Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion new and looking for insight

First, I have to say that I don't actually belong here because my son is not gifted. However, I have been scouring the web and keep coming across posts from this site because it seems like many of you have a wealth of information about what test score patterns might indicate. I will gladly depart if I am unwelcome, of course, but I'm really hoping you might share that wisdom with me.

My son is 6 and just finished Kindergarten. We had an evaluation done for him by an independent neuropsychologist this spring. Our goal was to better understand his strengths and weaknesses and preferred learning style so that we could help him enjoy school. He had always been an enthusiastic learner - so curious and energetic about everything! However, while he did fine in school, he reported being miserable every single day. He complained even to the last day of school about going. We thought there was something maybe behind it other than the usual little boy whining about having to do structured activities while sitting 7 hours a day.

Like I said, he had a comprehensive assessment done, but I still feel unclear about the results. We had the conference before getting the report, and now that I have had a chance to consider the results, I feel somewhat confused again. We did find out he has ADD (inattentive type), which explains some of it and wasn't hugely surprising to us. I am not going to say a lot else yet because I'm curious to hear what your initial reactions are to his test scores.

WISC-V

Verbal Comprehension: 133/99th
-similarities (15)
-vocabulary (16)

Visual Spatial: 117 (87th)
-block design (12)
-visual puzzles (14)

Fluid Reasoning: 103 (58th)
-matrix reasoning (11)
-figure weights (10)

Working Memory: 112 (79th)
-digit span (11)
-picture span (13)

Processing Speed: 83 (13th)
-coding (11)
-symbol search (3)

I just don't feel like I have sufficient explanation for why there is such a huge difference between his verbal comprehension and his processing speed - that's 50 points! Even between verbal comprehension and fluid reasoning there is a 30 point difference. Isn't that a big difference on a test that is supposed to measure a global construct?

Scores on a auditory/verbal learning and memory task:

Stories
-immediate memory 120/91st
-delayed memory 120/91st
-delayed recognition 120/91st

Word lists
-learning 120/91st
-delayed memory 135/99th
-delayed recognition >125/>95th

He also did the Woodcock Johnson Tests. Math is a weakness for him. Reading is a strength. Writing is a relative weakness because of his handwriting.

Math
-Math calculation 106/66th (1.7)
-Math fluency 77/6th (<K) (she told me that what happened here is that on one of the first items, Graham realized he made a mistake and added vs subtracted and laboriously took the time to erase and re-write his answer and so lost a lot of time)
-Applied problems 104/59th (1.6)
-Mathematics 106/66th

Reading
-letter/word identification 124/94th (3.2)
-word attack 117/87th (2.8)
-basic reading skills 121/92nd (3.1)
-sentence reading fluency 121/92nd (3.2)
-oral reading 123/93rd (3.5)
-reading fluency 124/95th (3.3)
-passage comprehension 119/89th (2.5)
-reading 124/95th (2.9)
-broad reading 126/96th (3.0)

Written language (he struggles with his handwriting - terrible grip, letter formation, flipping letters even in his own name)
-spelling 105/64th (1.7)
-sentence writing fluency 101/53rd (1.4)
-writing samples 116/86th (2.6)
-written language 113/80th (2.0)
-written expression 111/77th (1.9)
-broad written language 110/74th (1.8)

He is a wonderful kid. He is creative, funny, quirky, independent, and affectionate. I worry that the things that are unusual about him, which may make him an awesome human, aren't going to help him succeed in or enjoy school. While I believe in the benefit of adversity, I don't want him becoming demoralized across time. I just want to better understand him so I can help him better.

I apologize for the tome, and appreciate any and all perspectives on what I've shared!

Welcome!

You do not need to have a gifted child to "belong" here. Many people benefit from the forums. That said, the scores you've shared certainly indicate a very bright child, possibly gifted... when there are large gaps between scores (about 2 standard deviations), sometimes further testing reveals a learning difference or learning disability.

