Looks like I was underestimating my 7 year old. We are very relaxed homeschoolers but I have been facing persistent perfectionism (she gives up before she tries) so we decided to seek out further evaluation in hopes of gaining more information on how to best serve her educationally.

I am awaiting the full written report for me to pour over and study (I do much better with reading than listening), but I talked with the administering psychologist and feel like I have a little more insight to my daughter's brain. I think. Mostly I have a page filled with numbers and bits and pieces of remembering what she told me about each point.

Full Sale IQ: 135, 99%

Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI): 142, >99%
Similarities: 19, >99%
Vocabulary: 16, 98%
Comprehension: 16, 98%

Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI): 121, 92%
Block design: 10, 50%
Picture concepts: 14, 91%
Matrix reasoning: 16, 98%

Working Memory Index (WMI): 116, 86%
Arithmetic: 14, 91%
Digit span: 11, 63%
Letter-number seq.: 12, 75%

Processing Speed Index (PSI): 126, 96%
Coding: 17, 99%
Symbol search: 12, 75%

There was also a Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement II where her reading comprehension was 121 (3.3 grade level equivalent) and mathematical concepts was 128 (3.3 grade level).

So she doesn't qualify for the Davidson Young Scholars program with her highest score being VCI at 142 and 145+ being the minimum. Should we apply anyway and provide work samples and cross our fingers? Or is that a waste of effort? I can only think of providing a video of her reading, maybe some of her writing work...?

While I eagerly await the full written report, can anyone give me more insight on what these numbers really mean? Is there, like, a 'WISC-IV Results for Dummies' out there?

The psychologist who tested your daughter is probably the best person to ask, as s/he knows her and observed her during the test.

The requirements for the DYS program are here. They have a lot of different categories with score requirements, which might help you decide.

Val, I was just looking for anything to dive into while I wait for the full written report

She doesn't meet any of the minimum requirements for Young Scholars (3 points shy of the 145+ minimum on VCI). I guess I was wondering if anyone had applied and been accepted being just shy of the minimum.

It can't hurt to try I guess. I would think that just shy meant a fsiq of 144 though.

I tend to agree with puffin about what I would consider "just shy."

If you get the subtest scores that went into calculating the VCI and PRI, you could see if the GAI is 145 or above. The sum of the scaled scores of those 6 subtests would need to be 97 or greater.

I have a it of a different take on this - rather than worrying about getting into DYS at the moment, I'd ask the psychologist a few questions that might help you understand your dd's learning profile a bit better. It appears she has some significant relative score discrepancies between VCI/PRI/WMI and PSI. It's possible that the reason you're seeing your dd "give up before she tries" isn't due to a motivation problem, but possibly a learning challenge that's related to the high-vs-average WISC scores. What looks like perfectionism might actually be a child who is having a tough time coming up with some part or piece of the answer to whatever they are being asked to do. It doesn't mean they aren't incredibly bright or that they don't know the answer, just that something's breaking down somewhere in getting the information together or getting it out or getting it recorded. I sincerely thought my 2e ds was a shy perfectionist before he was diagnosed with dysgraphia and expressive language challenges.

There are many different things that might be behind such a wide range in scores - I'd start by asking the psychologist if your ds was on task and attentive during testing or if he appeared to lose focus and/or was tired. If the psych feels the test is representative of your ds' profile of abilities, ask the psych what his/her opinion is re why the range of test scores, and ask if he/she did any additional testing to help determine why those challenges exist.

I would also talk to your son and try to get information from him, ask him if he's frustrated or purposely going slow or (whatever) when he's working at home. Ask what he's thinking about when he's writing. Ask if it feels the same when he's working at school if it does when he's home doing homework. Ask if he understands what he's supposed to be doing in the assignment. Basically ask enough to get him talking about his work, and see if there is anything that starts to make sense when looked at in combination with the WISC scores.

Best wishes,

polarbear

I think the psych's narrative and clinical observations have the potential to be even more important to properly understanding her scores than usual. There is quite a bit of diversity, both between and within indices, affecting pretty much every index.

