Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-IV question about FSIQ and GAI

Yup, that's my baby! OK, this makes total sense now. The tester also pointed out that the PSI wasn't indicative of a problem (percentile rank was 92nd), so it's not like we ever worried about it.

Thank you for the explanation.

Thanks for explaining why the testing occurred. You have a really bright ds! The thing is, I wouldn't necessarily discount what the teacher and psych have told you - 2e kids can be *very* good at compensating for their weaknesses thanks to their incredible strengths. There are three things I'd take into consideration before deciding that there *isn't* a 2nd e for your ds -

1) Two independent observers have found suggestions that there might be a challenge (teacher and psych)

2) He likes to write, but only when it's something that "interests" him - it's possible that what is interesting to him coincides with a specific type of writing assignment. My 2e ds, for instance, struggles with creative writing and open-ended questions, but can write about science/facts/etc. Because he loves science, it was easy for us to think when he was younger that he was not writing because he wasn't interested in the topic, but the reality was the times he wasn't writing - he couldn't write due to his 2nd e.

3) Struggling with fine motor skills - holding things oddly, not able to tie shoes easily, clumsy etc - that is not something that you will hear parents of most NT 3rd graders mentioning. You'll see it in younger children, but if it's persistent up to 3rd grade, that *might* be an indication of a fine motor challenge. Did the psych perform other tests such as visual motor integration or finger-tapping or suggest an OT eval? Or were the fine motor issues discusses as part of this eval? The tricky thing is - if he's struggling with these, whatever the reason, it's possibly going to impact him when he uses handwriting, and that might also factor into why he will sometimes write if he's really interested in something and other times avoid it. A fine motor challenge isn't necessarily something that will require an IEP (special education) but it may be something that your ds would benefit from having either accommodations (keyboarding) or working with an OT to strengthen muscles, correct grip etc.

Best wishes,

polarbear

One thing I am a bit confused about here is that the comments teachers and the psychologist are making would suggest to me a weakness in WMI and PSI, which leads to the GAI being HIGHER than the FSIQ, not lower. Has a mistake been made and the scores transposed?

Do you have the Index scores so that here someone could check that for you?

The general ability index tends to be higher than the full-scale IQ in high IQ persons because the tests that enter into it are more g-loaded, on average, than those of the full-scale IQ. For example, the general ability index is measured by highly g-loaded tests such as vocabulary, similarities, matrix reasoning, and the like, while excluding low-level processing tasks such as digit span, coding, and et cetera. Still, full-scale IQ is a better estimate of Spearman's g than is the general ability index because of the greater generality of the tasks that enter into it.

Based on the scores you listed, I've calculated your son's CPI as being about 163. That means that his aptitude for low-level processing tasks is exceptional. Perhaps if you list his actual test scores I can make a more comprehensive statement about his abilities.

Polarbear - we suggested to the psychologist that our son was 2e, he also suffers from terrible anxiety and has been diagnosed with adhd. There was no testing of motor skills done,there was a visual and auditory test done though.

aeh and Frank22 - I apologize, as I am not very familiar with these tests and although we kept asking the psychologist to explain things in laymen terms we still aren't clear as to what all this means in detail.

These are the scores from his WISC, if I'm leaving out any that would be helpful please let me know which ones and I will post them

VCI 44
PRI 50
WMI 25
PSI 27
FSIQ 146

One thing that was explained to us was about the digits forward and digits backward - he said that ds did better on the backwards span than the forwards, which often happens with gifted children because backwards is more challenging to a gifted child. He said this may explain why ds sometimes has difficulty in classes that you would think would be easy for him, basically he tunes out because it's not stimulating enough so he does poorly. Does that make sense?


Thank you all for you help, I really do appreciate you taking the time.

Frank22, cbls didn't list any scores besides the GAI and FSIQ in this thread. A CPI of 163 (actually 162) is simply the max score possible on the DW-II, which I would agree is a reasonable estimate of the CPI if her original FSIQ and GAI are correct, which may be in doubt, based on what momof3 just pointed out. What CPI tables are you using, btw?

Momof3, you make a good observation. Apparently you have better reading comprehension than the rest of us!

cbls, if you could clarify: what is the rank order, highest to lowest, of the Index scores (VCI, PRI, WMI, PSI)?

Sorry, crossed in the post.

Again, excuse my ignorance - are you referring to the percentile rank of the scores?

Aeh,

Full-scale IQ and GAI are sufficient alone to calculate one's CPI.

I used the following artificial formula: FSIQ = GAI x 0.6 + CPI x 0.4

Cbls,

I'm sorry but I do not understand those scores; what do the 44, 50, 25, and 27 stand for? It would be extremely helpful if you could list his subtest scaled scores too (they range from 1 to 19, with a mean of 10 and a S.D. of 3).

EDIT: Clbs, I think now that the scores that you listed are the sum of scaled scores for each index.

According to the information you provided, his actual FSIQ is 135, with a GAI of 143. Perhaps the psychologist made a mistake in computing his scores?

Thanks, cbls. It appears you've listed the sums of scaled scores for the four factor indices (VCI, PRI, WMI, PSI). Perhaps you could send us the standard scores (I don't have my tables with you, so these are not real numbers, but they should look something like VCI 135 PRI 142, WMI 117, PSI 120), and the GAI.

From what you've listed though, it appears the GAI and FSIQ got transposed in the report, and it is the GAI which is the 146, and the FSIQ which is the 135. The subtests in the WMI average 12.5, which is in the High Average range (equivalent to about the 110s). The PSI subtests, which are slightly higher, average 13.5, which is also in the High Average range, and should generate a PSI around 120ish. In other words, the subtests which contribute to the GAI are, on the average, higher than those which contribute to the CPI (WMI/PSI), particularly than the WMI.

On the DSF and DSB: yes, that is not extremely unusual in gifted children, and also in those with other reasons for not attending to minimally-engaging activities (ADHD, emotional interference, medication, insomnia/poor sleep hygiene, etc.). Sometimes I also see it in kids with a skewed profile that favors visual memory, which may also be somewhat true of your dc, based on the scores you've provided.

Oh! I think I just figured out what happened: I think you have scores in the wrong columns. The FSIQ you have listed is exactly the same as the sum of all the subtests, which is why you've sent us only sums of subtests. Maybe your column headings are off in the formatting of the report? You're looking for a column called "Standard Scores" or "Composite Scores". It may not be the first column, which, if the psych uses the same software I do, lists the sums of subtest scores. The next column is the actual index scores (Composite Scores), which will be numbers in the low to mid hundreds. After that should be a percentile (probably in the 80-99 range), then a confidence interval (two numbers separated by a dash, more-or-less centered on the Composite Score), ending with a Qualitative Description.

crossed with you frank. I see we are thinking along the same lines.

Frank, thanks. I usually use the Dumont-Willis tables.