DD8 is about to have a Wechsler-variety test, performed by the school psychologist, as a final step for her school's gifted program. She is a very extroverted and verbal kid, who might have a tendency towards being rather chatty (perhaps even off-topic ;)). She did well on the CogAT (99% Composite). Her MAP tests are >99% Reading, 99% Math. She has never taken an IQ test before, but needs >130 to get into the program.

Any advice on what, if anything, to tell her before she goes into testing? What do you tell your children about what they are going to be doing?

Also, gosh - I'm trying to take a deep breath here - I am so worried about her just having an off day. She has been such a trooper through all of this testing so far. Does anyone have any children with similar scores who had good results on a Wechsler-type test? It sounds like it is hard to really predict how she will do on this one test and I do feel as though she needs the extra challenge of the program.

Thank you for any thoughts or advice!

Can't say my DD has similar scores (her CogAT scores were terrible), but she is the same age. Luckily she did much better on the WISC than the CogAT. If your DD's scores follow my DD's pattern of doing much better on the WISC, she will get a perfect WISC score. LOL. DD's WISC GAI (nonverbal and verbal scores) was 33 points higher than her CogAT composite. What I told her mostly had to do with what I knew might be issues. For instance, she doesn't need to be shy or give one word answers. The psych told me that she was not the slightest bit shy or quiet and was overly verbose at times so maybe that was counterproductive! I don't know. I also told her that for any section that is timed, to work as fast as she could and don't worry about being sloppy. This may be a bad thing to say to some kids but not to my DD who is incredibly slow. She still bombed the coding section and when the psych showed it to me it showed perfectionistic handwriting . If I hadn't said anything then how much lower would her score have been!
I didn't tell her much about "why" we were having this testing done and luckily she didn't ask. I'm not sure what I would have said. I think if it's in a school setting, your DD won't think much of it because pull-outs for assessments happen all the time in school. Good luck! So stressful--since I was right there in the waiting room I was on the edge of my seat. Esp. since I could hear some of the questions!

Thanks, blackcat - it sounded like your DD received the scores she needed on the WISC, right? If so, I am very happy for you and your DD!!!

Oh, and a follow-up question (if anyone knows): are children "younger in the grade" at a disadvantage on a on a WASI or is it age-normed? DD is young for her grade. Although she has usually done well without age-norming (most tests have been grade-normed), she did have higher CogAT subtest percentiles when age-normed vs. grade-normed (although the composite % was the same).

Only if they accept the GAI...otherwise she needs to get a higher reading score in January. The last time she took it she answered all the vocabulary questions the opposite of how she was supposed to, so she should have been picking synonyms and chose the antonyms or vice versa. So her scores for reading comprehension jumped way up since the last test but vocabulary went down 300 points! So frustrating!

I'm guessing the WASI is age-normed since that is how the WISC is.

Aimee Yermish's article on Hoagies is great to read before an IQ test: http://www.hoagiesgifted.com/test_prep.htm

Our DS was younger when he took his first IQ test, and we just told him that this was a fun test that would help us see how his mind worked, which would then help us decide where he should go to school. We told him to make sure to cooperate and answer all the questions, even if they seemed really, really easy and even if they seemed silly, since the more interesting questions would only come along if he answered the easy ones. (This was mostly a caution because at the time he was refusing to do things he thought were too easy.)

I think most GT kids think IQ tests are fun. Hopefully yours will too! Try to get her a good night's sleep and a good breakfast ahead of time. Send easy to eat snacks along.

When DS at almost seven did his testing, we told him he'd be doing some fun puzzles. And if he payed close attention to the instructions and did his best, it would help make sure he got more interesting work at school.

We told my son it was a game, but he was only 5. If she doesn't know what it's for, it would be best not to tell her. If she knows she needs a certain score it could make her nervous. Just tell her it's important she try her best. I think we told my son to try to see what "challenge level" he could get to. Also planning something like going for frozen yogurt after "the game" was also good for us. He took the scat this year at age 6 and I think that went less well because he knew it was to qualify for something.

Our DD was six when she took the CoGAT and then took the WISC a few months later. She did well on both, but had higher scores on the WISC. She loved taking both tests! She thought it was fun. However, she didn't do as well on the timed portions because she told the psychologist how they could have written the test differently, and preferred to talk!

Good luck!

Thank you, everyone! Your advice and experiences are helpful.

Blackcat - WOW, saw your other thread. That is a really high GAI! Yes, the process can be stressful (for parents, too).