One pattern of note is that she appears to do better with the abstract reasoning tasks than with the more concrete tasks within VCI and PRI (which are the reasoning-heavy indices that contribute to the GAI). For example, she did best on the most abstract verbal reasoning task (Si), and well, but less so, on the more concrete verbal tasks. Likewise, she did better on the two conceptual tasks in PRI, and not as well on the concrete task (BD). Although there is generally less reasoning on the CPI indices, the pattern appears to hold there. In WMI, her best performance was on the task that includes a little mathematical reasoning (Ar), while the rote memory tasks were not as strong. (Both PSI subtests are measures of mostly rote speed, with negligible abstraction, but even there, she did better on the one that is more amenable to strategies involving memory and learning (Cd).)

If we hypothesize that there is a gap between her ability to grasp high-level concepts and her ability to implement them in concrete applications, then it becomes not quite as surprising that she is achieving at the level of her concrete applications, rather than her abstract-conceptual reasoning. In particular, her isolated working memory (meaning, when the task does not allow as much cognitive compensation) is quite average, in contrast to her exceptional verbal reasoning, which has the potential for limiting the amount of data that she can process at once. One can easily imagine that she becomes frustrated when her working memory (often likened to the whiteboard of the mind) runs out of space to hold all the components on which she feels that she should be able to exercise her problem-solving and reasoning capacities.

Think of it this way: It is very possible that tasks that fit into her working memory are not sufficiently challenging for her abstract thinking, but tasks that are appropriate to her conceptual thinking ability require managing too many components for her working memory. So most tasks would then be both too easy and too hard for her at the same time.

Oh man, aeh, that sums things up too much. Are there resources for this? As a homeschooler I'm sort of flailing around now in an I-don't-know-what-to-do state.

Thank you, polarbear, I've started a list of questions that I plan to email the psychologist, starting with some of your points. I'm not super concerned with DYS, but the resources sounded nice.

fjzh, you've mentioned a strategy of your own in passing, when you described yourself as doing better with reading than with listening. Glance back at the description of working memory as the whiteboard of the mind. Well, a straightforward compensatory strategy for having a small mental whiteboard is externalizing it--write things down. In order to reduce the working memory component of an abstract reasoning or conceptual understanding task, use visuals--including graphic organizers, encourage her to write steps down, scribe steps for her as she verbalizes them, provide her with reference charts.

Aim for conceptual, big picture, understanding before introducing the nitty-gritty components; it will give her a meaningful framework into which to place the details, so she won't be holding a disorganized mass of isolated points in her mind, but a small selection of connected conceptual categories. This reduces the effective number of points on her mental whiteboard. Make sure she understands the personal relevance and practical application of academic skills and knowledge. She will have more vivid "hooks" for organizing them. Along with this, experiential learning is likely to be more effective than isolated skills instruction. Perfect for relaxed homeschooling!

And you are homeschooling, so you don't have to design a factoid-laden education for her. In the long-term, professionals rarely memorize; they remember the most frequently used figures, formulas, etc., but use their reference works for everything else. (I remember investing time into memorizing various metabolic cycles in undergraduate biochem class, and then entering graduate school and finding that many labs had them posted on the wall.) As she is relatively early in her education, and not actually incapable of memorizing, it is reasonable to include some level of memory work for math facts or handwriting, or spelling, as these are skills for which automaticity can smooth the way for higher-level problem-solving, but I would separate basic skills work from reasoning/conceptual work.

Allow her to follow her passions; you may even be able to co-opt them to weave in some other academic skills or content that you believe will be valuable to her future. When she finds something for which she has a personal fascination, I would not be surprised if she is able to remember and integrate all kinds of apparent trivia--because its personal meaning is intense enough that she has emotional structures organizing them.

