edited for privacy reasons

I'm not familiar with this particular test, but she did get placed into the gifted program. Is it much of a program? Is it likely to meet her educational needs? Is it limited to 90 minutes/week?

If there is a chance that it will meet her needs then I don't think private testing is needed. You may want to read '5 levels of Giftedness' by Dr. Deb Ruf and see if you think the testing the school did 'paints an accurate picture' of what you are seeing at home.

As for the 'what's missing' score - in every IQ tests there are subtests that are less highly correlatable with intelligence. So if 'what's missing' is one of those then you don't have to worry (at all) about it as long as it's within range of normal. It's not unusual for a kid to do much much worse in one or two sections. If you are seeing something in real life that seems related, then it's ok to explore more. I wouldn't re-evaluate your view of your child's intelligence based on any IQ score. If you see it, it's real, even if the test doesn't show it.

Love and More Love,
Grinity

I think what sort of confuses me is that What's Missing and Odd Item Out are both supposed to be nonverbal, so why high on one and average on the other? Do they measure different kinds of skills? Looks like Odd One Out is spatial, which I would say is her weakest area. Could there be some visual thing at play here? Or...hmmm...the low score was the last subtest. The test is only 30 minutes, but maybe she was "done"?

The question of whether the program will be adequate is not an easy one to answer. Probably not. I'd like to know if she is DYS bright or "just" high-achiever bright.

Can you arrange to go and visit the program to see what is actually going on?
That might be a pleasant suprise or a rude awakening. See if you can make an appointment. Do a little bit of 'afterschooling' to see what your DD is like as a learner. This is the 'next important thing to pay attention to.'


Notice that I'm not answering your questions about the various subscores - at a certian point it's like reading tea leaves - the tests aren't perfect...

Love and more love,
Grinity

From what I have learned listening to psychologists describe the RIAS and the What's Missing subtest in particular is that it is a non-verbal measure that is similar to the Picture Completion of the WISC that measures alertness to details and visual discrimination. Generally, more than a 15 point difference between any scores is considered significantly significant and an indicator of a relative strength or weakness. That said, it is not that unusual to have some variations in scores between tests.

If you want to get more information in the visual integration/ visual perception realm, at some point you could have her evaluated using other cognitive tests such as the WISC IV, ROCF test and others.

These scores alone do not point to a problem by any means. And, you have no idea if this score is even an accurate measure of her skills in this specific area. What you have is a score that reflects how she did on the test at a point in time.

If she does not have any problems - and it doesn't sound like she does - I might just put it in the back of your mind, and support her as she enters into the gifted program. If she is "just" high-achiever bright and happy, this would not be a bad thing.

*

*

No, no achievement testing, which is a little frustrating, but c'est la vie. She won't be achievement-tested till 3rd grade.

I don't know that I would say that the RIAS is "less accurate" than the WISC, but it is shorter and doesn't assess skills in as many different domains. The domains that it does assess are highly correlated with "g". Someone who is not gifted is not going to get a high score on the RIAS.

Many WISC subtests are not even close to pure measures of intelligence, but are instead measures of intelligence plus motor skills, attention, or other functions. This means that the WISC scores (even the GAI, which includes both the block design and comprehension subtests) for some gifted people with motor or visual-motor disabilities, AS, or some other issues will be depressed. The RIAS is sometimes used as an entrance test for school gifted programs because it is both quick to administer and it isn't as likely to screen out children who have co-existing disabilities. The WISC is a much better tool to get a detailed picture of functioning and to help identify areas that might be in need of further evaluation to rule out disabilities, but it can be a "less accurate" measure of overall intelligence for those who do have them.

Totally OT, but this comment of yours was enlightening for me. We, too, have a neighborhood and region with a statistically unlikely percentage of kids in GT programming, but we got a totally different response when we gave dd12's test scores (IQ and WJ) to her district when she was in 2nd grade. The district GT coordinator at the time told me that the higher-ups in the district were "philosophically opposed" to meeting her needs, she wasn't going to last long in public school, and asked if I had considered homeschooling her. Either she had a better understanding of what the scores meant than your district did with your ds' (which are certainly higher than my dd's!) or our neighborhood isn't that skewed, the identification is what is skewed.

In re to the OP, I too wouldn't be hugely worried about that one lower area especially if you feel that it is an inaccurate representation of your dd. I'm begining to wonder if my younger dd's slower processing speed scores on the WISC are truly slower processing or a child who made a lot of mistakes on the visual scanning required for that part of the test (more likely in her case). My older dd is clearly slower than able (what her WISC shows), but that type of pattern doesn't seem to be the case for my youngest despite that being what it looks like on the WISC. I wish that the testers had told us what that test looked like (lots of mistakes, looking back and forth at the key, or just slow coding, etc.)

this is a standard line - not sure why, but the standard response is:

"I'm so glad to hear it, that's exactly what we are hoping for! - so it would really benefit about half the class for the teacher to provide reading material such as (fill in dd's recent favorite books) and provide math enrichment that includes (fill in dd's recent Math interests.) When do you think it's reasonable for me expect to see homework at this level coming home in my dd's backpack? Do you need me to help organize volunteer to help the other kids while the teacher works with this advanced group?"