Thank you for that article, St. Pauli Girl. It brings up some interesting thoughts...I really hope DD doesn't get silly. I have to be careful about describing this as a game. DD has a creative/silly side that might get carried away if I say too much about "games." I'll have to think before I say anything. Since she likes to talk, this could really get her off-topic. I also do not want to say too much and make her nervous.

Is it common test administration practice to allow parents to wait in an area where test questions may be overheard? Have others had this experience?

Most of it I couldn't overhear, and couldn't hear DD at all. I could hear DD but she wasn't loud enough that I could understand her answers. I think the psych kept talking really loud when DD asked her to repeat questions. I could hear the letter-number sequence test and she was saying 6 or 7 letters/numbers really loud. Still, I thought it was strange. If i had stood by the door, I probably could have heard more of it. But I sat in the chair I was supposed to sit in.

When DS was tested at age 3, the pscyh (different psych) actually let me sit in the room and watch. That was the test for preschoolers.

The university clinic I took my son to had industrial strength white noise machines in every room, in the halls and in the waiting room. It was hard for me (because I was only reading) not to fall asleep. You wouldn't have heard a bomb go off in the next room.

My son's IQ test at 4 was in a closed room. The psychologist was with him for 45 minutes and there was an assistant present (either for taking notes or because it is their protocol to leave a small child alone with 2 adults than with one for the child's safety, I don't know). We told him that he was going to do some fun puzzles and answer quizzes (both of which he loves and he treated it like a playdate). The psychologist was also very nice, but she came out and told us that DS talked a lot about his favorite superheroes during the test.

Thanks, it sounds like tests are generally administered so the confidentiality of the test questions is protected. This is interesting, as I understood that the practice of allowing a parent to be present in the room to observe a child's IQ testing was prohibited.

If I remember right, she wasn't too happy about it, but I was very worried about whether DS would even cooperate. Turned out he wasn't particularly cooperative, so I'm glad I watched so I could see what was really going on and the fact that he was giving fake answers on purpose or refusing to answer! She did not try to build rapport with him at all, she marched him into the testing room, sat him down and immediately started the test. Terrible! It was at a Children's Hospital and we were testing him due to delays (which we now know are due to DCD). So she probably didn't view me as someone who would try to cheat the system to get DS into a gifted program.

Our school psychologist told me not to say anything at all about the tests to my twins. I didn't even know which day they were going to do the testing, as they were supposed to notify me in advance, but they "forgot" to do so. It turned out fine, though - both of my boys enjoyed the test and did much better than on the screening test.

I told my DD that we were going to see a lady that she would do puzzles and things with to find out how she thinks and that she would have fun - she did.

It has been my understanding that professional ethics dictate that others (including parents/guardians) may not be present for a test administration... even very worried ones?
Keeping with the theme of this thread, what did you tell him before testing?
It's hard to know whether a parent taking command of the situation had an impact on the child's performance?
It's hard to know whether a parent taking command of the situation had an impact on the tester's administration, including beginning the test immediately without small talk?
It has been my understanding that professional ethics dictate that others (including parents/guardians) may not be present for a test administration... that testers are not asked to make a subjective view of an individual parent's propensity to cheat the system?

For what it is worth, I have to take DD to the testing. Therefore, I will probably need to say something to her about what she is doing (and DD will probably ask why).

I have no intention of being with DD during the testing. I can certainly understand the concern with younger children being with a stranger, but DD is extremely independent, and does not need me there. I already plan to bring a book and find a free quiet space to wait for her.

From reading the Yemish article, concerns that I have are: DD getting off-topic, DD getting silly, DD not focusing on what is being asked. Since this is outside of DD's normal school setting, she is more likely to view it as "playtime," as in her time to do what she feels like doing (instead of what the examiner asks). At home, DD has the tendency to be very strong-willed and self-directed. At school, she usually seems to understand that she needs to do what is being asked. I guess this is why I wish to "tell" her something, without making her anxious.

The children at school already talk about the "testing," going on, so they are somewhat aware of what is going on. DD has been specifically asked in the recent "what are you doing?" by other kids when she has been pulled out of class for testing (DD said she just shrugs).

Also, DD has started complaining quite a bit this year about being bored at school. I am very concerned about this. I do think that more challenging programming might help.

I am just hoping to have DD be at ease, be herself (hopefully, cooperative self), and do her best.

I do think it helps to talk to the child ahead of time--but what you say depends on the child. Some kids probably need to be told very firmly that the test is important and they need to do their best, others (who might be anxious) might need to be told that the test is no big deal and not to worry about it.

My DS is one who acts silly, isn't very motivated, and he needs some bribery--i.e. if you work hard on the test I will take you out to lunch after this. He needs that during therapy sessions too since he can get very silly and immature and doesn't always follow directions. He does not like being "put on the spot" being told to perform certain things, and acts out.

