I have not (also realizing that I'm replying to your postings possibly out of order, so some of my replies are probably moot now!). But I will note that I typically recommend testing only if there is a function to it, not "just to know". On score changes: yes, there is some stability, and also yes, the scores may change over time. As I noted in my post to another of your threads, I have not had my children tested, but I have seen many, many records from children who were retested at multiple ages. Generally speaking, scores that are more extreme (very high or very low) see bigger changes on retest, back toward the middle (aka, regression to the mean). But very young children are also unpredictably testable, and may generate low estimates because of perfectly innocuous developmental differences (fatigue, inattention, lack of urgency on timed tasks, differential access to academic activities or stimulation, dual language learner, etc.).
FWIW, a high score on an early test probably can be reasonably interpreted as somewhere above average, but not necessarily with a specific magnitude.
In short, if you need a score for access to a resource that you believe would be in your child's best interest, or a fuller assessment to answer a question about a problem she is experiencing, then it may be appropriate to seek an evaluation. If not, you should make your own call, but if it were my child, I would save my money and her energy for a more stable assessment in a few years (if it seems to have utility then).
