Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-V Extended Norms data collection in progress

FYI, Linda Silverman is currently in the process of collecting WISC-V extended norm data. According to Pearson, she had collected 6 of an anticipated 50 cases by March 2016, using a convenience sample (presumably of clients otherwise referred). The research update document says the anticipated length of study/data collection was 1.5-2 years. So if she's only 6 cases in, she probably just started data collection, which means extended norms probably won't be out for a little bit--but at least they're in progress.

Thank you for the information, aeh! I've always found it interesting to hear how these tests have changed through time and I also ran across this explanation from Linda Silverman's GDC: http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/bl...-do-new-iq-tests-pose-identifying-gifted

Can you help me understand what this means for my DD6 who just took the WISC V? She scored 99.9 percentile or greater on two composite scores. Does this mean her scores might not be accurate? Her tester didn't discuss this. Thanks!

ChasingTwo, the scores you got are accurate in the sense that they are a lower bound or her possible composite scores. Any subtests that she got a 19 (or possibly an 18) on could go higher, pushing her "real" score even higher. If you didn't get the raw scores from your tester, ask for them. You will be able to recompute her extended norms score from the raw scores, possibly with help from aeh, as long as the tester went all the way to the discontinue criterion and didn't stop because it wasn't possible for her to score any better on that subtest anyway.

I did get the subtest scores, 2 19s (>99), an 18 (>99) and a 17 (99). Is this what you mean?

These are the scaled scores, not the raw score.

No, though the two 19s do suggest that the extended norms may add information to your child's assessment. Raw scores indicate the number of actual points obtained or credited on a subtest. The numbers you have are subtest scaled scores, which indicate performance relative to age peers. 10 is the mean. 19 is 3 standard deviations above the mean. Since one would expect the typical 14-year-old to do better in absolute terms than the typical 6-year-old, using raw scores confounds high performance due to typical development and high performance due to unusually high cognition. Using age-normed scaled scores allows a child to be compared to her age-peers, which should minimize the impact of differences due to normal development.

At age 6, you would be looking for multiple 19 scaled scores for extended norms. (not 18s or lower)

Ok thanks for that information. It sounds like you are saying it's not super likely that her score would be much different, but the raw scores could help determine that, even without extended norms? Is that correct?

If so, I can request the raw scores. Thanks.

Actually, I meant that it is possible that her score could be different, but this cannot be determined without the use of extended norms, which would require raw scores.

The criterion for using extended norms is generally two scaled scores of 19 anywhere in the core subtests. If those two scores are in the same index, then that index would definitely be a candidate for extended norms.

In short, you may wish to obtain raw scores, as the extended norms, when they are released, may be applicable to your child.

Aha. Thank you