"That being said, she did do just the PSI part of the WISC IV a year after the original test and her score went up to, I think, 118. I don't know if that was her "real" score or if the school psych was so incompetent she didn't administer or score it properly."

Thanks blackcat. This is useful. One thing I wonder is if there is much research on repeatability of scores like this one - in HG+ kid where there is an outlier score, esp in something like PSI. DD does try to do thinks without making mistakes, unless and until she is reassured that mistakes are fine and expected and necessary - e.g., by doing a video game where she can't maximize her score if she aims at never ever making a mistake. So I've wondered if her PSI might have been somewhat higher if she repeated it with information that she had made no mistakes but needed to go faster. (I realize this would be a non-standard administration, of course. But if she could go faster and still get a higher score, that would mean something to me, in terms of my concern.) This is pretty much like real life. Default is to be cautious, something that benefits her in some circumstances, but not all. She was also anxious and not feeling well the day she took the WISC-IV.

The psychologist who gave the WISC-IV specializes in gifted kids and this is what she does all week long, so I don't think she made a mistake in scoring or anything like that. But the info that your daughter changed scores so dramatically is reassuring. My daughter may not be a 97 percentile in PSI - given her personality, I would have been super surprised if she scored like that - but maybe it's more a situation of her needing to learn when to go fast and when to be cautious, where she can still be average or above average in speed, once she's figured out that she needs to be.

One thing that is also concerning, I suppose, is that she scored in the bottom 1% to 17% on various subtests of a number calling test at the developmental optometrist's office. I had her sort of repeat the test at home, and she is noticeably slower than I or DD#1 (I think DD#1's PSI was in "superior" range, a personal weakness).

But that doesn't necessarily point to a problem with DD#2's VISION. It could be, but it might not be.