Huggies Forum

  1. home
  2. Baby Forum
  3. General Baby Topics
  4. General Discussion
  5. Testing for 'giftedness' - Can anyone tell me what will happen?

Testing for 'giftedness' - Can anyone tell me what will happen? Lock Rss

Hi ladies (and gents if you're about too)

A few weeks ago my daughters teacher asked me if it was ok to have my DD tested to see if she is on the gifted spectrum. Can anyone tell me what will happen? Will I be allowed to be there? Will I have to take her or will someone come to the school or will the teacher do the test?? Lol sorry I just hate the unknown as does DD and it would be easier if I could explain to her what will happen. TIA smile
Just be careful that it is not a scam. My DD went to a giftedness conference that cost a lot of money and the whole thing was a bit of a sham! My DD was smarter in many ways than the so called other gifted children and the so called gifted children had other issues that I would not like my DD to have. So love your DD - whether it turns out she is gifted (by what test - I don't know) or not.

Children can be gifted in different ways e.g. music, acedemically, creativeness. They could even be gifted in seemingly negative things now - which later turn out to be assets!
how will she benefit by being tested?
I'd ask the teacher those questions. wink

If the results will be used to create learning experiences more suited to her needs (eg preventing her being bored in class, develop her "gifted" area further) I would be fine with it.
At the school i teach at, all testing is done through a clinical psychologist. Testing can be done in 1 session or a number depending on the complexity of the issues at hand. The psychologist can run through a series of questions through a conversation style format &/or written, they may even look at her book work etc. They will then give you a comprehensive report on your child.
I think as previous posts have suggested the best thing you can do is ask the teacher (or someone higher) atyour daughters school.
Hi,
My DS was tested at the age 4 and it was done with a child psycologist. I wasn't present during the testing it was just the two of them. The testing is based around problem solving and memory activities etc. They asked my son questions like what can be hot or cold and moves things? They also look at their emotional side. The psycologist that tested my DS had a form that his teachers and I both filled out. We answered questions about his talents as well as his emotions and anxieties. She then wrote up a report that was given to me and his school.

It's pretty basic! It's a great thing to know as if you have never been exposed to this it can be quite a different thing to understand. Gifted peoples mind works in a different way and it sometimes requires the parenting between my children to differ slightly. It can be very challenging raising a gifted child, but it's also and incredible journey to be a part of. Good luck smile
T.R.E.E wrote:
OC1246 wrote:
how will she benefit by being tested?

I had it described to me once that it's similar to finding out if a child has dyslexia or ADHD or something else, that a 'diagnosis' can only be a positive thing so that the child is being given the best opportunity to reach their potential. True giftedness needs to be approached in a different way to a child who is just "above average intelligence" as it can be so complex. So even though to some it seems like oh yay I'm so proud my kid is gifted for some if it's not approached properly can be as bad as not getting the right plan in place for a dyslexic child. That's what I've been told.


That was why I was asking. If the school want to test her so they can provide what she needs to accomodate that and the only way they can do it is with a formal diagnosis, then fine. If they are testing just to know, but there will be nothing they can offer, then I don't see the benefit. If the teacher can see there are some signs of being gifted, rather then labelling her she could just assume she is and meet the needs the best way she can. I understand in some schools they offer special programs and they need a formal diagnosis. I think the same goes for the other kids too. If you can see they have a need, meet it. They don't need a label to have their needs met. Its only an advantage if there are admin reasons, or so you can explain it easily to other people. I think there are advantages to mixing the kids up rather then labelling them and keeping them with kids that are similar. Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.
OC1246 wrote:
Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.


Most schools i've worked in do this Oc, it's called peer tutoring and I use it all the time in my lessons.
Rosie Mumma wrote:
OC1246 wrote:
Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.

Most schools i've worked in do this Oc, it's called peer tutoring and I use it all the time in my lessons.


Fantastic! I know they do it in the little schools around here, but the bigger schools people I know go to the slower kids tend to be separated. I haven't heard of anything for the gifted kids within those schools though.
OC1246 wrote:
Rosie Mumma wrote:OC1246 wrote:Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.Most schools i've worked in do this Oc, it's called peer tutoring and I use it all the time in my lessons.Fantastic! I know they do it in the little schools around here, but the bigger schools people I know go to the slower kids tend to be separated. I haven't heard of anything for the gifted kids within those schools though.


Sadly, it's often the gifted kids who don't get the extra stuff they need. The schools resources are so stretched with catering to those identified with special needs and then even further stretched with those who clearly have special needs but don't meet the criteria for funding that it's the gifted kids who are often left to blend in with the average ability kids. sad
OC1246 wrote:
Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.


