Intelligence Test and Gifted Requirements Essay

In 2015, I wrote about my personal philosophy of the gifted learner. I stated in my paper that, “Giftedness is not a one, set definition. The definition of gifted must encompass intellect, ability, creative talent as well as emotional awareness. It cannot be micro-managed and be a “one size fits all” definition” (Dauber, 2015). People, who are gifted, need differentiation and opportunity to express, demonstrate and show their giftedness. Educators must be able to provide opportunities for the gifted learner to express his/her abilities and/or talents. Gifted students learn differently and require special educational experiences in order to grow academically and achieve their highest potential. Therefore, the education field must be able to understand not only the cognitive side of a gifted learner but the affective or social/emotional aspects too.

Additionally, Albert Einstein once said, “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” There are different forms of intelligence that go beyond what our school system measures. Students are not a unit to be measured, and students cannot be assigned a numerical value to identify their intelligence. Students are diverse—they learn at different speeds, and they learn in different ways. Focusing solely on test scores is hurting our students and deviating away from building our society on success and excellence. Critics are slowly realizing the problems associated with standardized tests—they create anxiety, they are extremely biased, and they do not measure the ability to think deeply.

With this in mind, how then is it fair to give a student in Compton the same test that is given to a student in Beverly Hills? The answer is obvious, it is not fair. However, if a test on life in the ghetto and Ebonics was given to children in Beverly Hills, it is safe to assume nearly all the children would fail. This example illustrates that by changing the culture for which the test is written the previously gifted kids fall to the ranks of retards while the ghetto kids advance to the state of genius. To better evaluate the intelligence potential of any student from any background, the I.Q. tests given should cover a broader range of topics, so that a musical genius is not mistakenly placed in a class for the mentally challenged.

One of the difficulties in identifying the needs of low-income students is the profound cultural barriers which exist that prevent their strengths and deficits from being identified. Children from low-income homes frequently have poorer vocabularies and a weaker basis of the type of knowledge that is frequently considered 'intelligence' on most forms of assessment. A low-income child's IQ may be high, even though he lacks a framework of accepted middle-class knowledge. "In January 2003, the National Academy of Sciences released a report on the seeming overrepresentation of minorities in special education and underrepresentation of those students in gifted education. The NRC reported that, nationwide, 7.47 percent of all white students and 9.9 percent of Asian students are placed in gifted programs. Meanwhile, 3.04 percent of African-American students, 3.57 percent of Hispanic students, and 4.86 percent of American Indian students are classified as gifted" (GT-minority identification, 2003, ERIC Clearinghouse). The discrepancy, the NAS believed, could not be solely explained by talent alone but was at least partially rooted in the methods of identifying students labeled as gifted. Biases in standardized and other tests identifying student strengths, combined with prejudices, however unintentional, amongst educators and administrators lead to under-identification of the gifted

I was given these opportunities through quite a long series of unlikely events. My parents divorced when I was only 3-4 years old, and my mother soon remarried an American. This allowed us to move to the United States when I was 6 years old. After moving, I repeated first grade because of the language barrier. This put me a year ahead of the rest of my classmates, resulting in my placement into advanced courses/programs. I continued to be in these “gifted” programs and received a better education than the majority of students, not because I was gifted, but ironically because I was held back a

2 & 3. Use the most current versions of standardized tests that are going to be used to make a decision about admission into a gifted program and that norms are up-to-date and a good representation of

Standardized, merit-based assessment also disadvantages minority and low socioeconomic status students because of its presentation as a measure of ability. The performance of both black and low socioeconomic status students depends upon the context in which the test is administered. If tests are presented as measures of ability, these students tend to perform lower than their more advantaged peers; if tests are presented as general non-diagnostic studies, they perform equally. As one of over 100 examples, when administered questions from the Graduate Record Examination under normal testing circumstances, low socioeconomic status students answered an average of 8.90 correctly, compared with 12.30 for their high socioeconomic status peers. When presented as a general laboratory study, the scores were 11.46 and 10.89, respectively (Croizet, 2008). Such differences arise due to social anxiety and stereotype threat, the fear of confirming the supposed inferiority of a social group (Croizet, 2008).

