Also consider other IQ tests that don't have such annoying discontinuities in the norms -- I personally love the DAS-II and like the SB-5 and K-ABC-II, none of which are going to make you wait or have such low ceilings as the WPPSI.
But we don't make educational placement decisions purely on the basis of scores. Take a calm and thoughtful look at the various aspects of the kid and the school -- think less about "should we skip him?" and more about, "Given the various placement options, which is most likely to be a good fit for him? Where there are problems we can predict, which are most likely to be tractable?" Realize that placing him in the "normal" place for his age is just as much a decision, with attendant potential problems, as placing him in a different classroom.
With respect to the "branding" issue, I have two comments.
(1) Kids are always getting branded -- we want the labels to be *accurate* and *compassionate*. Because the kids who don't get identified as gifted are often getting identified instead as "pain in the neck," "wiseacre," "bossy," "immature," and other such labels.
(2) In general, we don't think it's psychologically healthy to conceal important aspects of self from self or other. I don't think giftedness should be an exception to that. I'd rather see us be open with kids about all aspects of self, which can include thinking about how they might want to present themselves to others. But the point is that we shouldn't be telling them that being gifted means anything shameful or anything that belongs in the closet.
