Thanks for the post--very interesting. A question--DD(now 8) took the SB5 at about 5 1/2 and her Working Memory score was the mean (10). Just was reevaluated this year at just over 8 yrs with WISC-IV and got a 17 on digit span and 16 on letter/number sequence, for an index of 138/ 99%. (and no signs of prodigy-ness, and also I am not pushing for that--just saying, apparently there is some discrepancy in how working memory might be measured). I asked the local psych who did the testing (who was woefully uninformative and I think ignorant of GT issues) about this and she said that one of the measures was verbal and one was non-verbal (sorry--can't remember which)--which returns me to my persistent (but not urgent) concern about how these tests actually measure what they say they are measuring. So I am curious about the OP and what measure the study used--and whether it matters for 'prodigousness.' (also FWIW this particular local psych did not even mention GAI or the extended WISC-IV scores until after I figured that out and asked--yet ANOTHER of many reasons to go with an 'expert' on gifted if your
kid is anything besides completely normal in their behavior; b/c after that we used the scores from that eval to get DD into DYS, not that it helped with her teachers from last year--but I digress). But sorry--if I were a responsible netizen, I should have researched this issue before posting; it's just that I'm so totally behind in everything else, so I will try to figure it out soon.