At the centre where DD was evaluated I was allowed to view the proceedings from a side room via a double mirror. I could see her flagging towards the end of the test - I had no idea of what to expect and had naively thought it would only take 30 minutes or so. Instead, it went on for over 90 minutes, at least, and I regretted not having brought a snack or a drink as the test spanned her usual school lunchtime.

She had a great time and the tester even commented on how comfortable she was with a strange woman. She was engaged throughout almost all of the test until the last bits and having witnessed the whole thing myself I think that her lack of vigor towards end of the test was reflected in her a average WM scores.

Thank you all.


Excellent point, blackcat! Every child is different. Yes, and I need to somehow get across that the testing IS important/to be taken seriously, without making her nervous.

Did the observation arrangements allow for seeing the child's overall body language and behavior only, or were any test questions/items discernible?

I'm sorry to hear this, as it seems the test center might have notified you in advance of what to expect time-wise and in regard to planning a snack for your child. Did the test center make any allowance for the possible impact on scoring, because the child had not eaten and was slowing down? It might seem that some arrangements for re-testing that portion might be made (with another test instrument) due to the unusual circumstances?

Possibly this experience provides one more idea of what some families may want to tell their children prior to a test... the child may feel free to request a break to have their snack or beverage.

and I've always liked the Yermish article. It's been around awhile as it is dated 2002.

I was finally was able to locate something I read years ago which had one important difference. It is an article from the Davidson Database, by Nadia Webb, dated 2006. Beginning with questions above chronological age may be seen as one important difference from the Yermish article which describes the test as beginning with easy questions (the kind which many describe as inspiring kids to give silly answers, negatively impacting their performance score).

This is not to detract from Aimee's article, as the purpose of the article is for parents to prepare children for what to expect during testing... even if a tester is choosing questions which are above chronological age, they may be seen by an HG or PG child as "easy"... therefore it may be wise to prepare a child that they may receive easy questions with obvious answers... so they can decide ahead of time not to be too silly if this occurs.

= * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * =
Aimee Yermish article archived on the WayBack Machine -
https://web.archive.org/web/2017*/http://www.hoagiesgifted.com/test_prep.htm

Nadia Webb article archived on the WayBack Machine -
https://web.archive.org/web/2017*/http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10404.aspx
= * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * = * =

and You may have already shared this, but I am unaware... what does your school's gifted programming consist of?

Indigo, that article brings up some interesting issues. Since we haven't selected the tester, we have no idea whether she will have a rapport with DD. DD is NOT primarily a "people pleaser" like some good students. She marches to her own beat. Also, I think "easy questions" could generate a "silliness" in her, as in, "oh, now we are asking silly questions....so I will get silly (and carried away) and provide you sillier answers - what fun!" I do not know that the tester will be assuming she is working with HG+ kids, although I am sure at least some of them are probably extremely bright.

I do realize that each test is "only one test," and a "snapshot," but as a parent, it seems like quite a bit is riding on a single test with a "cut score." Particularly when she has "survived" so many other tests so far with "cut scores" (and scored well-above the cut-scores). Also, the next couple-few years of curriculum depend on all of this (and a child who is complaining of being bored) - that makes ME anxious (and I am trying not to let her sense that). DD has to have an "off-day" at some point, right? I just hope it is not on the day of the test.

It is a reading/language pull-out program with a gifted teacher (math is completely separate). This is probably DD's strongest area.

It's too bad school districts rely so much on cut-offs on tests. I think this is esp. problematic in circumstances where there are a limited number of "seats" and kids have to compete for them. When DD bombed the CogAT their response was that DD would have a chance to take it again. Yeah, like her score would go up from 117 to 139 by taking it again--it just wasn't a good test for her! So my choice was either to prep her extensively to try to get her speed up, give up, or try to get them to use other data. I had to go around in circles before they finally agreed she could take another test, but I still didn't think the alternate test would be helpful. (Hence I had her tested privately rather than continue to argue with them about it-- and who knows if they will accept those results).

I agree. Your DD clearly sounds gifted with that GAI and it is shocking that she could STILL be denied gifted programming. If these tests are truly "snapshots," then there has to be a better way than simple single test "cut scores." Perhaps if they could instead, look at the "bigger picture" of all of the data? I understand the fear of subjectivity by the school, but the Wechsler tests are starting to also sound subjective to me with the possibility of a "lack of rapport, etc." I do not know that there is "one perfect test."

