Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-V follow up questions for psych

We received results of school-based psych eval for DS9, and she has very nicely offered to meet and talk with us before the IEP mtg next week. There were significant differences between subtests in his scores. From reviewing posts on this site as a lurker, I developed a pretty good understanding of the basics, but i can mostly find info on wisc-I've, and much less on wisc-v. She just provided the scaled scores and the CI and percentile - I seem to remember that someone recommended the raw scores could be useful in understanding the details and possibly running additional comparisons, but I can't find that reference, so perhaps I misunderstood.

Is it useful to ask for raw scores? Can I do the calculations of comparisons between subtests myself, or should they be done by her to make them valid? I found a presentation from Pearson that seems to provide the info on how to do this, and it seems straightforward. Are there other questions they would be useful to ask her? Is it relevant if he exceeded time limits? He did not have 19 on any subtest, so I assume that means he did not hit the ceiling, but is that worth probing? It sounds like there are not yet extended norms for wisc-v, so is thr ceiling less relevant?

Other questions to ask?

The raw scores are not yet that useful on the WISC-V, in the absence of extended norms. As you note, if he does not have any 19s, the extended norms are irrelevant in any case. In any case, the -V has a better floor and ceiling than the -IV (more range on either end of the bell curve).

Please do not attempt to do subtest profiling yourself. This is a controversial practice even within the profession, and is best left to those with extensive clinical experience, if it is to be done at all. It may be that what you are describing as subtest comparisons is actually the interpretation of differences between index scores. That has more psychometric robustness, but is still a conversation you should have with the school psych, rather than going it alone, as the meaning of the index differences may not be the same for each child.

If exceeding time limits was a regular occurrence, then that is also worth discussing with the examiner. One of the subtests (block design) has an alternate scoring that does not do away with time limits, but reduces the impact of speed on scoring. This may be a source of additional normative information. If fine motor or mental processing speed is a factor, often this is evident in the form of relatively weaker performance on the PSI. In that case, the GAI may be a better representation of his actual overall ability. You may know that the GAI is preferred for GT kids by many.

Thanks so much aeh. I will take your cautions on the subtests. We are considering further eval with a private neuropsych and I thought she had recommended asking for raw scores, but I will double-check, and will happily rely on professionals to do the interpretation.

I did learn that the school does not have the software so all the scoring was done manually, so she had only calculated the fsiq, not the GAI, so I will ask her to do that, and also whether time limits were exceeded. I don't think they were - rather, she had issues with him not stopping when time ended.

My DS9 had significant difference between VC and Processing (39 points, 2.5 sd) which is why I want to explore further.

Also, I thought I had read that results of wisc could be compared with results of wiat. Feedback on that? She thought it was not done anymore, bc it can't be used to identify sped, but if there are significant discrepancies between ability and achievement, it seems like that would be useful insight, even if it is not used for eligibility.

The testing also id dx of autism, so an IEP is likely. The district is likely to be supportive, but also does seem to have much experience with 2E (though they do acknowledge it, so that is a start).

Other considerations? Is it appropriate to ask for additional feedback here on scores? I think I have seen it sometimes, but I didn't want to presume.

Yes, it is possible to compare the WISC with the WIAT. The psych is also correct that it should be used with caution, as it used to be a routine (but unfortunately not sufficiently evidence-based) approach to diagnosing learning disabilities (the aptitude-achievement discrepancy model). I still think comparing cognitive and achievement profiles has value, when used in the proper context. There is ongoing discussion and research about newer formulations of LD diagnosis that do so, such as the pattern of strengths and weaknesses model, and the cross-battery model.

Not stopping when time ended is not dissimilar from exceeding time limits, if the resulting responses were more accurate than those obtaining at the moment time expired.

Good to hear that the district is starting off from a supportive stance.

If you would like feedback on scores, I think most people would be receptive to responding. You may wish to think about your level of comfort with posting his data on a public forum (sometimes posters delete the scores and other sensitive information after enough other posters have responded). There are others here whose children are also 2e GT/ASD, whose contributions may be helpful to you.

Thanks. I have posted scores separately. I did talk with psych about comparing wisc and wiat. She said the technical manual for wisc-v for this was not available, so she provided me with the comparison chart for wisc-iv as reference. That did not show sig discrepancy, but I assume I should take that with even greater caution, given it is not the same test!

Also, my state does accept the strength-weakness model as qualifying option. It is brand-new. Requires 2 parts - a) 1.5+ so below mean in one subtest or 1+ sd below mean on 2 subtests - subtests need to be in area of psychological processing - "memory, processing speed, phonological skills, or other relevant tests" and b) no lower than 1.5 sd from mean in cognitive functioning. The complete text seems to suggest that A) and B) are not supposed to be same test.

I had not realized the regs were updated until after IEP mtg - so this seems like something else to look at with them. DS meets B) but not sure whether PSI from Wisc-v can also be used for A) or if another test should be done.

There is not a specific question, but feedback is of course welcome.

Yes, the PSI from WISC-V can be used for A). A) and B) can actually be the same test. B) is just supposed to distinguish between learning disabled and intellectually disabled students.

And what she really means by "the technical manual for WISC-V/WIAT-III discrepancy is not available" is that her district did not choose to purchase the online scoring platform for her to run the discrepancy!