Is it possible a child has a low IQ?

ora_43

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 4:24 pm

amother wrote:

Not necessarily. Sure, people can't usually succeed while being completely illiterate or completely unable to follow verbal instructions, but there are a lot of ways to learn. Most courses combine lectures and textbook learning. There's a ton of material online that helps with learning various subjects in a more visual way - Khan academy is the first thing that comes to my mind, but it's just one of many.

ora_43

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 4:35 pm

amother wrote:

It seems the reason we use the term "processing disorder" instead of "low iq" is because: a) its much less offensive and b) it helps the parents feel better about things as it gives false hope that its a fixable problem.

Other posters have explained why low IQ and procession disorders are very different. But I'd like to add - even if they were virtually the same, it would still make sense to say "processing disorder" instead of "low iq" when necessary, for the following reasons:
a. because it's the medically accurate term
b. because it's the medically accurate term
c. because it's the medically accurate term

Seriously, why would we not start giving problems more accurate labels now that more accurate labels are available? It'd be like saying "why bother telling people they have seasonal allergies and not a nasty head cold; aren't they going to keep sneezing and coughing for the next few weeks either way?"

If people get overly optimistic, the answer is giving them more information (although I'd think there's usually not much wrong with a little optimism). Not telling them, wrongly, that it's a different problem (so that they'll give up on trying to help their child, no less).

marina

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 4:58 pm

debsey wrote:

Marina, with all due respect, while the board of education does do a basic evaluation, it is not usually enough to help a child with processing issues. The job of the board of ed eval is to qualify/disqualify for services. More nuanced explorations of exactly the processing issue and how to work with it is beyond the scope of a board of ed eval. If I had only relied on a board of ed eval, my son would still be in a completely self-contained environment. Because he had a full eval by a team, which included neuropsychologists and learning disabilities specialists, we were able to pinpoint his exact needs and get him help, to the point where he is completely mainstreamed (and thriving! and thrilled!) today. There are ways to get this type of eval covered, as well.

Board of education eval is a bare starting point.

I dk where you live. In many places a board of Ed eval is superb. In any case- THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE- if you are unhappy with a board evaluation (ETR) you can ask for the board to pay for an independent educational evaluation and the board is generally obligated to do so. That means you can choose - within certain criteria- who will
Evaluate your child and the district will pay.

This is not legal
Advice I am prob not licensed where you live

debsey

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 5:21 pm

marina wrote:

I live in Lakewood. I am not a lawyer, but because I work in compliance, I know a lot about special education law, and I've seen a lot of evaluations. You are right that the board of ed eval is the start point. If you want a better eval, there are ways to get the Board of Ed to cover it, but expect it to be a long, drawn-out process. There's also Catastrophic Illness in Childhood Fund (at least in NJ), where if your child is diagnosed with a catastrophic illness (in my son's case, it was autism), and the costs of the evals, therapy, etc is more than a certain percentage of your income, you can get some of the money covered by the state.

We had a major arbitration issue with the Lakewood Board of Ed, but ended up getting most services covered through Catastrophic (at the worst point, when my son was really struggling, the bills for all his therapies would probably have crippled Bill Gates!) Thankfully, we got him all the services he needed. In the long run, this means the difference between someone being warehoused in special ed for the rest of his life vs. a child who will grow up to be a productive member of society!

In Lakewood, and based on moms I know from Brooklyn too, if you're going to not accept the Board of Ed's recommendations, you can win, but it's going to be a very long battle.

Along the way, many well-meaning people told us the Board of Ed eval was sufficient. It was not. My son was evaluated by a neuropsych clinic in Mt. Sinai, and there's no comparison to the help and the diagnostic clarity they gave us. Not to mention, the Board of Ed was flat-out WRONG. They said he's not autistic, just mildly learning disabled, but Mt. Sinai gave him the gold standard autism test and they said he is most definitely autistic. The Board of Ed said he's defiant and he chooses to misbehave. The Mt. Sinai clinic showed that he is also mildly ADHD, and ever since he was medicated, he has not misbehaved in school once.

Imagine what would have been if we would have accepted the Board of Ed's recommendations?

amother

Blue

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 8:12 pm

ora_43 wrote:

The problem is that since parents are almost never told that its an intelligence issue, they falsely believe that with the proper therapy the child can catch up to their class. Very often its just not true. If doctors started telling me I'm short because I have deficit of length syndrome I might think, well who do I go to to get that fixed? I'd rather the doctor just tell me I'm short and deal with it.

