For this particular child (OP), I think the situation really is that she IS above the 75th percentile. It just wasn't captured on this particular test, perhaps due to unfamiliar terminology, etc. I think with Grinity's suggestion of a little bit of hot-housing, she'll soar over that cut.
I guess that's why I'm not too keen on using achievement data in isolation. It seems like her school is relying a little too heavily on achievement data although I guess that above level achievement data is technically aptitude. I have one kid who seems to learn everything but math by osmosis and who has always scored highly on achievement and aptitude tests even when instruction is inadequate. My other kiddo, while she has other issues as well, is more reliant on being taught something in school or through my supplementing or her achievement scores get a lot more erratic.
These types of tests seem a lot more subject to what has been taught not what the child is capable of doing if properly placed. It seems to leave a lot of room for kids of pushy parents and high achievers to get accelerated while able but underachieving kids wind up with nothing. That's why I'm more on board with the suggestion of trying to change the district policy. It seems truly silly not to even consider IQ if the achievement piece isn't in place. I'd rather see it the other way around -- not to consider the achievement if the IQ isn't there (although that probably isn't totally fair either).
