Gifted

Parents Forum
81

<p>I'm thinking that some of you posters who keep ranting against the idea of testing for an LD must have some sort of LD yourselves -- you certainly have a problem understanding what you read. Let's try again:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Birdie said she is NOT -- repeat NOT - trying to get accomodations and extended time for the SAT for her daughter. </p></li>
<li><p>Birdie said that her daughter does NOT want to retake the SAT after taking it twice already. She may or may not take the ACT.</p></li>
<li><p>Birdie talked to the school psychologist, who recommended testing and said she would arrange it. Birdie mentioned in passing some issues unrelated to the SAT, such as that the daughter reads slowly. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>Now what do these facts mean? </p>

<p>Parents usually have to fight tooth-and-nail to get schools to test their kids for LD's. If Birdie's school psych thinks that testing is in order, either the school has a suprisingly liberal standard about using its funds for psychometric testing, or else there probably is a pretty good reason - this may be due to issues that have shown up in other contexts that teachers have observed, or due to things the daughter has told the psych. </p>

<p>Testing for LD's is not the same as SAT-type testing -- the atmosphere is very different - so it is not going to put "more pressure" on the kid, as long as it is scheduled at an appropriate time. Many of the type of issues that show up from such testing can be remedied or addressed in very direct ways. </p>

<p>So why are people upset at the idea that a parent who has an indication that her daughter may have subtle learning problems is open to the idea of testing? Would you be just as outraged if the parent was noticing what seemed like a minor but inexplicable physical health problem, such as a slight tremor, and wanted a physical exam to rule out anything more serious?</p>

<p>I am not particularly advocating testing -- I just don't like the way those of you who have some sort of hostility to the idea are jumping all over Birdie for considering it -- or attacking those who do advocate it. It's a personal, family decision as to how to approach the issue. Birdie sounds like a parent with a very rational approach. And for those of you who cannot read,- once again, she has said repeatedly that she is not looking for some sort of testing accommodations. She is simply trying to help her daughter.</p>

82

<p>citygirlsmom- Our posts crossed. We seem to be saying the same thing. Coming face-to-face with our kids' imperfections is hard. We want the world for them.</p>

83

<p>While we are all rushing to push the LD angle, where, besides the SAT, does there appear to be any problem? It makes the kids with real LD diagnosis taken less seriously. Some kids don't take the SAT test well. Thats one reason I don't like it. But does that mean we should test kids who don't do well for LD, or maybe think, the test itself is flawed?</p>

<p>Most kids with LD struggle in other parts of their studies- reading, note taking, testing, listening skills, repeating back information, and it shows a little somewhere. </p>

<p>Why are we in such a rush to diagnose a disablity when in ONE area of an otherwise excellent student, there seems to be a problem. So its harder. Sometimes things are hard. It just that this is the first time for this student. Ps- many kids are frustrated. Its life. Its like a kid who aces algebra, but suddenly finds geometry difficult. </p>

<p>My fear is that testers often find a problem where none really exists. Happens all the time.</p>

<p>At my Ds school, a classmate was not doing well in class. Teachers INSISTED she was LD. Had their own person come in, and lo and behold, child was labeled LD. Parent was not so sure. She spent a fortune getting daughter retested. No LD. Just a very different learning style then was being taught. These teachers only taught to strong readers. This student was more auditory, with a more tangible style of learning. While the testing was good in that it showed the school was wrong, the tester was all too ready to diagnose LD where none existed. </p>

<p>My D is not a great test taker, but gets straight A.s She took a class to learn how to "work" the test. She didn't need more time, she needed to learn how to use the time well. It worked. </p>

<p>Sometimes gifted kids expect everything to be really easy. When its not, they get frustrated because they have to work at it, almost like everybody else. </p>

<p>I am not diminishng true LD diagnosis. My mom taught special ed for years. Its just we are too quick to want to find another reason for our childs imperfections than something just being hard. Sometimes kids diagnosed and drugged for ADD aren't ADD or AHAD. They are just difficult. But it is easier to drug them than to deal with behavioral problems.</p>

<p>Sometimes things are hard.</p>

84

<p>Calmom.....thank you I couldn't have said it better...</p>

<p>"Sometimes gifted kids expect everything to be really easy. When its not, they get frustrated because they have to work at it, almost like everybody else." citygirlsmom </p>

