Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WPPSI at age 7.5? - UPDATE

Looking for a bit more guidance regarding my DD7 (1st grade). She was screened by the school a couple weeks ago (KBIT-2) upon her teacher's recommendation, and scored a composite IQ of 135, with very even subtests (though strongest in verbal, as expected). Full-scale IQ testing was the next step, and we agreed to let their intern do it, thinking she'd be given the RIAS or WISC-V due to her age (she'll be 7:8 in 2 weeks). We learned today that he administered the WPPSI instead (which I understand is only normed to age 7:7), and her IQ came back as 125 (program cut-off is 130).

In talking with a SP friend, she was dismayed that they'd given the WPPSI to a nearly 2nd grade, 7.5 year old who'd already screened in the 99th percentile on the KBIT. I have a call in to the supervising SP to get her thoughts, but I'd love to hear other experiences with the WPPSI-V, in particular its validity in kids at the far end of the age range and correlation with other tests. Google (super reliable, right?) tells me the newer test may be normed in a way that's missing some gifted kids, and I really didn't expect her score to be 10 points below her KBIT, but I do believe in the validity of IQ tests so I don't want to be questioning things unnecessarily.

Is it worth asking for her to be given a more appropriate/valid test? Just waiting the usual year to redo the process? Accepting results as is? I'm partly torn because as a gifted kid myself, my initial test at age 7 was inconclusive largely due to my reserved personality (similar to DD) and retesting with a more experienced psych brought me to a score of 164, so I have a bit of PTSD with this issue, I think. Trying not to let that affect my objectivity, though!

That is a clear violation of professional best practice. The standard scores (IQ) obtained are marginally valid, and a likely low estimate, as the child was at the upper limit of the age norms. In addition, Pearson (the publisher) specifically advises that high-ability children should be given the WISC. Here is the advisement on six and seven year-olds from their website, emphasis mine (it references the WISC-IV, and not the WISC-V, as that was the version of the WISC current at the publication of the WPPSI-IV):

"For children suspected of below average cognitive ability, the WPPSI–IV should be administered due to its lower floor at this age range. ... For children of high ability, however, the WISC–IV should be considered due to its higher ceiling. For the average-ability child, the choice between the WPPSI–IV and the WISC–IV requires clinical judgment from the educational and/or psychological professional."

You do not have to wait a year for a retest, as it will be a different test. Yes, it is worth asking for a valid test administration. If they say they don't have a WISC-V (in the building, which is possible if this is a primary school), then ask them to find one elsewhere in the district. There is one somewhere.

Hmmm, so this confirms my gut feeling, then. Thank you so much for your insight. My background is in counseling, so I only have a rudimentary knowledge of testing, but for a student who had been screened in the 99th percentile a week prior, with extremely strong verbal skills, no evidence of learning issues, and a long attention span, I just could not see any reason why he'd choose the WPPSI to determine gifted program eligibility. And at this point, after reading your thoughtful response and talking with 3 different elementary SPs (friends/acquaintances, not involved with DD's testing) who all felt that this was completely inappropriate, I'm thinking it was a significant and potentially unethical error in judgment (fulfilling an internship requirement maybe? not consulting the manual before administering the test?) and I agree that it needs to be resolved.

I know the district owns the WISC-V but for some reason typically uses the RIAS in gifted evals. They may be in the building next door, but really should be accessible. I'm concerned that they'll push back if I request the WISC because of potential overlap with the WPPSI she just took, but may more readily agree to the RIAS? I'm also not sure who we'd prefer to administer any additional testing, since I'm clearly not thrilled with this intern and also know how swamped the supervising SP is, at this point in the year. But she'll be calling me tomorrow morning, so I'll be interested to hear her perspective.

I've already been conflicted about this process since DD7 is my sensitive, understated, "fly under the radar" kiddo, and while I recognize that an additional, more valid test could still result in a similar score, I think it needs to happen for our peace of mind. I just hate the idea of her slipping through the cracks because of somebody else's mistake. Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts.

Wow...kind of a shocking story. When we were talking about having DS tested, even at the age of 5, the tester (who is very experienced) recommended waiting to test with the WISC because she was worried about the ceilings of the WPPSI (he'd had prior achievement testing, which had given us a clue).

