. It has been suggested for wealthy, highly educated families, the family correlation is even higher, as the families have resources to help children reach or get closer to their maximum potential. Since a child doesn't have much choice about the socioeconomic makeup of their family or how much enrichment and life experience he can get, I would suggest that even the part of IQ not based on genetics is far from flexible or changeable.

 

The growth mindset is somewhat difficult and troubling in my opinion. It's demonstrated and demonstrable that children and adults who believe IQ is not fixed do better on cognitive tasks, but it's demonstrated and demonstrable that IQ is mostly fixed by genetics (and much of the rest determined by socioeconomic factors). What you believe is the source of the research, not that IQ is actually flexible. Of course, you can "game" IQ tests, but you're improving a score on a test, not the child's actual level of intelligence. Of course, using varied and complex language and reading to your children can raise the actual level of intelligence, but it won't turn an average child into a genius. 

 

A single test score is a snapshot of a child on a particular day, with accompanied errors and qualifications. Testing makes sense for solving problems or for admission to programs. Otherwise, I'd suggest that you have a sufficiently good idea of where your child stands and what your child needs without a number.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only use the growth mind set with my children when it comes to dealing with failure . I dont tell me kids that there are gifted. And when they do know :

 

I will tell them that even when you are gifted you still need to work hard. 

 

And if they do everything good without mistakes that it means that they didnt learn a lot . We need to make mistakes to learn. 

 

A lot of gifted kids are perfectionist and they are used to do everything good, When they do make a mistake or when something gets difficult they get confused and want to stop. And then they will not grow.

 

And no, a gifted mind is not fixed because it can grow more with for example : AoPs, Kangaroo math, BA and MCT. 

 

 

Edited by visitor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have tested only twice, specifically to get into programs (district magnet school and CTY summer camp). He did extremely well with no prep, so its enough for me to know his abilities are not in my imagination.

 

I'm not a huge fan of testing. Although I'm incredibly curious to see how DS would do on a true IQ test, I figure the testing is not likely to tell me anything new - if he did poorly I'd probably dismiss the results as a bad day and if he did well I's say "duh" and not change a thing. I also remember reading about an experiment where they told teachers that they were assigned to gifted classes, when in reality the classes were completely random average kids. Unsurprisingly, the classes wheres the teachers assumed all the students were gifted learned more than the control classrooms. While I have no idea how scientific this study was, it seemed like common sense that I was best off just assuming my child was gifted and educate accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many things in the IQ tests that my son was not aware of because of his lack of exposure: think of an iron for ironing clothes (mom never ironed clothes), an ink bottle for a fountain pen (never had one of those), a typewriter (I am not posting the exact same things that appeared in the tests even though the tests he took have newer versions out now). We came to know of these things over many years when he casually mentioned seeing pictures of such things in a long ago test!

This kind of thing drives me up the wall. I remember teaching my son to use the FaceTime app last year and I kept saying "It's the icon that looks like a phone." He didn't get it. I was frustrated until I realized that the only phones he's ever really seen are smartphones so the traditional telephone icon had no meaning for him because he's never seen one! 

 

This incident was hilarious to us, but on a more serious note when intelligence tests make references to things that require significant cultural context: sports, vacation destinations, etc. (examples I've actually seen) it can really put some students at a disadvantage. 

Edited by RoundAbout
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of thing drives me up the wall. I remember teaching my son to use the FaceTime app last year and I kept saying "It's the icon that looks like a phone." He didn't get it. I was frustrated until I realized that the only phones he's ever really seen are smartphones so the traditional telephone icon had no meaning for him because he's never seen one! 

 

This incident was hilarious to us, but on a more serious note when intelligence tests make references to things that require significant cultural context: sports, vacation destinations, etc. (examples I've actually seen) it can really put some students at a disadvantage. 

I have noticed similar things with the various tests my children went through. The IQ test had 'general knowledge' type components that are really only reliable indicators of what the child has or hasn't been exposed to, so the more 'different' the child is, the more disadvantaged they can be. A couple of examples I recall:

 

Ds being shown a picture and expected to tell which ball was the soccer ball and which was the football (he was 3, we're not a sporty family, and he'd never seen either type of ball before)

 

Dd age 8 being asked how many days were in each month of the year. She didn't know, but only because I hadn't gotten around to telling her (I know, my bad!) but she could have happily recited the periodic table or a couple of Shakespeare speeches if they'd cared to ask, and it only took her a few minutes to memorize the months the following day, so it can hardly be indicative of the supposedly stable trait of 'intelligence'. 

Edited by IsabelC
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IQ test had 'general knowledge' type components that are really only reliable indicators of what the child has or hasn't been exposed to, so the more 'different' the child is, the more disadvantaged they can be.

This incident was hilarious to us, but on a more serious note when intelligence tests make references to things that require significant cultural context: sports, vacation destinations, etc. (examples I've actually seen) it can really put some students at a disadvantage.

