Pinkmonkey wrote:
Diana,
Well from what I've read you can assume the 141 is more correct.
What did the psychologist say about that difference?
I've read that kids can have a bad day and score lower, but that the highest score rec'd is always the more accurate.
Also, some of that drop comes from the different versions of the WISC....right?
Cheryl
Hi Cheryl and Everyone,
Sorry that I didn�t answer your question regarding the psychologist�s explanation for lowered scores earlier. Our weekend was crazy busy.
She wrote in the report that the verbal comprehension subtests require the processing of auditorially presented information, use of associative thinking and the generation of quality higher order expressive language. These are the areas where she believes my daughter has significant learning disabilities. The conclusion was that lack of appropriate intervention has decreased her ability in these areas.
I believe that may be a factor, but think there may be a few others. The tester was a grad student and the focus of the assessment was LD, not giftedness. During her previous test (for giftedness), the psychologist sometimes coaxed her to guess rather than accept what she felt were premature �I don�t know.� answers.
Another factor is that this was a newer version test. It is simply harder to score as high as on the previous ones. Whether that is due to the exaggeration of the old ones or because the scores are depressed on the new ones, I don�t know. I do know that they are not comparable. For example, a 145 on the WISC III is not the same as a 145 on the SB5.
In the case of your daughter, a re-test should be no threat for a lowered score since she has only been tested on the new version. Some gifted programs, such as the Young Scholars program, base their acceptance criteria on the Full Scale and/or Verbal Comprehension and/or Perceptual Reasoning scores meeting or exceeding a certain threshold rather than just FSIQ.
