Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Twice Exceptional HUGE Discrepancies

Just got DD10's latest evaluation and my head is spinning. Not only are her high numbers more than a full standard deviation lower than her last testing but the spread she is showing is beyond remarkable. The evaluator indicated the difference between her high area (verbal comprehension) and low areas (visual spatial, fluid reasoning, working memory and processing speed) occur at a base rate of 0.0% and 0.3% respectively. I thought with these sorts of discrepancies in was inappropriate to calculate a FSIQ and slow processing speed makes any number calculated meaningless. (DD's processing speed measured at the 2nd percentile.) Evaluator did calculate - and came up with a *very* low number - and said likelihood that it was accurate was 95%. Same with calculating GAI. This seems like a problem to me. Any input?

Grade level equivalents (DD is in 4th grade) ranged from below kindergarten to grad school level (>17.7). Significantly below grade level in most academic tasks but way above grade level in areas of comprehension, verbal, oral, etc.

Has anyone else had a child with this kind of spread? Anyone with an older kid that can give me some piece of mind that she has any chance at all of overcoming all of this?

What achievement test was she given? DD9 did the Woodcock Johnson a year ago and for certain subtests, a "grad school level" was only around 80th percentile. It didn't really make a lot of sense.

She had a huge spread between her GAI which was 150 and processing speed was 94...the psych wrote "slow processing speed" in the report due to the gap, but she was retested (just on processing speed) 13 months later and it went up 21 points, so my guess is that it's not exactly a reliable score (or else DD's second score was an error, due to an incompetent school psych, which is entirely possible--I hesitated even allowing her to do the test). For IQ testing the pscyh (a private evaluator) did compute the FSIQ but wrote in the report that the GAI is a more accurate indicator of her academic ability/potential.

Apologies if you have covered this already, but what does your DD "look like" in terms of how she is performing at school? What challenges or successes is she having? Does she have any learning disabilities or other diagnoses which may explain the spread? Did the evaluator offer any explanation for the results based on the tests themselves and the evaluator's observations?

Test results are most useful as information when they are part of an overall approach to guide you and your daughter in how to adjust her learning situation to maximize her success.

The full scale IQ and GAI probably aren't very helpful as they aren't able to provide you with guidance.

DD has been diagnosed with just about every conceivable LD. Prior neuropsych labeled her as "NLD-ish" but she totally lacks the social aspects of NLD. He said it was "a useful diagnostic concept" and "easier than saying super high verbal along with dyslexia, dysgraphia, dyspraxia, math disability, etc." This evaluator (recommended by the Eides) disagreed with NLD but labeled her with severe LD's in reading, written expression and math and thinks many of the problems are linked to dyslexia. Prior evaluator labeled ADHD-Inattentive, which we rejected. This one did not see any indication of ADD but said she suspected Sluggish Cognitive Tempo. Since it wasn't included in the DSM she couldn't make a formal diagnosis but suggested I educate myself about it.

DD has the processing speed of a tortoise - it's surprising that she made it as high as 2nd percentile. She is s-l-o-w at everything she does. Evaluator suggested getting her checked for CAPD and screened by an endocrinologist to see if there is some physical reason for her sluggishness. She also suffers from severe migraines and after a particularly awful cluster of them last year we reluctantly changed her meds to one that has known cognitive side effects. Her processing is so slow it was hard to tell if the med was impacting her but I am guessing that it is. It is effective at controlling the migraines, though, so it's really hard to risk a change.

DD had about 15 hours of testing so too many tests to list here. I can give specifics if I know what you think might help. Drop in high scores was explained as changes in the test using less of her areas of strength, more of her areas of weakness and probable drop in her already low processing speed because of the migraine med.

She is in out of district placement at a special Ed school. Last year, as a 3rd grader, she was placed in an 8th grade reading comprehension group (using audio books), which she found "painfully slow". In her 4th year of daily reading intervention she is now decoding at grade level. Writing is at a kindergarten level and she has been receiving 3 1/2 hours a week of OT trying to get her functional with Assistive Technology and improve her handwriting. She has no automaticity or fluidity. Relies almost entirely on context. Nonsense words, numbers, etc are just about impossible for her.

Is this what you were looking for? Thanks for any help you can offer.

You are coping with major challenges Pemberley and are obviously working hard to support your DD while trying to find ways to also expand her strengths. It is very good that there is an attempt to accelerate your daughter in her area of strength.

Such a complex profile would seem to be an explanation for the spread of her results. What you really might want is an underlying unifying diagnosis. I can't begin to help you with that but would second the suggestion to keep an eye on any physical causes that could be impacting. An endocrinologist can help with some of those particularly thyroid, pituitary and adrenal issues. Not saying there are any but such things can be missed so always wise to check in especially as she also has migraines.

I came across this article on slow processing speed.
http://www.mghclaycenter.org/parent...oping-slow-processing-speed-home-school/

The article mentions a book, Bright Kids Who Can't Keep Up. I haven't read it but wonder if it's worth a look.

Thanks ndw. The author of that article seems like a good resource to keep in mind.

Can anyone tell me if I am right - a FSIQ should not be calculated in these situations? And any number calculated should be considered meaningless?

On prior evals the testers calculated low FSIQ numbers, which just about everyone literally laughed at, but stated in the report that the numbers were meaningless. I have run into problems with people (ie former horrible principal at the public school DD attended before being placed out of district) who just saw this number and dismissed DD as a little snowflake of average intelligence and a crazy parent who was imagining things without ever reading or comprehending the report itself. This evaluator not only came up with a number 15 points lower but stated that it is 95% likely to be accurate. If so I have just gone from dealing with a gifted kid with an incredibly complex profile and some areas of significant weakness to a developmentally disabled kid with some profound (read "bizarre") areas of strength. This will make my already challenging role as a parent/advocate way more difficult...

Yes, FSIQ and even GAI are not good representations of her ability. 95% actually means the confidence interval for the calculated score, not whether it's a valid representation of her.

Sounds like she may have had a different test, or different selection of subtests, last time. Also, persistent reading decoding weaknesses can drag down oral vocabulary scores over the years, as kids then have less access to the high-level reading vocabulary than a child with that verbal intelligence would otherwise have. The reading disability interferes with the ability to keep pace with their non disabled high-cognitive peers. Remember that this is a norm-referenced test, which compares her to her age peers, not an absolute standard.

The migraine meds very likely do affect her already-slow processing speed. And possibly even her overall test performance.