Jeanette

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 8:30 pm

amother wrote:

Even a condition like being short can be multi-faceted. Why is this child short? Is there a bone disease? A nutritional deficiency? A hormone deficiency? First you'd want to do some investigation to rule out other conditions before saying that they're "just short." And what does "deal with it" mean? How is their shortness affecting them? If they are struggling with it are there ways to help them cope better?

The case of a child not doing well in school is obviously a lot more complex than just being "smart" or "dumb." Some of the smartest people I know did not do well academically as children.

cnc

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 8:42 pm

amother wrote:

What do you consider an intelligence issue?
Intelligence is multi-faceted and the whole concept of IQ is controversial in general. Some feel that it is totally flawed. In fact IEPs are not permitted to be based on IQ alone.
I taught for 10 years and have not seen a child that was "dumb" in every area.
I also know people with vision, auditory, and sensory processing disorders that have made great progress with therapy(including my own child). I don't know why you think that that therapy will never help them catch up.

If someone has an intellectual disability (with an IQ of below 70 or so)- that's something else and chances are they never will catch up. But comparing intellectual disabilities to processing disorders is like comparing apples to cucumbers.

I happen to have recently read a book that explained it pretty clearly if you're interested.

Exceptional Children: Introduction to Special Ed by William Heward

yogabird

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 8:59 pm

amother wrote:

Any child that's getting evaluated is having an IQ test done. If they score below average, the parent will be told just that.

imasinger

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 10:45 pm

What on earth is to be gained by being judgmental, and assuming some kids are just "too dumb" to succeed at any important jobs?!

It's both halacha (dan l'chaf z'chus) and common sense that we should think differently. As one of my mentors, a master teacher once said, "a good teacher should always have the highest expectations of each member of the class, and at the same time, make sure the material is accessible to the lowest common denominator." Any school that is manufacturing artificial pats on the back, or inflating grades, is depriving the student body. That's what's more likely causing the problem on SAT's, not the kids' "dumbness." Offering proper therapeutic support can change things.

One of the great joys of being a teacher is seeing that a child who had been languishing is now blooming.

In a store, the customer is always right. Someone who doesn't believe that shouldn't interact with consumers.

In a school, each child always has potential and great intelligence of some sort. Someone who doesn't believe that shouldn't be a teacher.

marina

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 11:18 pm

I worked once with a school district who had a teen girl with an IQ of low 40s. Tested many times over many years. This is about as low as the tests measure. You can't really score lower than 40 on an IQ test.

Because the child had a lot of therapy and support- she was doing fantastic. She was verbal, could count, could add and subtract numbers without regrouping, could read on a end of first grade level, could go online, could do a google search, could type and send an email, could write several sentences legibly, could socialize on a basic level etc, etc. She had most of the basic skills. That's because her teachers and parents developed an intense and comprehensive program for her - they didn't just say "eh, she's a low IQ kid, the end, what can we expect." They had goals and ambitions and they pushed her.

That's a child with one of the lowest IQs I've seen.

Kal Vechomer a child with an average IQ (90-110) who is bad at, say writing quickly ( short term memory & processing speed) and needs to learn some compensatory skills or improve in writing ability. Lol. That child needs to be pushed so he or she can succeed and catch up and exceed his or her class. No reason why therapy or specially-designed instruction cannot lead the child to be exceptional!

cnc

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 11:22 pm

marina wrote:

I wish I knew this earlier.

marina

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 11:28 pm

debsey wrote:

Okay, I am glad that your situation worked out. It's unfortunate that the school psychologist appointed by your board of ed didn't do the best job, but that does not mean other special education offices won't do a good job for those parents. In other words, everyone should try their board of education first and many times, those evaluations will be very good.

amother

Turquoise

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 11:31 pm

marina wrote:

You're not being too honest. You're being too uneducated. Plenty of pple with dyslexia or processing disorders become professionals. They just learn to compensate.

I recently met a medical resident who has severe dyslexia. He always had a hard time reading so all his books were on tape. Except he learned to compensate and listens to audio at 4x the speed- it's incomprehensible to anyone else, but he hears and understands it just fine. He took the classes and exams and did well. And in real life he's a fine doctor.

