"My favorite subject is physics and anything related to Einstein. Why? He never combed his hair and he never wore socks." Silverman, of the Gifted Development Center, has been called as a potential witness in Chapman's neglect case and no longer talks publicly about her protege and little friend. But she spoke of him extensively last summer. In fact, she was instrumental in helping Chapman move to Colorado. Silverman was to arrange programs and protocols to help develop Justin's potential, as well as line up sponsorships to help the family financially. It was early 2000 when she first saw Justin's Web site, Knowledge Quest -- Chapman says Justin built it by himself in six hours -- and she was "blown away." Much of Justin's mesmerizing effect was achieved through e-mail to mentors and prospective peers around the country. Many of these were signed off late at night, when most children his age are asleep. Silverman recalled her early e-mail exchanges with the boy as "incredible." "He would e-mail things at a profound level of knowledge that I knew I couldn't get him to tell me in words," she said. Silverman, who earned a doctoral degree in educational psychology and special education from the University of Southern California, didn't doubt the authenticity of the messages. "For anyone else to be able to ghostwrite what Justin does on e-mail, they would have to be a greater genius than Justin and they would have to be the stupidest person on the face of the Earth, because they'd be found out," Silverman said. In Silverman's test of Justin's intelligence, she used a Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (Form L-M). That test has brought much controversy to Silverman's career, in which she has tested the IQ of more than 3,000 people, because it last was revised in 1972. Jerome Sattler, a nationally known IQ testing expert and author who helped update the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition in 1986, said results from the 1972 test are not valid. People have more knowledge now, meaning that scores compared with norms from 30 years ago are inflated. "The idea is, one should use the most current version of a standardized test because it better reflects what is known in the population," said Sattler, professor emeritus at San Diego State University. But Silverman and her staff argue that the Stanford-Binet Form L-M is the only test that distinguishes those who rank above the 99th percentile on other intelligence tests. She said there is a formula in the Stanford-Binet manual that describes how to calculate a score when the ceiling of the test is reached. Despite her loyalty to the Form L-M test and the professional duels that has caused, Silverman is a member of an advisory committee to the team of editors and psychologists revising the fifth edition of the Stanford-Binet, which is expected to be released in 2003. The Stanford-Binet tests skills in vocabulary, verbal abstract reasoning, mathematical induction, spatial perception, auditory short-term memory, visual memory, visual-motor performance, arithmetic reasoning, social cognition and verbal fluency. Justin slept only two hours the night before the first day of his testing, according to Silverman's report. She said she allowed him to take the test in his mother's lap because she could not always understand his responses. Silverman noted that there were several times she had to ask Chapman what her son was saying. Special testing arrangements aren't common, although they're not unheard of. But Sattler said he would not accept as valid any answers translated by a parent. Regardless, Justin's score blew off the charts. At 298-plus, according to Silverman, it was almost three times the average IQ of 100. "Justin's extraordinary strengths in all of these areas surpassed the limits of this instrument," Silverman wrote. "He performed beyond the level of an individual 19 years, 5 months." Sattler said there is no valid way to achieve a score of 298. "That number doesn't exist. It doesn't exist in any normed group. You cannot find a number in any standardized manual that's much higher than 160." The voices of critics failed to dampen Silverman's awe. "It was the most incredible experience testing this kid," Silverman said. "I've never had anything like this happen to me in my entire life." Other experts have weighed in to support Silverman. "If his score was really that high, there is almost no testing modification you could make that would make that big of a difference," said Jonathan Plucker, a testing expert and associate professor of educational psychology at Indiana University. "With a score that high, the kid is bright. There is not a lot to be argued about there."
|