<p>hummmm sounds a little sour grapes to me!</p>

85

<p>"What is so interesting about my d is she has always done well on her Nationally normed tests (which are timed tests). Our school district tests every year K-6. Several times she hit the ceiling on the math tests and always finished in the 99% across the board. That is why I was so shocked when she said she was not able to finish." Birdie</p>

<p>I still don't see what the big problem is? D can finish timed tests. She is 99% across the board. But somoehow when she does poorly on one stadardized tests its suddenly an LD? And when she takes it twice and quits, its an LD? </p>

<p>As I said my mom taught Special Ed for years. WIth such limited resources, I hate to see them used on someone who has come across something tough for the first time in their lives.</p>

<p>I am calling it as I see it. You haven't refuted what other posters have said. Just that the really gifted girl failed at something, so suddenly we need all kinds of tests to figure out why. </p>

<p>As I said before, my D is really quite smart. Bad test taker. We worked on the that. Good test taker now.</p>

<p>Sour grapes? What does that mean?</p>

<p>Take the tests. Who really cares. Its just seems that there might be some other issues here. Such as, well D took test twice, didn't finish it and has given up. It was hard. Its supposed to be. THe lesson she is getting, is well, if its kind of hard, give up. Its kind of hard for almost everyone. She was disapppointed. It didn't match what she has always done. </p>

<p>Slam away.</p>

86

<p>No sour grapes here, Birdie, but I do agree with Citygirlsmom's statement. My "gifted" boys had a lot of trouble when they reached a point where they had to work, be organized, plan, and really think. They were able to go a long ways before they really HAD to work at things. Now I am not comparing them to your daughter who sounds like a lovely young lady and a motivated, hard working student, not a slacker as each of my boys were, but I have seen many kids who did get frustrated when the work really took a lot of time and thought when they were able to spend a lot of time embellishing work since the basics came so easily to them. I was always very good at mathematics but for some reason probability and statistics was counter intuitive to me, and it was then, that I realized that alot of what I did in math was intuitive and logical which did cut out a lot of the work others had to do. When I had to plod through the possibilities, it was pretty traumatic to me, but useful in actuarial work when you get into fields like number theory where degrees of accuracy does not make it intuitive but drudgery. That I was not so quick with my fingers on the calculator became an issue as well. So it is not putting your D down at all to say any of this. My two girls always had to put in the work at the earliest ages to do well. They were never the "smartest" in the class and neither qualified as gifted in the public programs. They did not test high enough. But they were outstanding students and remained so through college taking difficult pre med courses. Kids much more gifted than they did not do as well as they have done. They never expected school work to be easy, as it never was for them. There were times when I have to say in shame that I became exasperated in the time and effort it took for them to learn something thoroughly, but it is sad to me how my boys who can learn the same things so much more quickly will not bother to take the time to do so. But neither girl ever showed any resentment or frustration about the time they needed to take, whereas the boys had plenty of both when they hit the upper level college courses at rigorous universities where they had to bite the bullet and work or flunk.</p>

87

<p>Take the tests. </p>

<p>Its just seems that there might be some other issues here. Such as, well D took test twice, didn't finish it and has given up. It was hard. Its supposed to be. THe lesson she is getting, is well, if its kind of hard, give up. Its kind of hard for almost everyone. She was disapppointed. It didn't match what she has always done. </p>

<p>I was always great at math in school. Aced everything Get to college calculas. OMG. IT was hard. I had to work my (&$& off to pass. Reallity hit that I needed to actually study and practice math. A bruise to the ego, sure. But a lesson learned. Oldest D- loved social studies in grade school. Could read the lesson, take the test. 100%. In highschool, not so easy. She learned that her she needed to work harder. Take better notes, Read it more than jsut once. What was a piece of cake, wasn't anymore. Work was involved. </p>

<p>I don't know your D. Just what I see here. I am sure she is a great kid. I am sure she will do well no matter what. I just worry about jumping to the LD conclusion so easily. Its almost a crutch when it isn't warranted. So many kids have real issues and things to overcome. Not doing well on one test does mean a child is a failure. It means they didn't do well on one test.</p>