A fifth grader may come in at a “second-grade level” and graduate at a “fourth-grade level,” which is a tremendous achievement on the part of the educators; however, because standardized testing fails to account for such circumstances, the entire year would be seen as a failure from the perspective of the state (Berger). To put it crudely, “poor schools can’t win at standardized testing” because students in areas of poverty start school academically behind and are unable to catch up as there is the lack of resources and funding (Broussard). On the other extreme, gifted students are also hurt by attempts to standardize education, for instance, with the No Child Left Behind Act, an act that many say has “failed our adolescents” (Steinberg). Teachers say that the legislation has resulted in a “race to the middle” that means “talented students have their potential squandered” as schools “[don’t] foster growth” (Weller). In effect, standardization attempts to remove individuality from learning and ignores that students have different capacities for learning, that some students may need more help while others need to be challenged above their grade level - instead it averages it all out to a “standard” that harms both

In week 9 we were required to take a sample IQ test to have an idea of what are IQ scores may be. On this test I scored 129. In our book I learned that the score of 130 is the minimum score that you need to get to be considered gifted. Although I know I am

There are state requirements she has to install in the kids. For over twenty years now, she has had a daycare. She’s mentioned over the years, there have been a lot of changes with state requirements. Students are given a test to measure their intelligence before they are allowed acceptance into the daycare. According to Terrie, the state decides whether or not the students are academically ready. Terrie has mentioned several times that there are students who she perceived showed multiple signs of gifted and talented. When the results came back, there were students who didn’t meet the benchmark. Often, Terrie has said that one test shouldn’t determine a child’s level of brilliance. Before, she has also had students who test above benchmark; they don’t show as much promise as some of the other kids do. According to Schooling America, “Students used to beat to their own drum. Now, the drumbeat demands that all children achieve academically at a high level and the measure of that achievement is tests” (Graham). Children are supposed to learn at the same rate. However, there are many different kinds of learners. Some students don’t test well, but they perform differently in the

While the definition (“the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations”) seems self-explanatory, what this translates to in showing someone with above-average intelligence is definitely a matter of opinion. The first definitions of giftedness all focus on intelligence as a quantifiable characteristic. Take a test and be given a number – this is the way that we can make sure to be fair to all students. And this definition is used for quite a long time, being California’s definition of giftedness maintaining IQ as the only characteristics that matters in determining intelligence until the late 1970s. Later definitions begin to include achievement as a qualifier of giftedness and, in turn, intelligence. The definitions

Adams County public school system’s current program doesn’t seem to recognize any minority or poor students who could be considered gifted. Educators in this district and committee members seem to lack any motivation to include diverse learners in their program. The fact that Adams County only recognized three out of four hundred thirty-eight over a five-year span is appalling. I feel Adams County need some major changes to extend their idea of giftedness. It needs to start with intensive and in-depth teacher training along with community outreach and awareness programs to help educate parents about giftedness. For instance, parent could learn ways to better support their children and help identify their child’s areas of giftedness.

cognitive ability. This test can get students into gifted programs in schools and was used by the

Intelligence tests are inaccurate to measures true ability of a person because genes affect how a person responds to their surroundings, the tests cannot measure the person biological makeup or his true potential for being “smart”.

Before the 1950s, most educators and school systems tended to follow Louis Terman’s example and based most decisions about gifted individuals on IQ and scholastic achievement scores. Standardized group intelligence tests, such as California Test of Mental Maturity, were often used to determine IQ. In these tests, educators were looking for exceptional ability in verbal or performance IQ, or a combination of the two. For the final identification, individual IQ tests such as the Wechsler scales and the Stanford Binet were used. Most school systems around this time considered an IQ of 130 or above to fall in the "gifted" range. This information comes from a book by Frederick B. Tuttle, Laurence A. Becker, and Joan A. Sousa (48).