At my son's school (not DC area - we moved), kids showing high potential are given an abbreviated form of IQ test administered by the district. Score above 130 and you can take part in a high potential pull-out program for all of elementary. Score above 145 and you may be eligible for the even higher potential grouped classroom. The school also uses a form of abbreviated IQ test in considering whether to allow early admission for K, and will only allow early entry if score is 130 or more. Our daughter misses the K cutoff by less than a week, so this is the process we'd have to go through if we wanted to send her "early".

It's a little weird, but for our kids, it's been a good opportunity to get them some more focused differentiation with kids that "get" them. Differentiation within the classroom is a lovely idea but in practice it can be pretty limited.

Your child will have to work with all types of people to be successful in life. Relating to others is an important skill to learn in school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you want your local public elementary school to perform free psychologist-led IQ tests on all children? (If it was an option, that is.) Ostensibly for the purposes of putting children into different groups and offering those with IQs of above a certain amount (let's say 130) to take part in special small group instruction?

This is already happening. No IQ test needed. In fact IQ is irrelevant to the differentiated instruction - actual performance and ability are the measure; and since those are variable, the groups can/do change with the needs and development of the child.

Differentiation becomes near impossible when you have kids in the same class who are academic years and sometimes decades apart in ability. Kids with greater academic abilities will be left to their devices for the most part as teachers focus their efforts on struggling students. Also, by dividing a class into groups, it effectively means students get less direct instructional time with the teacher than when students are grouped by ability into different classrooms. Any teacher worth their mettle knows this.

The title of your post made me LOL (laugh out loud).

130 sounds like the cutoff for G&T and AAP in the 'burbs. The District won't be able to offer similar programs for many reasons. Sputnik is not one of them.

What is it that you want, OP?

16:46 That's wild - I tested into the MGM program in 3rd grade. Unfortunately, this was California, immediately post Prop 13 so my special enhanced educational experience consisted of plopping me and the other three MGMers in a corner with a pile of books, while the rest of the class actually received instruction.

Anonymous wrote:Would you want your local public elementary school to perform free psychologist-led IQ tests on all children? (If it was an option, that is.) Ostensibly for the purposes of putting children into different groups and offering those with IQs of above a certain amount (let's say 130) to take part in special small group instruction?

This is already happening. No IQ test needed. In fact IQ is irrelevant to the differentiated instruction - actual performance and ability are the measure; and since those are variable, the groups can/do change with the needs and development of the child.

Anonymous wrote:Maybe DC could determine IQ by lottery.

Maybe DC could determine IQ by lottery.

I don't think I'd ever trust one data point for determining a child's academic placement.

Anonymous wrote:I would be very uncomfortable with using IQ to determine class placement. Too Brave New World for me.

A history lesson: After Spudnik, the US educational system did exactly what OP is takling about to compete with the Soviets. It was called the MGM "Mentally Gifted Minors" program. By 1961, most U.S. children were given I.Q. tests and put in homogenous groupings (classrooms) based upon I.Q. The gifted children received the best teachers and best STEM services (pretty elementary then) that the public system could offer. Unfortunately, the system broke down in the 70s and classes went back to being mixed on the theory that the "bright would lead the not-so-bright" which meant that no one learned anything. Educators have learned the hard way that that style of teaching doesn't work so now we are roaring back with AAP, AP courses, IB programs, and anything else you can name to push your kid into a top-flight college. So, whether or not you like it, at 18 your child will be judged based upon test scores, GAP, how many advanced-level (AP courses) your child has taken and other numerical factors. it sucks and it's not right, but that's what education is about today. http://books.google.com/books?id=qK9Xa7P7jBYC&pg=PA7&lpg=PA7&dq=mentally+gifted+minors+sputnik&source=bl&ots=ZYmhl0SY2i&sig=JEOPcilEXi4Q6VDfTIYePn2LNJw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DMIMVIr5K5XCsASm7YGYCw&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=mentally%20gifted%20minors%20sputnik&f=false

This totally reads as "I know my kid is smart and I don't want them mingling with those others so what if we just found a way to do this in a way that doesn't make me look bad"

I would be very uncomfortable with using IQ to determine class placement. Too Brave New World for me.

No

Would you want your local public elementary school to perform free psychologist-led IQ tests on all children? (If it was an option, that is.) Ostensibly for the purposes of putting children into different groups and offering those with IQs of above a certain amount (let's say 130) to take part in special small group instruction?