<p>PS: If you gifted kid has some sort of LD, there is a good chance you (and your kidlet) would sense there is something wrong and they would experience major frustration. In my limited experience, it could be very obvious to mom and still not be apparent to teachers or even psychologists, until actual testing is done.</p>
<p>There is no reason not to have the girl tested in case she does have a learning disabllity that will entitle her to extra time. That is not scamming the system. Yes, there are those who get the designation who are not entitled to it who are scamming the system, but if you are legitimately entitled, of course you should go for it.</p>
<p>I tutored SATs for many, many years, and the time element is one of the problems many kids have. If they took away the time element, many kids would do better. It is a culling agent, no question about it. If your daughter can take sample test repeatedly with a tutor working with her on how to pace herself, she can learn to move more quickly. I have done this with a number of kids. But it is an expensive way to go. The time issue is a problem for a number of reasons, For some kids, it's because they are just by nature, slow, deliberate workers. Others have attention and claustrophobic issues. They are more sprinters, than distance runners, and the time that the SAT1 takes is a definite problem for them, and now it's even longer. Such kids have to be desensitized to sitting for that long by taking practice tests in similar environments several times a week. I have just sold my business in tutoring the SATs since I just did not want to do the work needed to learn the new test and was really thinking of quitting all of this anyways. But as part of the tutoring, I rented space from a school on weekends and offer 4 SAT test session over the weekend where kids signed up with me can just go and take a proctored test run just like the real college boards. Then they go over the test with a tutor at a scheduled time. But for kids with timing issues or test anxiety, I tell them to sit and take as many tests as they can schedule to desensitize them, and that does usually work. the same with kids who are slow workers. If accuracy is not a problem, the intent is to rush them along so that they are focused on the time issue. Once they can get the danged test completed in time, we then work on the accuracy again. But all of these strategies do take a lot of time. My girls had that problem with time, and though I could get them to complete the test, their scores were not that much higher I found. Had I pushed it by making them practice more, or had we started all of this earlier, I could have probably brought their scores up significantly, but I don't know if it would have been worth it as it would have come out of something else, as they were very busy those days in things they loved to do and were so much more relevant to their lives than the SATs. I chose to back off, and, yes, they did not have the picks that their peers with 1400+ SATs did (their's were in the 1200 range) but they were accepted to schools like Cornell, Smith and Oberlin among a number of other schools without such name recognition. And both did and are doing very well at college--D has a 4.0, niece is completing med school now.</p>
<p>"It has always been a joy when he returns from a session ready to talk math some more under the guise of explaining it to me."</p>
<p>Marite--me too! Except every once in awhile S would give me this look and say "did you understand anything I just said?" And I would have to say "well, no. . ."</p>
<p>OT--does anyone know about the math circle in the bay area? I know there is one, but have had no experience with it. Just wondering if I should try to persuade my D to give it a try, or if it is only for math geniuses.</p>
<p>The Bay-area Math Circle emphasizes preparing students for math contests; the Boston-area Math Circle does not. Google both for more information about their rather different philosophies. My S went to our math circle for the pure enjoyment of it. He does not care for or do well at math competitions.</p>
<p>Marite--thanks for the info. I'm disappointed, the Boston circle philosophy sounds better to me, but thanks.</p>
<p>Justice: i guess i shouldn't have said that intelligence has nothing to do with speed, but more that it's not only about speed. I think you described things very well in your first post.</p>
<p>I guess with my particular weakness being math, I always felt that well, I WILL get to the answer...eventually, but I'm not gonna be able to do it as fast as the others! And I believe that speed & facility did make those students better than me with math, but it just felt a little unfair...like hey, I got my 5 questions right...I just didn't get to finish all ten like the kid who got the 100! ;-) Or more likely, I raced to complete the last five & made mistakes! And to this day, if a kid asks what's 7 times 4, I really like to WRITE it down...or visulize in my head 7...X...4...=...28 which probably makes NO sense to people with swifter math capability!</p>