Welcome!
I'd reframe the way you look at your child: he doesn't have a "relative weakness" in maths, but a "relative strength" in the verbal field - I fact, he appears to be gifted in verbal reasoning, while above average in the nonverbal field. In fact. Almost all of his test scores in the non verbal field, both in the iQ and the achievement testing,with the exception of the one math test he threw due to perfectionism,appear very close together, solidly above average (being close to the middle of the bell curve, I think 10 to 14 is closer together than, say, 12 and 16 - someone will correct me on this if it's rubbish).
What stands out is, as has been said, his verbal strength, a relative weakness in writing which you are aware of and appear to be tackling (really, difficulties in fine motor and graphomotor skills alone can make a child who should otherwise be just fine in school with his skill set thoroughly miserable) and, of course his processing speed, specifically the symbol search subtest - the other subtest is, again, squarely in the above average area. You will have to find out what happened there, maybe it's a pointer to a very specific problem you can attack once you know what's going on, or maybe it's just another fluke again. Not sure what symbol search entails, but I'm sure aeh will chime in and explain.

Welcome, gmama!

Your son posts some very strong scores, certainly some that would be considered GT range. He also has quite striking diversity among his cognitive and academic clusters. I hope the evaluator gave you some clear interpretive narrative to chew on.

My thoughts:

cognition: Firstly, no, the WISC-V is not supposed to measure only a unitary construct (g). This is because the field is not in agreement that such a unitary construct exists, or can be definitively captured. The -V respects Dr. Wechsler's initial pragmatic intent, and many of his original tasks, but also bows to the body of evidence supporting the contemporary Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence, with many more subdomains, or aspects, of cognition. The five index scores are an attempt to assess some of the more highly-valued and easily measured of the theorized major domains. g is important, but a single g-score (the FSIQ), without any domains, would obscure the strengths and weaknesses a child like your son might display.

Clearly, language is his strength, in the Very Superior range. It's not as clear whether processing speed is as great of a weakness for him, or if the same temperament or style (anxiety, perfectionism, EF-shift) that caused him to bog down correcting math fluency items was at work in symbol search. The discrepancy between the two processing speed subtests is such that I'm surprised the neuropsych didn't give him the supplementary PS subtest (cancellation), too, to try to tease out the reasons for low performance on SS, and possibly give a more reliable PSI. If we postulate that coding is more representative of his PS than symbol search (and the achievement fluency measures other than math would appear to bear that out), then PS and FR are both relative weaknesses, but not as weak as the index score initially suggests. VS is probably slightly underestimated, as both subtests are timed (BD is also a fine motor task, so more likely to track the fine motor tasks of the PSI). Did the NP provide any information on his timed vs no-time-bonus performance on block design? (Or any other error analysis/clinical scores.) If there is a significant difference, that might tell us whether speed (or lack thereof) adversely affected his scaled score. WM is weaker than VC, but not to an extent unusual among children with a VCI in his range.

What does it mean that FR and PS are relative weaknesses, in the Average range? The relative weakness in FR suggests to me that he probably does better with tasks and learning that have meaning to him, such as those with connections to his real-life experience, or for which practical applications have been presented. Decontextualized abstractions generally aren't a strength. Factoid and rote memorization are probably not preferred methods. Sometimes children with this profile are experienced by teachers as disruptive, because they have difficulty maintaining engagement when meaning is not integrated into instruction, and they may talk a lot, often apparently at cross-purposes to the lesson plan, in an attempt to create this meaning and applicability for themselves. I will say his verbal list learning was better than I usually see for kids who need context. I'd be interested to know how he remembered them.

Processing speed weaknesses have many potential meanings, one of which is simply poor sustained attention, which would fit the ADD diagnosis. Alternatively, fine motor deficits (and you mention handwriting) can be a factor.

He did equally well (Average/High Average) on both auditory and visual working memory, which supports the idea of possible slight low estimate on VS.

achievement: I gather this was the new WJIV?

Reading and math (other than the aforementioned math fluency) track pretty well with his VCI and FRI, which are the two cognitive indices most likely to predict them, among those provided. The aspects of written language which are least likely to be vulnerable to mechanical issues approach his VCI, while those with the most vulnerability are more like his (presumed) PSI. It would be interesting to know how he would have performed on the Oral Language battery of the WJIV, to see how much of the written expression may have been pulled down by the complications of translating language onto paper, which involves not only fine motor skills, but automaticity (one of the possible elements affecting processing speed), and many executive functions (e.g., planning, organization, sustained attention); EF is a critical area in ADD/ADHD.