Absolutely see if you can have her tested with WISC.

Just wanted to update, and ask for a bit more insight, if possible.

I spoke on the phone with the supervising SP and she agreed the WPPSI was not the best choice of test, and offered to have DD7 retested by a different SP. We agreed, somewhat reluctantly, but hopeful for an accurate score. Communication was spotty (all via email) but DD was pulled and tested on a Tuesday. By Friday, I hadn't heard a word, so emailed asking for an update. He replied the next day that she had scored a 126 on the RIAS-2. No subtest scores, no elaboration. I know they're very busy with end-of-year work.

My understanding at this point is that the RIAS-2 is a new test, scoring lower than the previous version. I also understand the reasons for renorming, but that still says to me that any student who tested into the program earlier this year via the original RIAS, has been held to a different standard than my child, which feels frustrating. As does the fact that my DD has been shuffled through a series of unfamiliar testers, some who've made poor choices, others who were understandably preoccupied given the time of year. She's a low priority for the school, and I get that. But this is a child who spent 4-6 hours a week in a non-academic nursery school, spontaneously taught herself to read, then did half-day kinder, and now a year of 1st grade with a lovely but very busy teacher who's been pulling books for her from the middle school just to find her something new. So any potential measured on an IQ test is definitely very raw, which I'm glad about, because I believe strongly in play-based education. But my gut is also screaming that I have a unique learner in danger of slipping through the cracks here. I'm just not sure how to proceed.

Any thoughts on whether that 126 on the RIAS-2 (missing the gifted cut-off of 130) is definitive enough to drop the idea of a GIEP? Or is there still value in pursuing a differentiated education, particularly given her verbal strength? Part of me thinks that if we're relying solely on numbers, then the method of obtaining those numbers at least needs to be consistent for all kids in the program. And while we're considering statistics, the likelihood of a child's IQ falling nearly 40 points below her mom's also seems low. I recognize my bias comes from my own personal experience as a gifted kid, but assuming DD would benefit from the program, would you consider independent testing with someone more experienced in giftedness? Wait another year or two? Accept her score as not likely to jump 4 full points regardless? I feel like I'm having a hard time sorting out my own emotions around the idea of my child missing out on something that could be of significant benefit to her psychological wellbeing. I'd love to hear some objective perspectives. Or subjective ones. Just some other perspectives.

While it is true the WISC V should have been administered. My personal experience has been that the K-BIT seems to skew on the high side and often Wechsler scores come in a bit lower. That is completely anecdotal and not always the case though:).

To be fair, the history of the RIAS is that it tends to skew high, especially in outlier populations (very high and very low cognition). Test developers attempted to address some of those issues in the revision, so a lower RIAS-2 score is not unreasonable, both from a norm obsolescence (Flynn effect) and test revision standpoint.

It's also not completely unlikely that your childhood score would not be predictive of your child's score at the same age. You report a score in the 160s, which would require either extended norms (which weren't released when you were a child), or the SBLM, which used a very different scaling system. If you were tested on the SBLM any time after 1980 or so, the norms were also fairly old at the time, which could also have inflated them somewhat. Comparisons of the SBLM to the SBV (which is itself on the aged side) find score drops of easily 15-20 points.

(I am not, btw, in any way implying that you are not an extremely bright individual, just that your exact numbers are not directly comparable to your child's.)

None of this, of course, addresses the issue of equity in access, when some children were admitted based on a higher-skewing test, and others are excluded based on a lower-scoring test.

I still think a WISC-V would be the best direction to go with this. Both the KBIT-2 and RIAS-2 cannot be considered comprehensive assessments.

She also is quite young, with a lot of inherent score instability simply due to her stage of development, exposure to direct academic instruction, and experience with school-type tasks. You may find that waiting a year, and re-testing with the WISC-V, will give you a picture of her learning ability in which you feel a higher degree of confidence. Also, in the event that the extended norms are a factor, they may be out by then.