Bring in samples of Book reports and Math sheets in dd's handwriting to show that you aren't just making stuff up.

If you've been taking notes all along, this is a great time to raise the pen expectantly and write down whatever the principle says next. You can sort of mutter/repeat what the principle said as you are writing it down, so the Principle has a chance to hear how it sounds. Not pretty usually. As if you are taking notes for a school board meeting or local newspaper - but you don't have to say that.

Best Wishes,
Grinity

She does very well with online learning and would probably enjoy something like this this summer.

Grinity, absolutely great advice!

I would agree completely that none of the tests are ideal, Dottie, and that the more data you have, the better!

I'd also agree that often people don't understand what the data do and don't tell them. I have had two of our local district's school psychologists who had my 7th grade son's 31 Reading and 23 Science ACT scores sitting in front of them tell me that he clearly wasn't gifted because his FSIQ of 107 and GAI of 120 on the WISC didn't support such a finding, ignoring the fact that his subtest scores ranged from 19 to 2, and that his VCI was a 134.

We've had a similar experience. When we were looking at dd12 skipping 5th grade (at the school's suggestion), we had multiple meetings with the school and the district GT coordinator (different one this time). The district coordinator looked @ dd's IQ & achievement scores and told me that she "really only has this one score that indicates she is gifted" (the 99.9th+ on part of the PRI). For some reason the other scores in the 98th & 99th on IQ as well as almost all of her achievement scores (reading, composite, writing, social studies, science...) on ITBS, MAPS, SRI lexile, and other achievement scores being in the 99th percentile meant nothing to her . The school GT coordinator did look at her like she was out of her mind, though -- lol!

I really wouldn't think that one score would make her less likely to get in. How many gifted kids are in the upper 90s on everything, really? Mine certainly aren't and I've had numerous GT teachers and other adults tell me that dd12 is one of the most gifted children they've ever worked with.

You're probably right.

This is a wonderful observation, and exactly what the 'Talent Search' testing is all about. The idea is to take all the kids in the top 5% in ordinary school testing, and let them take an 'above level test' of things they haven't been taught and see how much self-teaching they've done - including what they can do spontaneously from learning from the test itself!

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Talentsearchmap.png
to see which region you are in and look up the name of the particular group.

Most likely this sort of testing will lead to summer and various enrichment programs outside of the school day.

Best Wishes,
Grinity

It seems like all these talent searches use achievement testing, not IQ. I don't have any achievement scores--DD's school avoids them except when legally necessary. Is there anything except Davidson that uses IQ scores?

Are you meaning that talent searches use achievement testing for admission? Usually there is a way around that if you don't have achievement data. I know that the one in Denver will take a teacher recommendation and I bet that they'd take her RIAS scores if you wanted her to take a talent search test.

"Are you meaning that talent searches use achievement testing for admission?"

Yes, seems like. I may be missing something. I am just barely dipping my toe into that stuff.

Ultramarina,

She can sit the ACT or the SAT and submit the scores to the Duke TIP program through the TIP "Option" program, which is how my son got in. (We homeschool, and he didn't have any other standardized achievement testing, either.)

Not sure if all the other talent search programs will go this route, but I think most of them will.

I think at just seven, a better bet might be SCAT through CTY as a starting place. That is where we started and expect to move up to Explore next year. Prices are nowhere near like private achievement testing, yet provide a glimpse that supports the RIAS scores or suggests that something more/different might be appropriate.

Back to the discussion of RIAS. We are one of the few that I've seen that have both RIAS and WISC-IV scores in this general range. There is at least one journal article that I found way back when we were living through this that suggested there was a correlation between WISC and RIAS, about 75%.

I've mentioned this on the board before, but wasn't sure if you'd seen it. We did RIAS through the school system in K, testing just after DD turned 6. I don't recall the individual subtest scores, but verbal was 118 (for highly verbal DD) and non-verbal was 141 (for DD who showed no signs of unusual visual-spatial strengths) for a composite of 133. I was floored at how far off I was and decided to private test, thinking if the non-verbal score was anywhere close to representative and the verbal score was off as much as I thought it was, maybe I was in denial and she really was DYS level.

Private testing wtih WISC about 3 months later showed VCI of 136, PRI of 137, with supporting WMI and PSI scores for a FS of 143 and a GAI of 144. So in our case the RIAS was close on the non-verbal and way off on the verbal.

