Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC IV vs. SBV

We are applying for a full-time gifted program for our 7.5 year old son. The program is offered through a consortium of participating public school districts in a large metro area. Admission to the program requires a 140+ FSIQ on both the WISC IV and the SBV. A 140+ WISC GAI may be substituted for the WISC IV FSIQ. Our son's score are as follows:

142 FSIQ on SBV (taken several months ago)
148 GAI on WISC IV
138 FSIQ on WISC IV

The WISC IV scores are broken down as follows:
VERBAL - 146
Similiarities - 19
Vocab - 19
Comprehension - 15

PERCEPTUAL - 133
Block Design - 12
Picture Concept- 16
Matrix Reas. - 18

WORIKING MEMORY- 126
Digit Span - 12
Letter-Num.Seq. - 17

PROCESSING SPEED - 106

Coding - 12
Symbol Search - 10

My concern is that the WISC IV FSIQ of 138 will somehow diminish the 148 GAI given the 140 cut-off score. Sure, the program says that a 140+ WISC GAI can be substituted, but I'm wondering if any of you folks have any insights into whether selection committees tend to focus on the FSIQ even when, as in our son's case, the FSIQ is drawn down primarily by more average processing speed.

Thanks so much for any responses. We recently found this board and it is has proven quite educational as we try to get something for our 2nd grader to do at school above and beyond simple math and reading that he was doing in kindergarten and before. Amazing and a bit depressing as to how much resistance there is to providing appropriate and obvious child-specific challenges at school.

My first take: his GAI is clearly the more appropriate measure, given the marked relative weakness in PSI (BTW, likely also resulting in an underestimate of the PRI, due to his significant relative weakness in block design, which is a timed motor task, and may be affected by the same factors that preferentially lower the PSI).

I can't speak to your selection committee, but when I was a member of the selection committee at a large district in the past, we used a variety of criteria, in addition to individually-administered test data, none of which were necessarily as cut and dried as you might think. How much they focus on one score over another will probably depend on the level of psychometric expertise of the committee, and the portfolios of the other candidates. If there is space for you to submit work samples or any supplementary evidence, I would suggest you do so, to support the GAI as being the measure most consistent with his actual level of performance.

aeh, thank you for your response and insights. The application process uses the WISC and SBV as initial screeners for an interview; additional materials are not requested. I never imagined that I'd EVER be involved in a process necessitating an admissions interview for a 7 year-old, but so it goes.

Your observation re block design is perceptive and well-taken; our son has always been a bit behind when it comes to physical tasks. For instance, though he can think a mile a minute and express those thoughts verbally, he struggles with handwriting and resists doing it - which the current school cites as evidence that he lacks reading comprehension because he provides very cursory written answers on the 2nd grade reading comp. worksheets. Or that he is not ready to advance to more advanced math because he is slow at hitting the right button on a keyboard in timed math tests where you have three seconds to respond even though he's known the simple math facts for years. Unreal.

I know it varies by committee, but I would think that in a large metro area, in a program designed to select talented kids, there would be someone who can meaningfully analyze the tests. Its fine if he doesn't get in, I there are people in place who have the knowledge to look beyond one number and ascertain what his particular range of scores indicates.

For the WISC, I see some high/near ceiling subtest scores (19s, and perhaps 18). Was he eligible for extended norms? If he is and they have not been used, this could be useful information when being considered for such a program.

Also FWIW, DS had the WISC/WIAT performed at the same time with a discrepancy analysis. His lowest scoring area on the WISC was the PSI, so his GAI is also supposed to be a better number for him. On the WIAT, his performance was MUCH closer to his GAI than his FSIQ. So far, his other achievement scores have also followed this pattern.

At age seven, the two 19s would suggest ceiling subtest scores. 18, not. He's very near the beginning of the norms, so there should have been plenty of space to score a 19. In any case, Loy's point is well-taken. He would be appropriate for extended norms for the VCI, GAI, and FSIQ, based on having two max subtest scores. There are ExIQ tables available for the SBV, as well.

And, where you see motor impacts in real life, you may also want to have in the background the possibility of 2e, most likely of the motor coordination/dyspraxic/dysgraphic variety. If it exists, once documented, this allows for 504/IEP accommodations such as supplementary oral assessment, reduced written responses, items sufficient only to demonstrate mastery, etc. If you have individually-administered achievement testing, it is possible that you already have much of the data necessary to initiate this process.

I'll second aeh's suggestion to look into the possibility of a 2e motor-related challenge. Our dyspraxic/dysgraphic ds has a similar spread in WISC scores (with relatively low processing speed subtest scores) and had similar issues in school in K-2nd grade. It was so obvious from his verbal abilities that he was incredibly smart that we saw the challenges with being held back in math due to timed math tests and notes from teachers that his written output didn't match verbal as annoying quirks that were getting in the way of access to the gifted level programming he needed - and they were getting in the way of that, but they were also signs that he needed help with accommodations and some remediation. We were only seeing his gifts, not his challenges - and he really did need help with the challenges. Once he had accommodations/etc in place, it was much easier for school staff to see his gifts, and for him to placed appropriately in school. The things you've listed as issues at his current school will most likely crop up as issues again, especially as he moves up in grade level, if he has a fine-motor related challenge.

Best wishes,

polarbear