Although I continue to see the quote from Weschler tossed about, I can't really square that up with the broader acceptance of the WISC in the GT-Community, or the high-profile GT specialists's use of the WISC in particular.
(And if it were not a useful test for the upper SDs, why would the DYS program utilize the results?)
That's kind of what I was wondering. Why is the test so popular when the creator said it isn't to be used for this, and when it has all these subtests and measures that are not considered a good measure of g? (And how do we know that, anyway? From the norming sample?) Is it just the best available? Is it that it does provide a lot of data? I admit, sitting over here with my verrrry brief RIAS results, the WISC looks so much more meaty and interesting. Yet there seems to be general agreement that the RIAS is absolutely fine for ID purposes.