 

There were many things in the IQ tests that my son was not aware of because of his lack of exposure: think of an iron for ironing clothes (mom never ironed clothes), an ink bottle for a fountain pen (never had one of those), a typewriter (I am not posting the exact same things that appeared in the tests even though the tests he took have newer versions out now). We came to know of these things over many years when he casually mentioned seeing pictures of such things in a long ago test!

Substitution of a subtest is allowed. My oldest had a "general knowledge" subtest substituted and it is not the core subtest anyway. He has no interest in sports or Hollywood. My younger boy has a different set of questions because of his age and his answers are atypical but his score for that subtest was still high. The core subtests in an index is the one requiring a strong reason for substituting e.g. Broken wrist on the dominant hand.

 

If you look at your child's reports any substitution or high difference would be stated with reasons/explanations. It was also noted on their reports that my kids are from a multilingual household and that we speak to them in languages other than English. Their verbal scores are so high that I don't even know why it has to be stated that our household is not single language. Chinese was stated as one of the home language.

Edited by Arcadia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed similar things with the various tests my children went through. The IQ test had 'general knowledge' type components that are really only reliable indicators of what the child has or hasn't been exposed to, so the more 'different' the child is, the more disadvantaged they can be. A couple of examples I recall:

 

Ds being shown a picture and expected to tell which ball was the soccer ball and which was the football (he was 3, we're not a sporty family, and he'd never seen either type of ball before)

 

Dd age 8 being asked how many days were in each month of the year. She didn't know, but only because I hadn't gotten around to telling her (I know, my bad!) but she could have happily recited the periodic table or a couple of Shakespeare speeches if they'd cared to ask, and it only took her a few minutes to memorize the months the following day, so it can hardly be indicative of the supposedly stable trait of 'intelligence'. 

 

Why do they have these questions on a test that is supposed to measure intelligence rather than achievement???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The growth mindset is somewhat difficult and troubling in my opinion. It's demonstrated and demonstrable that children and adults who believe IQ is not fixed do better on cognitive tasks, but it's demonstrated and demonstrable that IQ is mostly fixed by genetics (and much of the rest determined by socioeconomic factors). What you believe is the source of the research, not that IQ is actually flexible. Of course, you can "game" IQ tests, but you're improving a score on a test, not the child's actual level of intelligence. Of course, using varied and complex language and reading to your children can raise the actual level of intelligence, but it won't turn an average child into a genius. 

 

 

 

DS might be unusual, but he does not fit this research.  He tested at 30th percentile in auditory processing for the Woodcock Johnson when he was 6.  He had a small speech impediment at the time and could not spell AT ALL (like cat would be spelled fot), so we were not really surprised.  We got his hearing tested, and it was fine; he just could not *process* sound properly.  

 

Well, 10 years later, having played the violin for 30 minutes a day since he was 5, he has close to perfect pitch.  Violins require you to hear and tune every single note, so it was like an auditory processing class every day. As far as I can tell, he has simply rewired his brain, objectively increasing this cognitive skill.  So not just increased his score on an IQ test but increased the *actual* IQ underlying the test -- going from 30th to 99th percentile on this subtest. 

Edited by lewelma
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do they have these questions on a test that is supposed to measure intelligence rather than achievement???

Kids can answer "I don't know" and the subtest could be substituted for another subtest at the discretion of the tester.

 

Below subtests affected my kids in different ways and they were substituted for the specific child. My talkative child did very well for comprehension because he gets to answer paragraphs for every question.

 

"Comprehension

Comprehension measures common-sense social knowledge, practical judgment in social situations, and level of social maturation, along with the extent of development of their moral conscience. Children are asked to explain situations, actions, or activities that they'd be expected to be familiar with.

 

Comprehension is a core Verbal Comprehension subtest.

 

Example: Why do we turn out lights when we leave a room?

 

Suggestions:

What Would You Do?

Nifty Fifty

 

Information

Information measures general cultural knowledge, long-term memory, and acquired facts. Children are asked questions about different topics like geography, science and historical figures. The questions shouldn't be difficult for a child with a well rounded education but they do encompass a wide range of knowledge.

 

Information is a supplemental Verbal Comprehension subtest.

 

Example: Who was Queen Elizabeth I

Example: What do your lungs do?

Example: What is photosynthesis?" http://www.thinktonight.com/WISC_IV_subtests_s/331.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do they have these questions on a test that is supposed to measure intelligence rather than achievement???

 

 

I agree... the problem is, that you cannot really measure intelligence per se. Like, Raven's Progressive Matrices seems relatively culturally neutral/not based on achievement, right? But it's susceptible to the Flynn Effect as well. And then there's the research by Luria, in which he talked to a Siberian man:

 

"Luria put the following problem to the head man of one tribe in Siberia: Where there's always snow, the bears are white; there's always snow at the North Pole - what colour are the bears there? The head man replied that he had never seen bears that were any colour other than brown, but if a wise or truthful man came from the North Pole and told him that bears there were white, he might believe him. The scientific methods of hypothesising, classifying and making logical deductions were alien to him."

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31556802

 

Anyway, I think the reason things like general knowledge questions are on the WISC is that they test crystallized intelligence (some of the other subtests are more aimed at fluid intelligence, afaik):

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence

Edited by luuknam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do they have these questions on a test that is supposed to measure intelligence rather than achievement???