<p>Marite - Your image of competitive math groups may not be accurate. The one I run is very much for the pure enjoyment of it. It's a mixed age and ability group, that meets once a week. Kids sit around a large table working on problems together and helping each other. They stagger in at different times, and just pick a problem they'd like to start on. They come and go as they please. It's all very low-key. The amount of time spent over the course of a year actually doing anything competitive, or even anything timed, is very small. Tournaments are totally optional, and I have had some kids who attended meetings regularly but never attended tournaments (although the tournaments may be more fun and less stress than you are imagining). The other high school teams I know about that have regular meetings run pretty much the same. The team provides a structure in which contests like the AMC exams can be given, but that's just one day out of the entire year. Regular meetings are not the least bit like a team practice for say, a sport. Your son would probably feel right at home with us.</p>
<p>Mstee - I do not have personal knowledge of the Bay Area Math Cirlce, but you should definitely check it out for yourself and decide what the atmosphere is like.</p>
<p>Possible Scenarios</p>
<ol>
<li><p>A visual tracking problem
This will slow even the brightest student to a snail's crawl by making reading a mentally and physically challenging process. It sometimes shows up more on standardized tests because the multi-column format on some pages is too visually distracting. See a good/great ophthalmologist and be very articulate about the problem with finishing the tests.</p></li>
<li><p>Perfectionism
My gifted students over-analyze and over-check standardized tests. One of the characteristics of a gifted child is the ability to examine multiple outcomes to a situation or a given set of circumstances. On a multiple choice format, playing this game of "what if" chews up massive amounts of time. Students need to be coached to eliminate many of their natural "what if" questions. The test is asking about a fixed and invariable situation. Work only with the information that is presented in the question.</p></li>
<li><p>Seeking accommodations</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The rules governing extended time are very stringent. Generally, a student must have a documented (medically diagnosed) condition or disability that affects visual processing. This diagnosis must have been used to create accommodations in instruction and testing during the school year. Check far in advance of testing about this. </p>
<ol>
<li>IQ
With the IQ test (WISC IV is the current version of choice for most schools), a number of scores are generated. There are many subscores that focus on very limited skill sets. Examining this data with the school psychologist may help identify the source of the difficulty your D is having with time. Her WISC II score should have been reported as a COMPOSITE, a VERBAL, and a PERFORMANCE. If you have access to the original psych report, you may find that here is a marked difference between the verbal and performance sections of the test. The even smaller breakdowns in score (coding, object assembly, etc.) can be very revealing.</li>
</ol>
<p>
I would want the surgeon or programmer who was less likely to make an error -- in either case, the one who was more detail-oriented and painstaking. I don't know if that's the point you were trying to make or not, but in either case a very minor error can produce devastating results that are very difficult to rectify. </p>
<p>Definitely in real life and the workplace, "best" does not equate with "fastest". </p>
<p>An I'm not talking about speed differentials like one person taking an hour to do what someone else can do in 15 minutes (the 3:1 or 4:1 differentials set up in examples). Most bright kids who complain they couldn't finish all the questions on the SAT really would need only 10-15 minutes to finish. </p>
<p>Dyslexia has been shown by scientists to involve a subtle timing issue in the brain - a matter of milliseconds. This can be seen in terms of delays of about 0.25-0.40 seconds before the brain responds to visual or auditory stimuli in an experimental setting. But this subtle delay acts cumulatively -- if the stimulus is a written word, then it's going to add a full second of reading time for every 3 or 4 words... seconds add up to minutes ... and by the end of the test, even the dyslexic student who has successfully overcome reading barriers is going to take longer. In fact, when researchers work with high-achieving dyslexics, like college students, and give them a battery of tests, the dyslexics tend to have score somewhat better than nondyslexics on tests of reading comprehension skills -- but invariably they perform significantly worse on tests of reading rate. Of course it's possible that their slower rate has something to do with comprehension - they may be more likely to pick up details important to meaning as they read than a speed reader. </p>
<p>And that's just one sort of learning barrier that can be at the heart of an individual's need for more time.</p>
<p>