And, big picture, regardless of the exact numbers, she is consistently demonstrating cognition well above her age/grade peers, which usually calls for adjustments to her instruction, in order to meet her academic and social needs. If she doesn't get into this specific program, that does not mean she should get nothing at all. I would encourage you to continue pursuing all reasonable avenues for adapting to her needs.

Please do not worry that she will go unnoticed and unsupported. The difference between her experience and your own is that you are her parent, and you will not let that happen.

Thank you so much for your expertise again! At this point, you probably should be charging me a consulting fee, but I'm so appreciative. I didn't mean to overstate my own test scores as a relevant factor in DD's testing; it's just something that enters in when I'm trying to sort out my own subjectivity. On one hand, I feel like I'm familiar with both giftedness and her strengths in particular, in a way that may let me see her more clearly than some of the professionals at her school. On the other hand, I know the ups and downs of my own experience could be clouding everything. And yes, it was the SBLM in 1985, so definitely skewed. I had SAT/GRE scores later which may support that score a bit (perfect in verbal, not so perfect in math ), but regardless, I know I'm a different person than DD. And truthfully if she didn't have to struggle to be challenged in the way that I did, that would be a good thing! I'm just feeling unsure about whether those scores are truly reflecting her ability, and what that means as far as advocacy. Or assuming that they are a fair representation of her, wondering whether we should just let things unfold without advocating any further at all.

For now, this is a large, public school with a dozen 2nd grade classes, but I was told they intend to track her in one of the classrooms with other gifted kids. She just won't be in the pull-out program or given differentiated instruction, other than the standard 3 levels of reading groups. She is a sensitive, compliant kiddo by nature, generally concerned about fitting in and not rocking the boat (also how I was), so I imagine she will continue to go through the motions in class, have fun at recess and lunch and music and art, then come home and read until we beg her to put her book down, just like this year. I hate the thought of her stagnating or losing confidence in her own uniqueness, and I think that's what's driving my concern here, but if she seems happy overall, then it could be okay. But I do agree with your suggestion that it might be logical to retest with the WISC-V at some point. Maybe at this time next year, after seeing how things go in her 2nd grade classroom.

Follow her lead. If she seems happy then I'd probably hold off on the WISC testing for now. The biggest reason that I personally would hold off is that I know the teachers in our board would be highly suspicious looking through a file with 3 tests within a few months and would probably jump to the conclusion that I had shopped around for higher results (I'm not implying that is what you are doing but just that people who don't know that the WPPSI was inappropriate and all of the details about the RAIS would probably look and say hmmmm 2 out of 3 say this score, that is probably more accurate than the third one (assuming it came out higher)).

As a mom who's kid who REALLY needed the gifted program back in grade one but who's WISC scores at the time weren't gifted enough I fully sympathize though. We kind of thought DS's scores might be a low estimate (he was extremely uncooperative at the time) but there wasn't really much we could do (the board only accepts WISC scores). We ended up retesting to confirm the suspected LD a couple years later and his scores easily qualified for the full time gifted program at that point. The extra years in a normal class gave him an extra appreciation of his unique skills and talents (probably too much - I think he started to think he was the smartest person in the world.... haha). We also had other things that he worked through (dealing with frustration, self advocacy, etc). I probably would have been a lot less stressed and appreciated not being called by the school for various things those years but in the end he wasn't permanently scarred by the situation and we made the best of it.

I also have a DD who cruised along quite happily in grade 1. We tested her in grade 2 mostly because of her brother's scores and because we were curious. A few months later in grade 2 she started to show some cracks and she's transferring to DS's school next year. If she had had the same teacher she had in grade 1 and the same classmates I think she would have been fine longer but the grade 2 class didn't have the same mix of kids and the teacher did nothing to add challenge. It will be interesting to see if it is as good of a fit for her as it was for him.

TBH if we hadn't been through all of this stuff with DS we probably wouldn't have been as aware of some of the signs with DD. She kept up a great facade at school but then started letting out her frustration at home. DH and I both had interesting experiences with the education system so that also heightened our awareness while at the same time I totally understand the fun that comes with trying to keep our own baggage to ourselves and not make up issues that aren't there.

So much fun. Hope that you're able to find something that is a reasonable fit for her.