1. If those are all the subtests administered from the WISC-V, they did not give her the whole test. They gave her the subtests sufficient to obtain, first, a GAI, and then (after your request) an FSIQ. Based on her strongest WISC-V subtest score, it might have been interesting to see how she did on Visual Puzzles, which is the other half of the Visual Spatial Index. Block Design scored at the 99th %ile, pretty much exactly the same as the WRIT Visual IQ. Administering the remaining three subtests would not change the IQ or the GAI, but it might be informative all the same. Especially with regard to areas of giftedness that the school might be willing to recognize (e.g., Visual Spatial).
2. I am curious as to whether there are discrepancies in her academic performance anywhere, as her cognitive profile suggests that there might be. Based on what you've provided, it looks like her verbal comprehension (VCI) and fluid reasoning (FRI) fall in the high average range on this testing, working memory (WMI) and processing speed (PSI) are estimated to be average, and visual spatial (VSI) is estimated to be very superior (moderately gifted range). That is significant diversity across clusters. You describe her as thriving in a GT program during K,1,2. I wonder if she has been making appropriate gains in reading during this time (either because of insufficient exposure, or because of a hidden reading disability). I have a couple of reasons for wondering:
a. Her verbal profile on cognitive testing is the same shape as it was three years ago, but lower in magnitude. At age 6, she had exceptionally strong vocabulary, and verbal reasoning a little over a standard deviation lower. At age 9, her vocabulary is still strong (though substantially lower than it was), and her verbal reasoning is still a standard deviation lower. This suggests to me that her vocabulary development has not been keeping pace over the past three years with her development prior to entering school. It may be that this is because her early reading skills gave her additional exposure to vocabulary that other 6 yos did not have, which gave a boost to her Verbal IQ on the WRIT. In the years since, other children have learned to read, gaining access to vocabulary from text, and thus "catching up" a little bit in the norms. It may be that she has not been challenged sufficiently in reading and language development over the past three years, even in the GT program. Or, it may be that she has a hidden reading disability, which, despite her early reading ability, has caused her reading (and hence vocabulary) development to stall out. (Considering that, at age six, she was already several grade levels ahead in reading, this would not necessarily have been an obstacle to academic success up to this point.) This last possibility is not incompatible with early reading, as there is a subset of exceptionally early readers who read mainly by sight, not by phonetic decoding, which interferes with the acquisition of new reading vocabulary, especially if one does not have a phenomenal rote memory (and her working memory scores do not support such a memory), and with the development of decoding fluency. Both of which can affect reading comprehension. Which leads me to
b. Her achievement scores at age 6 were uniformly strong, largely in the moderately gifted range, with two exceptions: math reasoning (applied problems) was even stronger, and reading comprehension (passage comprehension) was a bit lower, just outside of the GT range. I am inclined to speculate that this may have been an early indication of vulnerabilities in reading. But you would know better how her reading actually is.
3. On a side note, keep in mind that siblings are usually within about 10 points of each other, and that giftedness can manifest in very different ways in different individuals. Don't discount your younger child's abilities; they may be equally strong, but displayed differently.
4. On another side note, remember that test scores capture only a very small part of an individual, on a single day in her life. Whether these are accurate or not, whether she technically qualifies for the GT program here, there, or elsewhere, does not change the bright little girl you know her to be. In or out of the GT program, I'm sure you will continue to advocate for her to be challenged in ways that will help her grow to her potential as a whole human being.
