Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment KBIT screening, next steps...

Hello, I'm a new poster. My 7yo daughter (1st grade, public school) was recommended her for gifted screening earlier this year by her teacher. The school counselor administered the KBIT-2 on Friday, and I haven't talked with him directly yet, but the paper that came home said her results were in the 99th percentile, so she is being referred for the full test. However, because of end-of-year time constraints on their school psych, they are suggesting that their SP intern administer the test instead.

Would you be comfortable with an intern doing the full-scale test (WISC, I think)? My DD can be hesitant in new situations, and also very sensitive to the mood/environment around her, so I'm somewhat worried that if he seems uncertain, my DD will pick up on that. And I'm just not sure whether his inexperience could be a detriment in other ways as well. He would have limited experience in test administration on the whole, and likely no experience in giftedness specifically. Then again, the counselor doing the KBIT-2 was also new, and that seemed to go well, so maybe I'm overthinking?

Also, I'm having a hard time finding data, but does the KBIT-2 generally correlate closely with the WISC? I don't have the breakdown on her score, just the 99th percentile, but she is a reading/verbal-heavy kiddo, if that matters.

Thanks in advance for any insight!

PhD does not necessarily equal a better administration of a given test, trust me. Nor is a doctoral intern necessarily new to testing. As an example, I know a clinical psych intern with 10 years of assessment under her belt (including all standard neuropsych tests), and a clinical psychologist (in assessment) who took no assessment classes and so whose experience with testing is limited to winging a WISC a couple of times. Additionally, I know school psych graduate assistants who can test circles around their boss (a school psych now working in clinical assessment, who hasn't given a test in years).
It just really depends, and I wouldn't rely so heavily on titles. I work in child assessment (namely, neurodevelopmental disorders, along with other issues impacting the 21-and-under set) at a center with huge traffic everyday, and this has proven itself to be true time and again.

Thanks so much for your perspective!

I don't feel a PhD is necessary (in our state, many of the more experienced school psychs have EdS degrees instead); I'm mostly just wondering about overall testing expertise. My understanding is that this intern hasn't worked in an assessment-heavy field before this. But I totally agree with you that there are other significant factors, and I'm encouraged by your input as someone actually working in this area.

I also learned today that it's the RIAS they'll be administering, and a SP friend told me she wouldn't be as concerned about experience with that particular test (short and simple), so that was reassuring. She also felt it was highly likely that a kiddo in the 99th percentile on the KBIT would end up placed in the program, since they'll be using a matrix from this point on to make that determination. So fingers crossed all goes well from here on!

I'll take a look at my WISC-V manual for any correlation data with the KBIT-2; that would be pretty much the only place to find it. The KBIT-2 manual would have correlation data for the WISC-IV, but that's probably not the test you're referencing.

And I would agree with Priiak that it's not the title or the years of certification, necessarily. Especially when you are talking about a relatively new edition of a test (WISC-V has only been out for about 1.5 years), with some substantive changes over past editions. Actually, when you go to a big name children's hospital or research university for a neuropsych eval, the actual testing is nearly always conducted by a pre or postdoctoral intern, or master's level psych technicians.

If the intern is an actual intern (post-master's), and not a first-year pre-practicum student, he has probably given the WISC-V about as many times as the school psych has. It is true that he is less likely to have extensive experience with giftedness (though that is also not necessarily the case), but presumably his mentor will support him with interpretation. (I think I had more experience with giftedness, especially at the PG-level, than many of my field supervisors.)

School psych is an area that has a fair number of experienced educators pursuing additional certification or re-specialization. This is how situations like those Priiak described can occur. A not insubstantial fraction of school psych trainees have previous experience as teachers, school counselors, or other mental health providers.

There is some data to suggest that the RIAS reads slightly high, when compared to the WISC (more so to the WISC-III, less so to the WISC-IV, no data on the WISC-V).

It is fairly easy to give, though. No reason to believe it will be any less accurate than the KBIT-2 was, especially when comparing a psych intern to a guidance counselor (who probably had one survey course in assessment in grad school).

Thank you, it's so helpful to hear your thoughts. I talked to the school counselor today and he said her composite IQ on the KBIT was 135. That seems somewhat close to the 130 cut-off to me, but the counselor seemed to think it was likely to correlate with the RIAS, even with an unfamiliar tester.

I think the reason for my overthinking this part of the process is that my frame of reference is limited to my own kids (well, and my own experience as an identified kid), and my DS5 has often seemed more overtly gifted to me. So I've been uncertain how DD7 would test, especially given her reserved, sensitive nature. I do think the school program would be of value to her, though, so I'm hoping it all works out.

Thanks again!