88

<p>Ladies. One of the great things about this site is the variety of suggestions offered. Someone posts a question then people offer ideas. The responses can flow very quickly. Then the original poster is able to move forward from their original post topic. Everyone learns something. And, it's fun to read. I am amazed daily at the breadth of suggestions and the quality of the writing. It's great that people really want to contribute and help others. </p>

<p>I'm not sure what has happened on this thread. I just logged back on because I wanted to respond to calmom's post #81, which has been bothering me since it posted. Calmom, you've been contributing all day and clearly have much hard-earned info to share. I guess you just got frustrated. When I first read #81, I wasn't sure where it came from. It felt like a personal attack and I don't even know if it was directed at my posts. It was a little harsh. Was I ranting? Was I misunderstood? I just read the entire thread again. It turns out that I did miss some details, perhaps because I had so many interruptions the first time and perhaps because this is a hot topic with a lot of mini-conversations and unfamiliar LD details. So just disregard my posts if you don't happen to agree. I am not well-informed about LD testing and assumed that it took many months; I was probably confusing it with the public school IEP process. So thank you for correcting me on this.</p>

<p>I think we all just want the best for our kids. Many of the posters on this thread have been consistently on-the-money with their comments and advice over the last few months. In one day you can hear from parents who have been through it all, professionals on many topics, authors, admissions and educational specialists, and more. We don't have to agree, but let's keep listening to each other.</p>

89

<p>now that I go back and see that the WISC subtests didnt indicate a disabilty- I am wondering if additional testing will show anything different.
My daughters are both all over the map- comprehension way up there but processing speed way down.
Its the unevennecess that indicates a disabilty
If it is all high scores than no disabilty ( generally)
all low scores would indicate a general lower intellgence
but both high and low- especially very high and very low- does indicate a learning disabilty which is why my daughter did have extended time testing for the SAT
Now me- even if I had extended time- after a few hours my brain over heats and shuts down- my youngest is the same way- so I imagine we will be either looking at the ACT or at schools that don't use the SAT as main criteria</p>

90

<p>Speckledegg - I am frustrated because there seems to be so much hostility directed at Birdie -- not particularly from you -- but there are several posters here who seem to feel that somehow her daughter does not deserve to be allowed to be tested for learning disabilities, because her possible LD is not nearly as bad as some others. That, to me, is akin to arguing that children with minor illnesses shouldn't be treated at the local clinic, because it takes away resources and attention from kids who are truly sick with life-threatening illnesses. I mean -- maybe my kid only has acne and the next kid in line at the dermatologist has melanoma -- does that mean that its wrong for me to make the appointment? </p>

<p>The nice thing about a minor learning issue is that often it is fairly easy to address once you can accurately pinpoint what it is. </p>

<p>There is another line of argument here going on that I find frustrating -- it is the "kid must be lazy" assumption. If the kid who is very bright, has straight A's, has always tested well before can't do well on the SAT... then parents opine that the kid just hasn't learned how to manage her time, or work hard enough, or apply herself. </p>

<p>Well, I don't know Birdie's daugher, but I do know mine. My high intellect, high-achieving, SAT-flubbing daughter is the most disciplined and organized person I know. She is the type of kid who will take an assignment to write an essay and turn it into a treatise, lavishing extra time on doing cover art for the front of the binder. She not only manages her own time well - she manages everyone else's. She also works quickly: again and again I have seen her take on a project and tell me her big ideas, and I would to tell her that the ideas sounded good, but that it was impossible to accomplish that much in the time alloted -- only I would see her pull it all off, beautifully, with time to spare. So I don't tell her to cool it any more - I just let her do her thing and sit back in awe. One thing I have noticed is that when my daughter has an idea - she moves on it, quickly. She never means, "I'll get to it next Thursday". </p>

<p>So again - I don't know Birdie's daughter, but you can't tell me that my daughter's problems with the tests are because she never had to work hard at anything, or never experienced a challenge before. It simply isn't true - this is a kid who is always looking to challenge herself. Never a dull moment.</p>