I do have to say that I would not have had any success dealing with some of the educational advocacy we have pursued if I had only the RIAS scores, since they look garden-variety gifted and did not represent my DD or her strengths. I get a much different reaction at the district level when discussing the WISC scores which, although not DYS, are not really garden-variety gifted to those who are in the know. School level - they don't get the difference - or only a very few do.

Just recently DS6 was tested on RIAS through school. His scores were much more even and at least surficially match my opinion of his profile, and were sufficient to gain access to the gifted designation and learning opportunities, such as they may be. His personality and learning needs are not as out-of the box as DDs, so at this time we see no reason to pursue additional testing. If things change as school progresses, we may need to do something different.

*

Sounds very familiar. DD now almost 9 didn't fit school from the beginning and it showed. She is grade skipped, still at the top of the class, actually having to exert the tiniest bit of effort, struggling with OEs and perfectionism and overall, still not a good fit. Even with the advocacy and the improvements, she has pretty much turned off to learning - the demands weren't getting met and she is now mostly just going through the motions - no longer actually all that interested in school or learning. Since the grades aren't suffering, school doesn't notice (although the gifted teacher is starting to).

In my opinion, DS 6 is likely higher IQ (more likely DYS in my opinion), but doesn't show it the same way. He is clearly less verbal, more visual-spatial, problem-solving, but he came with a happy-go-lucky, 'life is good' personality. I remember him playing quietly by himself in his room with his cars and toys for 30-45 minutes or more at the age of 2, while my then DD5 still required attention and interaction at five-minute intervals. The personalities are just different. Even though I believe that DS6 is likely a higher IQ than DD8, at this moment in time I believe that a relatively normal school program is likely to work for him, just because of who he is.

DD demands to be led and taught and and needs to be nurtured and encouraged. DS only needs to be let off the leash and he will take care of the rest. We'll see how that continues to play out as we proceed through the early elementary years.

If there's a reason to retest then consider it - we did and I'm very glad we did. I thought my DD's RIAS was flat wrong and although it gained her admission to the gifted program, I was pretty sure that was not going to be enough. I also had that little doubt that I had misjudged and perhaps she really was DYS, so we shelled out the money to have the WISC and achievement testing done. In fact that testing confirmed what I thought I knew all along - not quite DYS, but outside the 'garden-variety gifted' box. Besides now we have a relationship established with a local tester and now that some other things are cropping up, I have that resource.

If you have no immediate need to retest, that's OK too. But if you decide to do some sort of talent search or acheivement testing and it looks out of whack with the data you've already got, maybe then you retest. We did SCAT in 3rd grade (first year accelerated) and those scores continued to back up what we already had - missed the CTY cutoffs by 1 point each in verbal and math which put her right at 95% for her accelerated grade. If she had blown the SCAT away, I might have thought long and hard about whether we needed to revisit earlier scores or do something different.

Good luck!

p

*

I would retest on your own and see what happens. Don't the test results change with young children as they continued to develop?

p

My 6 year old got on the RIAS 147 verbal, > 160 non-verbal, and >160 total (the psychologist said he hit the ceiling). I sent these scores to MENSA, and they accepted them. He had gotten a 99.1% on the Raven's, which our local gifted program accepted. They don't accept the RIAS, apparently.
I don't want to spend $ either on testing since there isn't anything more that we want to do with the scores. I don't know why he wasn't given the WISC but it doesn't seem to matter. He reads at a second grade level and does his brother's third grade math; we aren't looking to skip him so...
I guess it really matters what you might need scores for and why.

I should mention that I am more than open to the idea that the RIAS scores are an accurate estimate of where she is and that she is just a very motivated student.

I have rushed reading through this thread as I am supposed to be packing lunches, but I just wanted to chime in before I forget, that for both of my kids Picture Completion, which is like "What's Missing" and the other cartoon based tests on the Wechsler tests were their weakest areas, but both tested very high on the Raven's. I have no idea why this is and have yet to find someone to ask who can give me a good answer. Maybe it's a visual processing thing, maybe it's the nature of the cartoons... But I suspect that those subtests of their WISC/WPPSI scores were not very accurate for my girls, for what what they are supposed to be testing. But of course they might be.

If you have not noticed any signs of 2E, and her visual processing checks out ok, I would be leaning toward thinking that she just "checked out" for that one subtest. All kinds of things can make this happen. She could have been hungry, tired, distracted by something outside or in the room, or she might not have understood the instructions properly. Or she might have thought that that section was stupid or too easy and stopped trying. A test is a snapshot of one moment in time, and there are lots of things that can make us not perform at our best.

A talent search test would be a reasonable and economical next step.

*