Why We Don’t Treat IQ as a Gatekeeper—And How We Look At It Instead
– By Jacqui Byrne
I recently read an article in The Atlantic, A High IQ Makes You an Outsider, Not a Genius (paywall), in which writer Helen Lewis takes aim at the myth of genius—and rightly so. As educators of gifted and twice-exceptional (2e) students—those identified as gifted with co-occurring challenges—we’ve repeatedly seen how the “genius” label can flatten complexity, misrepresent ability, and isolate the very students it’s meant to celebrate.
But that doesn’t mean we dismiss intelligence testing altogether. We just refuse to treat it as a verdict.
Despite its name, twice-exceptionality isn’t a neat binary; the phrase actually describes a particular pattern on a bell chart—one that simultaneously shows outlier scores at both ends of a spectrum. For example, a student might ace a spatial reasoning subtest and tank a verbal one. What’s important to understand is that one result doesn’t cancel the other out; rather, each reveals something critical about how that student thinks, learns, and navigates the world. And the tension between those results isn’t a contradiction—it’s a clue.
That’s why we don’t use IQ as a gatekeeper for admissions; in fact, we’ve observed that conventional IQ testing alone can create an incomplete and often misleading picture. If you’ve ever been told your child is “too smart to be struggling,” you already know how unhelpful an oversimplified label can be—even an allegedly flattering one.
But that doesn’t mean we ignore testing altogether, either. On the contrary, we welcome every available piece of information—and then we incorporate those pieces thoughtfully into the context of the whole, amazing, complex young human in front of us.
To reduce the skewing effect that outlier scores can cause, we like to look at the General Ability Index (GAI) if available, rather than just a full-scale IQ score (FSIQ). We look closely at subtest scores, and patterns of strengths and challenges. But more importantly, we look at all that through the lens of the lived experience, as shared firsthand by the child and family. We ask the kinds of questions standardized tools can’t:
- What lights this student up?
- What shuts them down?
- Where does the system misread them—and what can we do differently?
We use this approach in our admissions process, in our classrooms, and in our workshop series for parents and educators, Insider Strategies for Outlier Needs. It guides everything we do. It’s a commitment to seeing the full picture—not just what a number says, but what it means in the life of a real kid navigating the real world.
Lewis’s article reminds us that the myth of genius tends not to serve bright individuals well; not the brilliant young writer who is too plagued by performance anxiety to share their work; not the student deemed “high potential” who has a history of school refusal. Not even the child who seems to thrive, until the pressure to “live up to their IQ” becomes unbearable.
What these kids need—what all kids need—is not a single, reductive label, but a place where their full selves are welcome. That starts with curiosity, context, and consideration — and sometimes, yes, with a subtest score that helps us ask better questions.
To receive our latest posts, expert interviews and more, sign up to stay in touch!
Interested in applying to FlexSchool today? Get started!
Do you know someone who could benefit from learning more about 2e? Please invite them to visit the links below!
Jacqui Byrne is the visionary behind FlexSchool—an accredited private school serving gifted, neurodivergent, and twice-exceptional (2e) students. An award-winning educational leader, internationally recognized expert, and passionate advocate for the neurodivergent, Jacqui serves on the advisory board for the Bridges Graduate School of Cognitive Diversity in Education and holds a degree from Yale University.