Your husband's school might be doing a crappy job of educating the kids, but there's no reason to equate all disabilities with cognitive delay.

As the mom of a very bright dyslexic little boy, thank you for this story!! I hugged your post because I loved it.

amother

Turquoise

Tue, Jul 05 2016, 11:56 pm

Regarding dyslexia, Sally Shaywitz of the Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity (see what they did there? implying that dyslexia equals creativity) has done extensive research on the brains of dyslexics vs non-dyslexics.

Her team has found that there is no structural difference in the brains of dyslexics; rather, the neural pathways are different. (That's how messages are sent.) In fact, in only 60% of people who are an identical twin with dyslexia, does their twin also have it. This indicates that it is not a purely genetic condition.

What I found fascinating was that the researchers took MRIs of dyslexic kids' brains before and after one year of intensive training in reading skills.

They found that the neural pathways had actually CHANGED after the year, to resemble those of non-dyslexics!

I have learned, and as a parent I see, that the brain is an incredible thing, very multi-faceted and mysterious. OP, please don't write anyone off.

imaima

Wed, Jul 06 2016, 8:24 am

amother wrote:

I don't mean any disrespect but I've heard the term "visual learner" very often to describe students that are weak. Maybe I'm wrong but the problem is that to succeed academically, students need to sit in a class and understand verbal instructions. They also need to be able to go home and read and understand a textbook. Visual learners struggle with this and most schools and colleges don't have accommodations for these students because I dont think they exist. I don't think students graduate from college without having listened in class and read books. Can someone name a college that accommodates visual learners and will not require reading the standard textbooks?

Are you even aware of what you are saying? A textbook IS visual! Everything that you perceive with our eyes is visual.
I am a visual learner and it means that if I read a textbook, I can visualize the content hours or days later, along with itslayout and diagrams on the page.

When I hear information without the visual support I remember the gist of it but not details or exact words.
So I am more visual than auditory. That being said my auditory processing isn't impaired either.

amother

Slategray

Wed, Jul 06 2016, 8:37 am

We're incredibly lucky to live in a time when we recognize different skills and styles of learning. Lives used to be ruined when children didn't fit the mold.

Does that mean every child is brilliant? Come on, don't you know anyone who is smarter or (for lack of a better word) stupider than you are? Some are tall, some are short, some are weak, some are strong, and smart and some are stupid. That's life.

I can learn sports, I can practice, but I'll never be a natural athlete. We can teach kids learning skills, but only some will be brilliant. And that's fine. We shouldn't be pretending every child is smart. We should appreciate our children for their areas of excellence, whatever they may be.

imasinger

Wed, Jul 06 2016, 8:58 am

amother wrote:

I was with you until the bolded, which was like a bucket of ice water.

Yes, everyone has natural talents. Yes, people are all different.

But it is not true that we are therefore lmited. There are tons of stories about people whose determination to succeed led to success. The brain is elastic. It can change, where your height cannot. As more than one person on this thread has pointed out, neural pathways can develop, given proper training.

Maybe not every child is the MOST brilliant, but every child is smart at some things. Or could be, with proper support.

Part of appreciating children is not short-changing their potential. Too many times, families pigeonhole their kids. This one is the responsible one, this on is the smart one, this one is the social one, this one is the athlete.

Such thinkng is detrimental. We can recognize strengths without defining people by them, or limiting them.

Faigy86

Wed, Jul 06 2016, 9:43 am

amother wrote:

I think I get what op is saying, that these days all parents think their kid is smart (just read this thread) but has other issues that cause problems with learning. No ones kid is average or below average. But that doesn't mean all kids shouldn't be helped reach their potential.

But who gets to decide what a child's potential is? If you are willing to accept that your child (or student) may be below average, than you will not advocate for the support to help him/her reach higher and further. It's much better for parents to overestimate their child's abilities (not in a pressurizing way, just in a supportive way) that way it keeps all doors open for the child. Accepting a child as average or below average just slams doors in their faces way too pre-maturely.

If you hear the discussions that go on when middle school students are already being expected to choose academic (college) or vocational tracks for high school - that's really pre-mature and doesn't allow every student to explore their abilities in a productive way.