DS's Weschler score back when he was 3 was 106 and it went up to 133 for his GAI on the WISC 2.5 years later. So did he get more intelligent? Was it because he was so silly and uncooperative the first time? The lack of rapport? I mean, obviously one of the tests is incorrect. A lot of people would have taken that score of 106 and assumed that it was an accurate test and shows his innate ability that is never going to change. The psych who tested him when he was 3 didn't even write in the report how silly he was, or how he refused to answer questions after a while. She just acted like it was a valid score. When we ended the test with DS she told me to bring him back and she'd try again. I thought about it and decided DS would likely act the same way. So I called her up and said that unless she has serious concerns about his intellectual functioning, I think testing should be discontinued. She then said that she scored his test (even though he never finished it!) and said that he was clearly fine. She actually wrote up the scores in an official report and mailed the report to me. i was shocked when I got it because he never finished the test.
The school wanted those psych records to add to his IEP and I'm glad I never handed them over! That's one reason I wanted DD to be privately tested this time after bombing the CogAT--I really had no idea what to expect. Would she be anxious, shy, hyper and therefore we wouldn't get an accurate result? If she was tested by the school psych (who clearly did not want to give her the WISC), would she have pushed DD to give more detailed answers? Would she have told her to please hurry up when she was so slow? The whole thing made me nervous. I think a lot depends on the person who gives the test AND the child's attitude and effort.

WOW. That BIG difference to see in the SAME child. That does raise the concern of test accuracy/possible subjectivity.

It's good to have the insight as to why silliness may occur. St Pauli Girl shared wonderful experience on how she addressed this with her child.

Since you mention that you did not choose the tester, is the testing arranged by a gifted coordinator, principal, etc, someone you might have already met and have a working relationship with?

Is this someone from whom you might learn the tester's name? Some psychologists in private practice with a specialty in gifted, also work for school districts affording parents the opportunity to learn a bit about the tester by looking at the psychologist's website.

Is this someone with whom you might be able to share a copy of each of the two articles which have been linked upthread (A-Yermish, N-Webb), possibly with the one difference highlighted, and have a brief conversation about test administration? Goals might be learning whether gifted screening begins with questions above chronological age, raising awareness of that approach if they may not already have heard of it, and possibly having something documented in policy/practice statements to help ensure uniformity in gifted screening test administration processes for all candidate students.

and Given the information provided, this may be an apples-and-oranges comparison, as different tests measure different components of intelligence and are scored differently. For example Hoagies' Gifted Education Page shares a chart of approximately same level of intelligence indicated by different scores on different tests. (link- http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/highly_profoundly.htm) As another resource for parent research, Davidson Database also has a number of articles on the uses of various tests. ETA: Pearson offers a PDF explaining FSIQ, GAI, VCI, PRI, CPI, WMI, PSI for WAIS-IV and WISC-IV, easily found by a web search.

Testing is set up by the school, so they select the tester. DD's school starts in 3rd grade, so the school and all of it's personnel are very new to us. They do not like "parent volunteers" in this school, so I have not had the chance to get to know the staff like I did in DC's original school (where parent volunteers are more welcome).

Yes, I did try to check the name of the tester to get an idea of the tester's background, but there is little data available, other than that this person works for the schools.

I guess the only concern I have with offering articles to them unsolicited, is it will not be well-received. I am assuming that they are doing things the way they are to at least attempt to remove subjectivity - if I contact them, will they feel that I am perhaps trying to influence the process? I do not want to do that at all! I really have no reason to believe that the school and the tester do not have the best intentions. All of the children being tested have made it through the "gauntlet" so far, so they have at least achieved minimum scores. I am just a bit concerned about how this testing DOES actually sound like it can produce such different scores in the same child. That worries me.

Some might say that offering to test another day sounds like a solid plan?
With a child scoring 106 without completing the test, the tester did not have serious concerns about his intellectual functioning, therefore it seems to have met the requirements you stated at the time? While hindsight may be 20/20, it may not be fair to blame the tester who seems to have followed your wishes at the time?

She should have stated in the report that he refused to answer questions so she had to discontinue testing, and also that he was very silly throughout the test and the score may not be reliable. But none of that is in the report. I assumed she wouldn't actually write up a score report when I declined to bring him back to finish the test. She could have left it as telling me verbally that he scored 106 with the questions he actually answered and if she DID need to write a report for whatever reason she should have included that the score is not reliable. But she didn't. Luckily the worst that has come from it is that it is in his medical records. The other issue was that since the developmental pediatrician got the results from her he stuck it in with other test information and therefore I couldn't share ANY of it with the school system. I was not going to give the school system bad test results. Otherwise it doesn't matter.