<p>Now I didn't come here asking for help with my daughter, as Birdie did -- but the point is that Birdie's situation is not unique. There are many brilliant, hardworking people who seem to choke when it comes to standardized tests. Whether or not there is anything to be done about it is another matter -- but don't fault Birdie for her desire to seek out more information and help. It would be a shame for a bright kid like her daughter to spend 4 years in college excelling in math & science, only be to shut out yet again in 4 years by the GRE or MCAT, if there is something that can be done to get a handle on the issues now.</p>

91

<p>Emeraldkity - WISC III is just one of many tests that might be used to assess a LD - and in this case, the d. had the WISC III in elementary school - I don't think WISC III would generally be used with high school age kids. We probably should expand the concept of "LD" to include other perceptual processing issues - for example, there could be a visual perceptual issue that is at the heart of it. I think someone else above posted a comment about the difficulty of some people with visual tracking when using computer scan tron sheets. </p>

<p>Anyway, the point is that while the WISC III may give very good indication of a LD in many cases, it doesn't rule out LD's when a kid does well on it, especially with kid's in the highly gifted range who will tend to top out on many subtests.</p>

92

<p>Is it just me or does it seem that a large number of threads lately have deteriorated into disagreements and verbal fistfights that seem to have very little to do with the original question?</p>

<p>We all have our agendas. Let's try to keep them in check when we see things getting heated, OK?</p>

93

<p>citygirlsmom..."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." </p>

<p>citygirlsmom.... " Its just seems that there might be some other issues here. Such as, well D took test twice, didn't finish it and has given up. It was hard. Its supposed to be. THe lesson she is getting, is well, if its kind of hard, give up. Its kind of hard for almost everyone. She was disapppointed. It didn't match what she has always done"</p>

<p>I find these extremely offensive along with many of your other statements. It is unfortunate that you find the need to attack and use sarcasim. I refuse to waste my time responding to your bizarre statement about two people who are strangers to you.</p>

<p>I really want to send a hug to calmom....your knowledge, insight and compassion are valued and you express them so well....and thanks for coming to my defense.....I owe you one!</p>

<p>carolyn.....I agree with you....</p>

94

<p>tokenadult ....My d is a reader but she reads slow...because of her ec and sport she normally is only able to do reading related to her classes during the school year. (her ap english and ap psych require a great deal of reading) During the summer she always has some type of book in her beach bag. It could be a biography, a classic or a book on the NY Times best sellers list. She loves a good mystery,she calls these books "candy for the brain books" just pure pleasure. She enjoys reading science especially books relating to the rain forrest. She recieved her certification in scuba diving and can't read enough about ocean exploration. She has taken quite an interest in learning how maps are made of the ocean floor. (as a side note...she also loves college football and basketball and can tell you statistics on every player on her favorite teams.) Does this give you an idea? </p>

<p>tokenadult...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. </p>

<p>I would value some of your examples on how to boost reading ability.</p>

95

<p>One specific example of boosting reading ability, in a case of the kind you mention, in which the child reads but reads slowly, is studying etymology. There are lots and lots of books about word roots, some designed for college students who find they have to read a lot more than they did in high school, that seem to help a lot of readers read faster. I'll give a link to one</a> book of that kind that I have checked out of a university library and liked. The Donald Ayers and Thomas Worthen textbook on this same subject is a book I have at home and a book used in JHU-CTY summer courses for gifted students. </p>

<p>I thought of this issue right away because my son, a few years ago, had the IQ score profile and in-grade achievement test profile similar to what you mention. (He had fewer graded courses, as of that date, because we mostly "unschool." Now he has some grades in outside courses and distance learning courses.) My son a few years ago had strabismus (being cross-eyed, even wall-eyed some of time) and definitely had reading difficulties even though he liked to read and we have a house full of books. In his case, vision therapy for the strabismus made one jump forward in his reading ability, and taking an etymology course (in his case, the distance learning course from the Center for Talent Development LearningLinks courses) made for another jump forward. He now scores high on the SAT and ACT, which he surely wouldn't have done a few years ago (didn't do on the EXPLORE, in English or reading). I think most of his test score boost came from improved reading, a reading improvement that no one might have guessed he had room to make if only grade-level testing and IQ testing were considered. I thought of trying the etymology course for him because I had taken a course like that ("medical terminology") in college and I thought that course improved my reading ability, even though I was already at the top of grade-level standardized achievement tests and had aced the SAT verbal section before college. So that's why I thought your daughter, who already has many other accomplishments, might still have some room to grow in reading, which I'm glad to hear is an activity she enjoys. This might flow right to the bottom line of her test scores, if she should decide to retest before submitting college applications. </p>

