Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment New to the forum & need help with WJ III results

Hi everyone,

I've been lurking here for a month as we have wended our way through the process of having my DS (4.3) tested for early entry kindergarten, and I have been so grateful for the resources and advice on this board.

I hate to have my first post be a request, but I'm completely stumped by my son's Woodcock Johnson results in reading, and the broad reading score in particular. The standard score (SS) for broad reading is lower than all of the standard scores that are used to calculate it:

Broad Reading SS: 138
*Letter-word identification SS: 171
*Reading fluency SS: 143
*Passage comprehension SS: 147

I can't for the life of me figure this out! I was really hoping we could just average all three, which would give us DYS-qualifying scores. But I guess that's now how it works? His brief reading score was 182, which is higher than all the subscores (letter-word and passage comprehension), so that doesn't really make sense to me either.

Our tester had a great rapport with my son but I don't think she's worked with many gifted kids, because she is also stumped by the results. His FSIQ came in at 148, so we've just missed that DYS cutoff--we were hoping the WJ III results might qualify him.

If anyone can help, I would be so grateful! Thank you!

You are so close. Could you submit eval and do a portfolio?

There is absolutely no way this could be correct.

I'm not sure what you mean by submit eval? If there's an option for DYS besides test score & portfolio, I would love to know. We were hoping to have the WJ III and portfolio qualify him, if we can figure out what's going on with his score.

Testers can make mistakes in calculating scores. Maybe worth having them recheck?

Those are rather bizarre results. I would definitely recheck the standard scores. The higher Brief Reading is not as peculiar, due to the very high lwi score, but still worth checking out.

aeh, thank you for the confirmation that I'm not crazy. Would you suggest rechecking all of the standard scores? Do you have insight into how to do this? The psychologist we are working with said that the scoring system is automated, and she can neither see nor change how the computer scores it.

We've had WJ III Ach. results for DS for a while now, and getting Broad Scores calculated has been quite the ordeal (I STILL do not have them - long story). We had no need for Broad Scores when the WJ was originally given, but like you, would like to see if they qualify for DYS - but I get the sense a computer is necessary and that they cannot be calculated without the right program. Are broad scores just not commonly used?

OP - I hope you are able to get it straightened out soon. I think your DS has to be 5 y.o. to apply for DYS, but that you can use scores from when he was 4 (I asked the same question a while back, but I am still waiting for the broad scores, sigh).

There've been a few posts like this. I think the possibility of a software bug should be taken seriously.

Basically, combined scores should be higher than the average (or further from 100) of the component scores, since it is harder/rarer to score highly on several tests than just one.

The psychologist should realize this, and should be investigating. They should not automatically accept a computer output that is so overtly non-sensical.

I would start from the following checks for human error, some of which are very basic, but you'd be surprised how often even good practitioners have a momentary senior moment...

1. age/birthdate and date of administration
2. form (A or B) on both the paper record form and in the scoring software. And make sure all the subtests, record forms, and test easels were from the same form.
3. norm (original WJIII or WJIIINU 2005 normative update)
4. age vs. grade norms (in OP's case, these should have been age norms, as there are no preschool norms)
5. stray spaces or x's in computer entry
6. entered in correct fields, or with correct item set labels
7. reading fluency score entered correctly (it should be correct items minus incorrect items, no penalty for omissions)

These are the top errors from my personal experience, and from the scoring FAQ on the Riverside website.

Just as a general comment about the WJ family, the composite scores (Broad ---, Brief ---, etc.) are not simple averages, or even close. Different subtests are weighted differently. Likewise, the clusters are weighted differently to develop the GIA (on the COG). There will occasionally be weird results that are legit (which is why I am not as concerned about the Brief Reading).