Loy, try to remember that this is just one more test, one more day. She'll most likely do fine! And if not, you'll move forward and figure out what to do next.. whatever direction that may be.


For us, it depended on the context of the test. When my kids were young, and going for full neuropsych testing or reading/educational type evals, I told them it was a series of questions to learn more about how they learn, and that is would most likely be fun (and it was). When they've been tested at school for either state testing or gifted program etc, I've told them to do their best and also reminded them that it mattered that they answer the questions and didn't rush through the testing etc. I told them that the scores mattered, but I didn't tell them that getting into a program etc hinged on their scores.


We don't have similar CogAT scores (our EG ds is one of the kids who had much lower scores on the CogAT than he does on other tests including the WISC). What I'd keep in mind is that she does have high scores on her CogAT and chances are she will also have high scores on this test. If she doesn't, you'll try to figure out why. If the scores do come out lower, you can always opt to have private IQ/achievement testing (although you can't take the same IQ test within the same year). I'd try to worry less about the actual number and test result and just focus on what you see your child needing in school, and advocate toward that however you need to. I know quite a few parents in our local area who've had children come up with one or more required test scores lower than needed yet still actively advocated to get their children placed in gifted programs. Having a teacher advocate for your child's placement helps tremendously here. BUT- don't worry about that until you need to! Let this next test happen and see what her scores are.


I'll just put this out there, although I don't think it's what's going to happen with your dd and with a big caveat that I don't know anything about the program you're trying to get her into (ie, is it focused on high achievers or out-of-the-box gifted thinkers or both or something else) - she might very well be ready and up for the challenge of the program and still not have a 130 IQ. If you find that happens, don't just give up - advocate to get her the challenge she needs And remember that every test she takes is just one more data point

polarbear

Agreed. It may be difficult to approach someone you have not already had the opportunity to develop a working relationship with.

Sharing and discussing articles with those with whom we have established a working relationship does not cast aspersions on their intentions, neither does having things written in policy/practice statement so that all may be aware of the standard.

Hoagies' Gifted Education Page provides some resources for interested parents to begin their research, including Why Do My Child's Test Scores Vary From Test to Test? and An Inventory of Tests

Can you ask the developmental pediatrician to generate a report without those results? If you explain to him what happened with the testing, it sounds like he would agree that it's not reliable, anyway.

Our neuropsych generated a "redacted" version of her report that omitted parents' and family medical information that we didn't feel was any business of the school district. She offered to do it - it wasn't the result of a request from us (but only because I didn't think of it).

I'd second Elizabeth's suggestion - the private professionals we've used (neuropsych and educational eval specialists) have all offered to generate reports from school that only included the relevant information from their evals and left out other extraneous info about family history, previous testing etc.

polarbear

Thank you, polarbear - great perspective. I have no reason to believe that DD will not do well on this test. One test result should not change my perception of DD's abilities. The results (if surprisingly low) could make the advocacy at school much more difficult, though.

DD's teacher sounded VERY supportive of doing whatever she could to get DD into the program (and she offered to do this on her own).

I cannot comment on what types of kids make it in - I do not know the older children in the program well-enough to make that judgment. I do know that it sounds more similar to the type of instruction DD had in 1st and 2nd grade (not a formal gifted program, but actually sounds very similar in practice), which led to nice growth/progress (if you put any value on test scores). It sounds like if they do not make it in, DD is stuck in her general education classroom, while the teacher tries to teach many different levels of readers (her job does NOT sound easy). I feel for the teacher, but my concern has to be my DD. My focus is definitely on getting DD the instruction she needs.

Thanks, again!

Now that I think about it, it's probably too late. All that past testing info was probably in the latest neuropsych report since I gave him ALL the records. He told me to give the entire report to the school. And he documented every single thing. Luckily that also contained the 133 GAI info so at least it is updated IQ info and the other score is probably buried in the 10 page background info.
I need to talk to the psych that tested DD and make sure the report she writes helps DD and doesn't hurt in any way. For instance I told her that DD is very difficult when not medicated along with detailed info about weaknesses.

UPDATE - SHE IS IN!!! Yippee!!!

Thanks to all for your advice!!!

Great news! Good for her.

The gifted program you described sounds like a good match to her strengths. Good to hear she qualified. Sometimes the system does work.

I am just thrilled at the possibility of more challenging programming for her. I think there is a much better chance, now, that her educational needs will be met.

FSIQ scores were actually > DYS level, but I know that DYS doesn't list (specific-Wechsler test) as one of their tests. Still, we plan to have DD take the Explore test.

Thanks, again, for all of the support!!!