<p>Hope this helps!</p>

96

<p>It certainly does help. Do you know if the JHU-CTY offers a course? I believe she still has room to grow in reading and this certainly opens a new possibllity to help make it happen. Thanks so much!</p>

<p>I guess I am not the only night owl.</p>

97

<p>JHU-CTY definitely offers an etymology course, and I think it still has enrollment openings at this late date. (I'm talking about the summer residential course.) I'm less sure about distance learning providers other than Center for Talent Development, but anyone can sign up for that course, and I like it a lot.</p>

98

<p>I would love suggestions on what other tests to look at
I had my daughter tested with one of the WISC-s (last fall- have to dig out which one) on my own dime- ( $800) but I am meeting with school psych today and if someone could give suggestions on what tests to that might give more info about what exactly is going on with her ( she has a lot of difficulty with processing speed and transferring info into long term memory) I would appreciate it.</p>

99

<p>Birdie - among individuals who are diagnosed late in their educational careers for dyslexia - that is, those who are diagnosed for the first time in high school or college -- slow reading is often the predominant symptom. What happens is that these individuals have compensated well for their reading barriers in early childhood - when the subject matter of books is relatively simple and flow of text very predictable -- but their problems only manifest when the difficulty of the material increases. </p>

<p>Often they will also read high-interest material that is quite difficult -- there is a researcher named Rosalie Fink who has studied high-achieving dyslexics and found that the high level of motivation to read high interest material was the unifying factor which led to each overcoming their learning problems. Each seemed to have an abiding passion which drove them to read everything they could about whatever subject moved them.</p>

<p>Dyslexia is more than just slow reading, but an experienced evaluator would know what other signs to look for. For example, most dyslexics have very quirky spelling patterns, or simply can't spell well at all; often there are reading comprehension issues - the dyslexic person may have to go back and re-read the text repeatedly to get meaning from it. You could probably get a good indication just from a preliminary screening -- there are lists of common symptoms all over the internet, and generally they help to highlight clusters of symptoms that indicate the need for further testing. </p>

<p>Tokenadult is almost, but not quite, on the right track with the comments about building reading skills. Right because a dyslexic person definitely needs help in that area -- but not quite there because the dyslexic person will need specialized help geared to areas of difficulty. More practice or a recommended methodology appropriate for non-dyslexic readers probably won't work, and may be particularly frustrating -- the dyslexic brain is just wired differently, and so different strategies need to be emphasized, especially for teenagers and adults. Studying etymology probably is a big help -- but for a dyslexic, it would need to be learned in the context of a program that also addresses other issues. </p>

<p>Your daughter's slow reading by itself does not mean she is dyslexic - that is just something that indicates the possibility. I am quite certain that my own SAT-challenged daughter is NOT dyslexic - my d. is a very rapid reader, and tends to have more difficulty with math than verbal parts of the SAT. So its more likely that my d's barrier is her perfectionism and attendant reluctance to use strategic short-cuts. Her best performance by far was on the verbal analogies, which of course are now removed from the test. I'm just offering this comment because, despite what others may think, I am NOT saying that every kid who has problems with the SAT has a learning disability. I'm just saying that "slow reading" is something to explore -- the how and why of that is pretty important in uncovering a possible hidden LD. </p>

<p>By the way, the path for my son in overcoming his dyslexia was very short, once we had a handle on the problem. After years of struggle, he worked up to grade level reading in a matter of weeks, and was reading well beyond grade level within a few months. So, again - getting a diagnosis is not all about trying to get some sort of special accommodations -- a lot of times it is just about finding the key to resolving the problem.</p>

100

<p>Emeraldkity, I am not a psychologist and not an expert on testing -- so I can't tell you exactly what tests would be used. It would also probably depend on who is doing the testing - testing by a neurologist is going to follow a somewhat different path than testing by a psychologist. I just know that generally a battery of different tests is used - the WISC is often the starting point, but it is not specifically designed to diagnose learning disabilities. It is just favored because of its breakdown of subtests, so it gives more useful information than most other aptitude or IQ tests.</p>