 

Those particular questions sound like they might have been part of the WJ-Cognitive.  If so, the subtests they belong to don't actually go into calculating the GIA (akin to the FSIQ on the WISC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine that the general knowledge type questions would cover information that they expect every child to have been taught, because most children are in school, and school students are probably a bit more homogeneous in their knowledge than home schooled children. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DS might be unusual, but he does not fit this research.  He tested at 30th percentile in auditory processing for the Woodcock Johnson when he was 6.  He had a small speech impediment at the time and could not spell AT ALL (like cat would be spelled fot), so we were not really surprised.  We got his hearing tested, and it was fine; he just could not *process* sound properly.  

 

Well, 10 years later, having played the violin for 30 minutes a day since he was 5, he has close to perfect pitch.  Violins require you to hear and tune every single note, so it was like an auditory processing class every day. As far as I can tell, he has simply rewired his brain, objectively increasing this cognitive skill.  So not just increased his score on an IQ test but increased the *actual* IQ underlying the test -- going from 30th to 99th percentile on this subtest. 

 

Learning music from an early age and learning it to a high level like your DS has done affects the wiring of the brain. The brain apparently finds a way to reorganize itself and can create new pathways in its wiring to overcome any dysfunctions so that it performs with greater efficiency when a musical instrument is practiced daily for many years. I have heard many mentions of PSI scores going up due to violin study from an young age as well.

Edited by mathnerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

DS might be unusual, but he does not fit this research.  He tested at 30th percentile in auditory processing for the Woodcock Johnson when he was 6.  He had a small speech impediment at the time and could not spell AT ALL (like cat would be spelled fot), so we were not really surprised.  We got his hearing tested, and it was fine; he just could not *process* sound properly.  

 

Well, 10 years later, having played the violin for 30 minutes a day since he was 5, he has close to perfect pitch.  Violins require you to hear and tune every single note, so it was like an auditory processing class every day. As far as I can tell, he has simply rewired his brain, objectively increasing this cognitive skill.  So not just increased his score on an IQ test but increased the *actual* IQ underlying the test -- going from 30th to 99th percentile on this subtest. 

 

This underscores the importance of music lessons, to me... although my husband told me (he's a music teacher) that stringed instruments would be best, and to a lesser degree, brass, because of the need to hear and tune each note as you play. Piano, he said, wouldn't provide the same specific benefit, even though piano is beneficial for other reasons.

 

My question then, is what other activities can you involve your children in that will help improve processing speed? Is this a unique benefit to music lessons? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This underscores the importance of music lessons, to me... although my husband told me (he's a music teacher) that stringed instruments would be best, and to a lesser degree, brass, because of the need to hear and tune each note as you play. Piano, he said, wouldn't provide the same specific benefit, even though piano is beneficial for other reasons.

 

My question then, is what other activities can you involve your children in that will help improve processing speed? Is this a unique benefit to music lessons? 

 

FWIW, when my big kids were young, I made them learn piano specifically for the benefits of both sides of the brain working together.  As a bonus, there is sometimes the chance to use the metronome.  There is an actual therapy called Interactive Metronome for the very purpose of improving processing speed.  If you search the Learning Challenges forum, there have been several discussions about improving processing speed and how difficult that really is to accomplish, but there may be a few suggestions that may interest you.  Also, to some extent, processing speed might improve with age (there is a curve), at least for neurotypical kids.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This underscores the importance of music lessons, to me... although my husband told me (he's a music teacher) that stringed instruments would be best, and to a lesser degree, brass, because of the need to hear and tune each note as you play. Piano, he said, wouldn't provide the same specific benefit, even though piano is beneficial for other reasons.

 

My question then, is what other activities can you involve your children in that will help improve processing speed? Is this a unique benefit to music lessons? 

I made my kid learn piano from a very young age because of the many benefits of it (reading 2 clefs simultaneously, whole body coordination, hand independence, finger independence and whole brain development). His VSI index in all his IQ tests are super high and I attribute it mostly to the piano studies - he has to visualize the keyboard layout constantly when he is figuring out complex chord patterns, arpeggios etc or studying music theory. He signed up for other instruments later on and he could easily progress in them with excellent sight reading, play complex rhythm patterns, have good intonation etc because he was already used to dealing with more complex music in piano. His teachers mandate the use of metronome in his practice and it also trains the brain over the years to keep time  as someone else suggested on this thread.

 

Music education for kids alters the visual-spatial, motor and auditory areas in the brain. This has direct correlation to the brain systems used for learning: math, language, reading, speech, focus, impulse control and concentration.

 

As to your question on what other activities can improve processing speed - I have found that any highly structured and organized sport done well improves processing speed in my child - we have been doing martial arts for a long time - it has been highly beneficial to my son in developing focus, listening and responding to commands instantaneously, doing things in-sync with a group, not losing focus when put in front of an audience and asked to follow a bunch of rapid commands, timing, developing motor co-ordination etc.

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...