I had my DS9 tested last October. He did the WISC-IV. I see a gap between the VCI/PRI and WMI/PSI.

Here are his scores
VCI- sss 47--composite 134
PRI- sss 43-- composite- 127
WMI- sss 22-- composite 104
PSI- sss 25-- composite 115

FSIQ 128 and GAI- 136

If I understand correctly---He hit the ceiling on block design (raw 66- scaled 19). And Similarities (raw 35 and scaled 18). But I don't think the psychologist used the extended scores to give him an additional 3 points on the GAI. He could have gotten a 140 (if I am understanding all this correctly).

I am worried about his writing skills and spelling. I have an audiologist appt coming up. He has always been an intense child, picky about foods and smells, particular about sensory issues (eg. tags). I don't think Aspergers as he is VERY social. I do see some signs of dyslexia and/or dyspraxia. He was diagnosed with visual/auditory processing d/o 2 yrs ago by a speech language pathologist.

Thoughts? Any help appreciated. Do you agree that there is a gap betweeen VCI/PRI and WMI/PSI?

Can you give more detail on the spelling/writing issues?

yes, thanks for responding. Spelling is usually below grade level. Until around sept of 2013 all his words would almost look like they were "glued" to each other. He would say to me that that's how he sometimes saw the words on a book. Since we started working harder with him, this has improved. It takes effort to read what he writes because of the spelling mistakes.He does not like to write. I noticed that at times he will basically write the same thing. For instance, if he is writing about a pet. He will choose 2 or 3 reasons why he would like a specific pet and then repeat the same ones during the one or two pages that he is required to write without adding anything to improve the text. I have been told "he is just not that interested" but I think that's a symptom, not a cause. His verbal ability is clearly higher than his ability to put words on paper. This week he told us that he is afraid of writing some words because he is afraid he will mispell them.

Based purely on reading these boards and my DS' and DD's testing, a significant gap is usually interpreted as the difference of a "standard deviation" between scores. On the WISC, a standard deviation in 15 points. If the difference is less than a standard deviation between scores no one seems to be concerned about that. I would say a 7 point difference between the VCI and PRI is not significant.

The most significant gap in your DS' scores is the 2 standard deviation one between VCI and PSI. I am also interested to hear that he hit the ceiling on one of the PRI subtests but scored a 127 overall. He probably has significant variation among his subtest scores which also could be significant.

You say he is going to an audiologist. Have you had him evaluated by a developmental optometrist for tracking and convergence issues? What else does you tester recommend? Clearly something is going on based your description of his writing and spelling issues. If I were you I would explore vision issues as well.

I would suggest reading "The Mislabeled Child," especially the chapters on auditory issues, vision issues, dysgraphia and sensory processing. I saw this book mentioned many times on this board but ignored it because I thought it only applied to distinguishing ADHD from other LDs. It does do that but, more importantly, the book clearly and simply explains the common LDs and how to tease them out from each other. I strongly recommend it.

What does he do when encountering an unfamilar word when reading? How's his reading in general?

I would seek out testing for phonological processing and expressive language. We've also had good luck with using graphic organizers for writing to separate the process of coming up with the thoughts and ideas and constructing the sentences. They need to be tuned to the assignment, asking for the right lebel of detail expected, etc.

Google "stealth dyslexia" to see how that fits enough to pursue further testing. My DD was diagnosed at 9 with a profile that's similar, but not exact. I put off testing for a long while because she didn't squarely hit each box on stealth dyslexia. In retrospect, she was compensating a lot.

@geofizz--He had issues with reading 2 years ago- we did visual processing therapy with the speech pathologist. The reading improved, he loves reading now. His only issue with reading is that he won't read the ending of a long word. (My brother had the same issue as a child-- my brother tells me that he "just learned to compensate and even to this day has this problem". He is a lawyer with a full time job so I guess he compensates well).

I have read the Dyslexia Advantage and I totally think he fits the criteria for the stealth dyslexia

@fwtxmom- so if I am looking for a 15 difference then I have it several times--anytime I compare the VCI or PRI to either WM or PSI.
Basically, he scored between 11 to 13 in all subtests except similarities (18), vocabulary (17), block design (19).

The extended norms should only be used (I am not an expert but got this information from one) if the full scale IQ score exceeds 130 and the GAI exceeds 140 AND the child receives at least an 18 on two subtests. I know there has been some confusion about this so just repeating what I was told. The way it was explained is that it is only when you deal with children in the very upper ranges that the regular norming sample is not sufficient.

This is what I found from the NAGC's position statement on the WISC IV:

" Despite these limitations, testers should consult the Extended Norms if a child achieves at least one scaled score of 19 or two of 18 and modify scaled, Composite, GAI and Full Scale IQ scores accordingly. These can be found in Technical Report #7, available at http://www.pearsonassessments.com/N...C-8E4A114F7E1F/0/WISCIV_TechReport_7.pdf or through a search for “WISC-IV Extended Norms.” Extended Norms have been helpful in identifying some exceptionally and profoundly gifted students for much-needed support services, although others encounter insufficient item difficulty with no benefit from Extended Norms."

I'm curious about the mention of extended norms. According to the technical bulletin (which I've seen before), my child qualifies but didn't have them calculated. It doesn't really matter for us. However, it seems like relatively few people use the extended norms and that qualifying scores are often raised higher when they are used.

Have all of you found them to be useful?

My dd had 2 19s, and after I inquired about extended norms, it raised her PRI from 143 to 149, her FSIQ from 138 to 140, and her GAI from to 142 to 146. In the end, the new scores were really not useful.

Nutmeg, I'd think those transitions are the very sort that are useful because it takes scores under HG qualifying such as for DYS to above qualifying. The HG program where I live has a rubric that gives higher points based on IQ.

I second the extended norms not being that helpful. It raised by daughters verbal to 152 from 149 and GAI to 149 from 147 and full scale went from 133 to 136. The ranges were pretty much the same though and I don't think the "extended" scores really changed anything.

As a parent of a child who hit many ceilings, my understanding is as follows: The extended norms are helpful if a child is close to the ceiling of the test (FSIQ 160) and you want to know how far above that ceiling the child actually scored on GAI. They are also helpful if your child is particularly high in one area (hits more than two ceilings), as they help provide a better understanding of the overall IQ in relation to that area of giftedness. Unfortunately, the extended norms do not necessarily provide a true picture of the EG/PG child, and many testers recommend using SB-LM if you hit several ceilings on WISC-IV and have to use extend norms. The Gifted Development Center has a nice explanation of scoring the WISC-IV and the SB-LM on its website.

Yes they might have been useful in that respect (applying to DYS, which we did not do), but with regards to the gifted program in her public school it did not make a difference.

That was what I was told (but spoken more eloquently by kccook:)) about the extended norms. I called Pearson, the company that creates the WISC-IV and there were only two children in the entire norming sample that had a GIA over 145 and no children that has a FSIQ over 145. So if your child scores in that range (or higher, which is the case for the children of many of the people on this board) they are not being compared to a large sample, they are being compared to two children. So for very gifted children it given them a larger sample to be compared against AND is more statistically sound. The intention was not to raise scores but to give the group (that already qualifies for DYS for the most part) a true comparison group.