My apologies if this all just makes it more confusing...please ask for clarification!

Thank you all SO much for your welcome and responses! They are incredibly helpful. I especially appreciate the encouragement to focus on reframing my perspective. I have noticed myself being drawn to what appears a problem to be corrected, and it has caused me some anxiety.

Aeh, thanks for the clarity around the WISC background and framework, it resonates with me.

I really do think there was something flukey about the symbol search task. The NP seemed to think he just couldn't do it, that there was some visual/motor/attentional issue driving it, but it was SO much lower - and I see him do other visual scanning tasks, like puzzles and hidden pictures with ease. I don't know if he didn't understand and was afraid of saying so, or overcomplicating the instructions (which he does often) or what. If that subtest score wasn't so low, the index score would be more in line with the other scores.

So, he does have attention/EF issues. He also has some fine-motor issues we are getting ironed out with OT. His report suggested he has a developmental coordination disorder, but I'm not sure the OT agrees with that.

I am grateful for getting more clarity around this. I have some anxiety about him going back to school in the fall because he was so unhappy. I just want to do everything I can to help him feel engaged in learning again.


Thanks again!

If not already familiar with the wrightslaw website and the book From Emotions to Advocacy, you may wish to study the material which they present.

Parents can sign up to receive e-mail updates from Understood.org and ADDitude magazine. These are possible sources of IEP/504 recommendations (as is this forum).

Other recent threads which may be of interest include What happens to children who are gifted with poor EF and interesting article.

You may have read this elsewhere on the forums... a brief list of crowd-sourced tips for meeting prep:
- Research state laws and the school or district policies and practices. This information is often found online. You may wish to print and put this in an advocacy ring binder to refer to over the years as the laws and policies/practices may change over time.
- Have any test results and other pertinent facts available to share (milestones, reading lists, other accomplishments/achievements)
- It is good to have them speak first. If asked to speak first, you may simply wish to thank everyone for attending and summarize that you are all here to share information and ideas about how to best meet your child's educational needs... and that you would like to hear from them.
- Agenda
- Know who is in the meeting, and their role(s)
- Stay calm
- Know what you are asking for
- TAKE NOTES including Who-What-Where-When-Why-How of differentiation, so you can summarize in an e-mail afterward [Some families announce they plan to record the meeting and then do so, rather than taking notes.]
- Use active listening (rephrase what has been said, and put it in a question form) to clarify understanding
- Be open to receiving the school's data/observations.
- Listen to any proposals they may make, ask appropriate probing questions, such as how a proposal may work, how the proposal may help your child, the schedule/frequency of service delivery, etc
- Do not be forced to make a decision if you need time
- Summarize next steps & time frames, and/or need for a follow-up meeting
- Thank everyone for their time & interest
- After the meeting, write a summary (points of agreement, etc) and share it, possibly by e-mail

So, considering the symbol search task specifically...

It is supposed to tap visual scanning and discrimination in particular. This would suggest his low scores are perhaps due to a visual perception issue, which would be supported by the many reversals he makes in his writing. However, wouldn't it be evident in other tasks? It seems like visual scanning and discrimination is a pretty foundational ability that would come to play in block design, visual puzzles, matrix reasoning, figure weights, etc. But maybe I just don't understand it all.

My reason for continuing to ruminate on the issue is that I want to know whether he has some visual perception issue (which based on his scores seems like it would be pretty extreme and require some specific remediation) or to know if I should request an alternate subtest to clarify.

It is likely that visual perceptual issues would have some impact on other tasks, most probably Coding. The particular kind of error that you observe in live settings (reversals) is less likely to be an issue for block design, visual puzzles, and figure weights, as none of them rely on symbols. I sometimes see reversals carry over into matrix reasoning a bit. If you were to assess for this kind of deficit, you would probably want additional testing by an OT. I would probably start from an alternate PS measure to separate speed from something specific to symbols, though since you already report reversals, and fluency appears to be a global weakness, an OT eval might be worthwhile regardless of PS findings.