In real life, that may explain why some people see a solution very quickly, in a fraction of the time that it takes others. On a standardized test, it doesn't work -- because the "answer" that these creative problem-solvers see invariably is NOT listed as one of the multiple choice options. It might end up being there in the math section (given the fact that different strategies in math tend to lead to the same conclusion) -- but that doesn't apply on the verbal side, to the reading passage comprehension or sentence completions, where very smart test-takers often find they are confronted by a set of 5 wrong answers.</p>
<p>I am not diagnosed as dyslexic, but when I read I am bombarded by information that is not really there. I SEE anagrams. This makes me a great Scrabble player but can be as distracting as "little voices." For example, when I come across the word parental, before I settle on that meaning I must pass through prenatal and paternal. It can be very confusing and slow. I can only begin to imagine what the experience of a dyslexic may be. There are very high functioning dyslexics. Your D may be dyslexic without knowing it; her intellect has allowed her to make adjustments and compensation, but these things take time.</p>
<p>silent -listen-enlist
nicest-insect-incest</p>
<p>Mamacita, my son is like you. He loves doing those word "jumble" problems in the paper - he is very good at that, and can work them very quickly. I'm sure that was a big part of his early reading problems. Just in his case he was overwhelmed by the confusion it causes, whereas you seem to have recognized what is slowing you down and adjusted to it.</p>
<p>Hi Birdie- After years of stellar test results, your high-achieving daughter is inexplicably coming up short on the big kahuna, the SAT. She's got the GPA and the AP's and a sport and probably some other things, but the unexpected SAT results threaten the profile everyone expected she would present to highly selective schools. It's spring of junior year, she's taken the SAT twice and the scores are not indicative of her abilities. She's had test prep and tutoring, and time is running out. The SATII and finals are coming up.</p>
<p>This thread is so hot with anxiety that my monitor is smoking. There are 6 months left before ED application time. Enough already with the SAT. Does she really need to be evaluated for LD's on top of everything else that's going on junior year? Have her take the ACT; it she scores higher, than apply with that score. </p>
<p>Look for schools that are SAT-optional. Rather than SAT tutoring and test prep and retakes, take a close look at how her academic interests and activities tie together and figure out how to package her application so that her strengths are featured. How is her giftedness expressed in her daily life? How might her recommendations highlight her strengths? What will she bring to campus life? We all know kids who were denied despite the high GPA's and SAT's. Find another key to unlock the door.</p>
<p>Speckledegg--
Finding the cause of this difficulty is not only about raising the SAT score; any perceptual problem that is slowing down Birdie's D on the test will also impact her work. Although she may be able to control the quality of her studying by devoting more time to the task, the "cost" of being an excellent student increases. The physical and emotional toll of compensating for a learning difference can be large. If D has a difficulty for which she can receive support (training/coaching to overcome, ophthalmologic care, etc.) and not excuses, her future will be improved not just in the range of school choices that are available to her but also in the experience becoming educated.</p>
<p>My D went from very good SAT scores to outstanding SAT scores by learning to finish the test...she'd had 7-8 questions unanswered for each section. In her case, it was all about test taking technique, not insisting on solving the problem the "right" way but in getting the right test answer the fastest way, e.g., the famed "plugging in", starting with answer "C", on some Math problems.</p>
<p>I wouldn't have said she had been slow on the test but she was, umm, deliberate. PR tutoring was worth it...a neutral party was able to coax/demonstrate/cajole/inspire/teach a change of approach in the way that I could not have.</p>
<p>I'll admit, I really skimmed this thread so I may have missed a few points. BUT REALLY!! The SAT is now 3 3/4 hours. From the time the kid walks into the room- does all the administrative paper work-starts the test- has a few minutes break-we're talking 4 1/2 hours in a classroom. Kid takes the test in May or June with no air conditioning in classroom (not in NY). And then to also submit her through the psychological testing process to seek the privledge of having more time to complete this test and to see if she has learning disabilities??? I think most kids would go screaming out the door. Practically speaking-let her take the ACT, the colleges don't have to see the score. And check out schools that do not look at SAT's. I am sure that you will find the right schools for d to apply to. Good luck. Just an afterthought, if you truly think she's LD, you may want to go through the "testing process" at a later date. By adding this testing situation now, you may give your d more doubts and anxieties about her self. If she's gone this long and has been so successful in school I can't see the necessity of imposing this on a kid when they already have so much pressure. For all of our Juniors, the next 6-8 months is going to be a very trying time.</p>