Althought that is certainly theoretically a good experience and a good idea - it is expressly discouraged in gifted legislature in terms of education, and in the light of research and the reality of that in practice.

There are a few reasons for this, the main one being that frequently, gifted people are not recognised as people in need of a specialised education plan, and as people who deserve to reach their potential and be challenged, just as any other student is. They are frequently seen as existing for a benefit to others, and to society at large, as opposed to them being people in their own right who deserve an education plan that suits them. They are often seen for WHAT they are as opposed to WHO they are. There is also a lot of research to show that underachievers do not benefit from this at all, as children and adults tend to gravitate toward those who are of similar ability. Someone highly intelligent is not seen as a role model at all by a slower child. There have been many instances of class management tactics employing gifted children in this way, hence why often they learn nothing at school.

There is of course nothing theoretically wrong with gifted people associating with kids of a lower intellectual ability, however when this becomes constant and forced, and when they are expected to help kids rather than having the opportunity to be themeselves challenged, then this is why problems happen and why it is not recommended. It is kind of like the idea that gifted kids don't need any extra help or work, when really, they are just bieng put into the "normal" cateogory and shown to succeed here. Their actual potential is beyond normal and so cannot be measured as by normal means or testing. They might reach normal levels, but they won't have learned a thing. There is often a really big emphasis on forcing gifted kids to associate with age peers, when they would be much better off associating with intellectual peers as well as age peers, as with any person who would benefit from socialising with various different groups of people.

This issue is one of the misconceptions that exist surrounding giftedness and gifted education and needs, kind of like in the way people assume that homeschooled children lack socialisation. In that way, I mean that it is a natural and innocent assumption but nonetheless not backed by any research or truth. And it is a problem that heaps of gifted students have, because teachers are not given training and are not equipped to deal with such varying degrees of ability in a normal classroom.

I probably won't come back on here if there are any questions about this, but if anyone is interested in this idea, then there is a lot of information available online, and especially within the online gifted community smile
Windmill wrote:
OC1246 wrote:
Imagine if they had gifted students working alongside kids that were struggling. How brilliant for both of them! They would get so much out of it.

Althought that is certainly theoretically a good experience and a good idea - it is expressly discouraged in gifted legislature in terms of education, and in the light of research and the reality of that in practice.

There are a few reasons for this, the main one being that frequently, gifted people are not recognised as people in need of a specialised education plan, and as people who deserve to reach their potential and be challenged, just as any other student is. They are frequently seen as existing for a benefit to others, and to society at large, as opposed to them being people in their own right who deserve an education plan that suits them. They are often seen for WHAT they are as opposed to WHO they are. There is also a lot of research to show that underachievers do not benefit from this at all, as children and adults tend to gravitate toward those who are of similar ability. Someone highly intelligent is not seen as a role model at all by a slower child. There have been many instances of class management tactics employing gifted children in this way, hence why often they learn nothing at school.

There is of course nothing theoretically wrong with gifted people associating with kids of a lower intellectual ability, however when this becomes constant and forced, and when they are expected to help kids rather than having the opportunity to be themeselves challenged, then this is why problems happen and why it is not recommended. It is kind of like the idea that gifted kids don't need any extra help or work, when really, they are just bieng put into the "normal" cateogory and shown to succeed here. Their actual potential is beyond normal and so cannot be measured as by normal means or testing. They might reach normal levels, but they won't have learned a thing. There is often a really big emphasis on forcing gifted kids to associate with age peers, when they would be much better off associating with intellectual peers as well as age peers, as with any person who would benefit from socialising with various different groups of people.

This issue is one of the misconceptions that exist surrounding giftedness and gifted education and needs, kind of like in the way people assume that homeschooled children lack socialisation. In that way, I mean that it is a natural and innocent assumption but nonetheless not backed by any research or truth. And it is a problem that heaps of gifted students have, because teachers are not given training and are not equipped to deal with such varying degrees of ability in a normal classroom.

I probably won't come back on here if there are any questions about this, but if anyone is interested in this idea, then there is a lot of information available online, and especially within the online gifted community smile


I understand what you are saying. I didn't mean at the expense of the gifted childs education, I meant in addition to. When kids work alongside each other, they don't necessarily have to be actually teaching the other in a teacher student role. I guess much in the same way a younger sibling can learn from the older ones without the older one having to do anything but be themselves. I guess my education theories are from a child led perspective rather then a mainstream education and I understand that it may not work in those circumstances. However I believe with an adequate setup then they could both benefit. You know me Windmill, I wouldn't suggest giving one kids education preference over another! lol
Sign in to follow this topic