Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-IV vs. Stanford Binet

I am wondering if one is different than another? If the scores are generally the same? Is there a waiting period between the two? Our school district gives the WISC, and DD6 is going to be tested at some point this school year, but I am guessing it is going to be sometime in the spring (and if the school has their preference I am sure it'll be LATE spring). So, another school we are considering has to have the S-B, and we were thinking about in the meantime -- like sort of soonish -- doing that test, so that we know if she'd qualify for their HG immersion program, prior to waiting on our slow-as-molasses home school district. WDYT?

Yes, they are different but both are IQ tests. WISC is much more commonly used (and therefore better known by schools). They are completely different tests, so there shouldn't be a problem in having her take both.

Any differences in scores I've seen/heard about are anecdotal, but of the few kids I know who've taken both, the SB-V tends to run a bit lower for FSIQ. I've generally heard that the WISC is better for verbal kids and the SB for mathy kids if you are looking for a higher score or to hit on the kid's strengths, but again I'm not sure if that is just anecdote.

My eldest was tested on the WiSC at 7 and the SB5 last month, her FSIQ was 8 points higher on the SB than her GAI on the WISC. I put this down to:

1) actual better functioning (she's 2e and has changed a lot)
2) far better tested rapport
3) test picked up her visual spatial strength

My 5yr old did the WPPSI 6 months ago and the SB5 last month, her FSIQ tested 8 points higher and DYS level on the SB5. I put this down almost exclusively to better tester rapport so she did the whole test, less test fatigue was probably also an issue.

There's much to read on the differences between the two tests. My son did very well on the WISC-IV and WJ-III, along with another verbal IQ test. EG/PG across the board according to these.

With the SB-5 much lower, he would not have made the 130 cut-off for our gifted program. Wild differences. Thankfully the collection of other tests along with his real-life performance showed the higher scores to more accurately reflect his abilities.

I'm heading out the door so won't do much editing with what I've collected.. but it seems that for some, the SB-5 is a totally different "Yardstick."

Hope this helps!

---------------------------------
In no particular order. The quotes are all from the linked articles.

http://www.giftedchildren.org.nz/forum/read.php?f=3&i=3125&t=2378
"Comparing the same versions of individual IQ tests, such as the WISC-IV to the SB-5, should be straightforward. But each test has its own strengths. Psychologists suggest that matching the test to the subject's strengths results in the most accurate IQ score. The current version of the Wechsler, the WISC-IV, is a strong test for verbally gifted children, with emphasis on knowledge gained from reading. This version of the WISC, however, is also heavily timed. Short term memory and processing speed scales often lower the full scale IQ score for gifted children. Psychologists should be familiar with the alternate scoring, called the Global Intelligence Index (GAI), in cases where the difference between the verbal scale and short term memory or processing speed scales exceed limits. The current version of the Stanford Binet, the SB-5, is stronger for non-verbal intelligence, and less heavily timed. Note that for the previous versions of these tests, the WISC-III and SB-4, the common wisdom was exactly the opposite: use the WISC-III for non-verbal kids, and the SB-4 for verbal / intelligence gifted kids."

Full text of one study:
Gifted and highly gifted students: how do they score on the SB5?
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=150850213

"In contrast to the means on the SBS, which seem to be lower than expected, many of the age-equivalent scores appear to be higher than one might expect. The proportion of children that received age-equivalent scores beyond the highest average score for mature adults (19% of gifted students and 40% of highly gifted students) seems implausible even after taking into account documented cautions in interpreting such scores (Sattler, 2001). If these age-equivalent scores are indicative of actual functioning, it seems curious that they are not accompanied by correspondingly high IQ scores. In sum, these scores appeared to be of minimal use in accurately describing levels of giftedness in our sample."

and

"Another interesting finding is that some individual's scores varied dramatically between the two intelligence tests (as much as 35 points). Two students in the highly gifted program scored so low on the SB5 that they would not meet intelligence test criteria for giftedness even if the cut-off were lowered to 115. Alternatively, several students who scored at the low end of the IQ cut-off for our gifted program did very well on the SB5 and scored within the range of the study completed by Riverside on child prodigies."


This one shows discrepancies specifically for highly verbal kids:
http://www.malonefamilyfoundation.org/whatisgifted_assessing2.html
"Conclusion:
Any test can only measure a small portion of a person's competence. Therefore, all tests underestimate children's abilities rather than overestimate them. It is nearly impossible to fake abstract reasoning at an advanced level. When a disabled child achieves two different IQ scores, the higher score is believed to be the best estimate of the child's potential. Gifted children deserve the same attitude."

Discussions of SB-V at Davidson GT group:
http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/55959/1.html

Also WISC-IV v. SB-LM
http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/B...res_vs_sta.html

And another:
http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/33188/2.html

Our experience with the SB-V was mixed. First, my DD's scores were lower on the SB-V than the WISC-IV and did not seem to reflect her verbal strengths as well. However, it was helpful to see her scores on Quantitative Reasoning (one of her strength areas) that are not tested on the WISC. Also, the SB-V scores showed a clear distinction on verbal vs. non-verbal working memory for our DD, and helped to push us on the 2e evaluation process. (Although she scored average or above in total working memory on both the WISC and the SB, her non-verbal working memory was only a 6th percentile.)

For what it's worth, my DS took the SB-V at 5.9 and received a FSIQ of 132, which did not qualify him for the self-contained HG/PG program we felt would be the right fit. The second he turned 6 he scored a FSIQ of 155 on the WISC-IV (all subtests 99.9, except for WM, which was 99.7). I personally know of one other child who had to re-test due to a non-qualifying score in the low 130's on the SB-5, and subsequently scored >99% on all areas of the COGAT (and is now a first-grader considering a grade skip within his HG/PG program). I am not sure what it all means ... but I am planning to wait until my second child is 6 and go straight to the WISC if she needs a score for admission to a program. Confusing world of IQ testing out there!!

This is an interesting older thread.

My DS6 was 2 points away from qualifying for DYS on the WISC (143 on GAI). He is very mathy and did well on the working memory portion of the WISC, but not the processing speed. Oh, and he took the WISC on very little sleep.

We intend to test again, either with the WISC V next year or with the SB5 soon-ish. SB5 seems to play to DS's strengths, but scores seem to be lower on the SB5 for gifted kids (is that really possible for percentiles?). Plus I assume that the Flynn effect will make qualifying for DYS more difficult when the new tests come out.

With a kid with my DS's profile, what would you do? SB5, WISC V, or fuggetaboutit?

Ultralight, this is the only page i've marked about the test scores
http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/highly_profoundly.htm
Which at least gives you the common ages for the tests.
I only remember the DAS because I think it was much cheaper than the others.
Speaking of cheap, I've read that if the IQ score is really close and you have a qualifying achievement (free at school, right?) that they will take a portfolio sample of work that's a few years ahead of grade and count it as close enough.
This thread says how Aimee Yermish once said to test a mathy kid(poster here who's also a professional gifted psychologist).
http://giftedissues.davidsongifted.org/BB/ubbthreads.php/topics/89101/Best_test_for_math_talent.html

Interesting! Can anyone confirm this?