<p>What I am getting out of this thread is that the OP is worried that D is not perfect at everything. So, D doesn't blow the chart on the SAT. So what. That does not mean there is a learning disability, especiallly if she tests in the top whatever everywhere else. The SAT is one very specific test for general skills. There may be a LD but to be so worried about one area that is not outstanding is unfair to the child. She doesn't do well on the SAT. Many kids don't do well on the SAT and they are very bright. There is something about learning to take tests. </p>
<p>It is frustrating to read about kids who do really well, but who aren't perfect in all areas. Some kids will never ever be able to make free throws, but can do great layups. So what do they do, they practice layups. </p>
<p>OP's D has a style of learning, and thus far she hasn't really had to adapt to real world scenarios. She needs to learn how to work with real situations. If she is an excellent student, that means when she takes tests in class, she somehow manages to finish them on time. She gets her projects done. She does her finals in the time allotted, does her midterms. If OP had brought up that D had issues with those kinds of tests, I would think an LD was a possiblity, but to assume an LD because she hasn't learned to master one test is a stretch.</p>
<p>My take is that the SAT is out of her comfort zone. Its different. It takes a different kind of preperation. I know I am sounding harsh, but sometimes, when kids are gifted and very smart, things come easy. When something doesn't come so easy, we may rush to find something worng. There probably isn't anthing wrong. The student has finally been challenged on something that might take some work in a different way than they have needed to so far.</p>
<p>I'd still like to hear what kind of independent reading the OP's daughter is doing. That's an important clue about what to do next, because if the answer is "very little," there is a reading issue there that will influence the daughter's success in many colleges, whether those colleges use SAT scores as an admission criterion or not, and if the answer is "a lot, and of many and varied subjects," then perhaps the issue is more strictly confined to "test-wiseness." Most United States school curricula in most schools these days really don't set assignments that involve much reading: it is possible to be a straight-A student at many high schools without having strong high-level reading skills. (The same applies to the kind of IQ tests and achievement tests mentioned: it is possible to score high on that brand of IQ test, and on in-grade standardized achievement tests, without having the reading level necessary for the most competitive college courses.) </p>
<p>There are a lot of things that can be done to boost a learner's reading ability, and many of those things can be done almost without regard to how the learner's reading level was limited in the first place. Improving reading skill is almost always a good investment in a learner's future, even if it had nothing to do with admissions criteria, but in fact improving reading ability usually flows right to the bottom line of getting higher SAT scores (on ALL sections of the test) and being more articulate in college application interviews and essays.</p>
<p>Mamacita- I was rushed when I wrote my post and when I reread it, it sounded a little colder than intended. I agree that if the family is inclined to pursue further testing, which might identify a learning issue for which Birdie's daughter could receive effective support, there might be a future benefit. I jumped ahead and assumed that it would probably not be possible to complete such testing/initiate support/experience score-raising results in a timely enough manner that fall applications would be positively impacted. Given this student's history of amazing test scores and high grades, it seemed to me that any LD, if identified, would most likely be subtle and possibly take specialized methods to discern, thus even more time. With 6-8 months until application deadlines, to try to coordinate/interweave the timetables for LD diagnosis and college applications would be an enormous undertaking.</p>
<p>The testing for a possible LD could begin today, but in the absence of other concerning factors beyond an SAT score that won't go up despite considerable tutoring and prep, I'd think twice before initiating.
I am sensing a lot of stress and concern in the household over this issue. A perfectionistic, high-achieving student has been hammering away at the SAT and is underperforming for perhaps the first time since birth. How incredibly frustrating. And how upsetting for student and family to deal with this during junior year, when it's been smooth sailing for so long, and the college drumbeat is getting louder. All I'm saying is rather than have the process diminish the student and send the family into a tailspin, which would create a stressful home environment for months, see if this student is someone who simply does better on the ACT. If not, move on and emphasize the student's strengths. If moving on includes LD testing, fine. But let it happen at its own appropriate pace, without a diagnosis/treatment "deadline" such as a looming SAT test date.</p>