There are some nice parent-friendly suggestions for working memory development on this page:

https://www.understood.org/en/schoo...k-study-skills/8-working-memory-boosters

Peg Dawson's "Smart but Scattered" is a go-to book on executive functions in general, of which working memory is one:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1593854455/

Thank you so much aeh, this was very helpful! Excuse me while I pour over it all for hours with my likely low working memory

Does anyone know if there is a substitute for block design on WISC V for kids who have challenges with motor skills? DS did the WISC IV a few years ago and his block design was much lower than the other two PRI scores (13 vs. 18-19). Other testing done the same day was below the first percentile for fine motor coordination. I don't know if he will be tested again, but we already know his block design score is affected by the motor skill issue (which the psych put in the report). What if we want to measure visual spatial ability without it being confounded by a fine motor problem?

There is a motor-free spatial reasoning measure (Visual Puzzles) that comprises the other half of the Visual Spatial Index. A single substitution may be made in the FSIQ. Since only one VSI subtest contributes to the FSIQ, that would be an option for the composite score. No substitutions can be made for VSI, so both subtests would be retained at the index level. This also means BD would have to be used in the GAI. Keeping all of these substitution rules in mind, it may not be most beneficial to him to substitute VP for BD, depending on how Cd comes out. If you are attempting to capture his ability without significant fine motor confounds, subbing SS for Cd in the FSIQ probably makes more of a difference, since I would imagine Cd is far below his other scores, including BD.

If the examiner has access to it, there is also a supplement to the WISC-V, the WISC-V Integrated, that includes a motor-free version of Block Design, using multiple choice responses. Although this cannot be used as a substitute, it can provide valuable clinical and normative information regarding performance on similar tasks with and without motor demands.

Either way, a skilled clinician will be able to provide some information on his spatial ability with and without motor demands based on the primary subtests of the WISC-V.

Thanks aeh. The primary care doctor wants me to take him back to the university neuropsych and I don't know if they'd even want to re-test IQ but if they did I would probably ask about the point of doing the block design subtest again. They gave it to him before, knowing fine motor was impaired, so they would probably do it again unless I ask about it. Of course, they weren't trying to find out if he was gifted, they were trying to find out info about the TBI (I think? I didn't even know they were going to do an IQ test when I took him in).

Do schools normally test IQ as part of a re-evaluation? Obviously the old school was happy just giving everyone the CogAT but not sure what current school does. It is possible for "physically impaired" they don't need to assess cognitive ability anyway. For his last school eval they mentioned the University results but did not do their own cognitive testing, just the WJ-Ach (strangely, they did the whole test, or at least broad math, reading, and writing).

They probably do not need to do cognitive for physically impaired, but typically schools do re-test cognitive on re-evaluations. For the TBI, giving BD was probably important diagnostically, as it is one of the subtests that can be sensitive to brain injury.

Wonder why that is.

His coding score was actually a 10 or 50th percentile but I doubt it would be that good now. I had him write the alphabet and it took him twice as long as it should have. (26 letters in 60 seconds, I think it should be 30). I would actually be really interested in seeing how he does on coding again, even if it brings down the FSIQ. I can't figure out if he actually has dysgraphia or if it's just a coordination issue (or both). Anyway, sorry if I'm hijacking the original thread.

There are a number of visual organizational and visual integration tasks that are closely correlated with extent/presence of brain injury (RCFT or Rey-Osterreith is another one, beloved of neuropsychs).

Another instrument for assessing motor-free visual spatial ability is the MVPT-4, usually given by OTs.

His alphabet fluency may or may not parallel his Cd performance, as it includes retrieval fluency/automaticity, which is one of the core deficits of dysgraphia, as distinct from actual fine motor coordination. If measures of motor coordination (which may include Cd) are good, but alphabet fluency is below average, that would suggest that it is not (or not only) motor coordination per se that is the challenge, but automaticity.

Interesting. Thanks aeh. When I had him write the alphabet, he started off looking good but got really spacey and slow in the middle of it, and left out a string of 3 letters in the middle.

He did some sort of visual perception test after the brain injury, given by an OT. The OT could not get his eyes to track moving objects. I think it was the Test of Visual Perceptual ability or something like that. I think he was close to hitting the ceiling of the test for visual memory and visual spatial ability at the age of 6.

I wonder if it's worth it to get an actual dysgraphia diagnosis or it's not going to make a difference to the school anyway in terms of how they deal with him. The current school is hopeless (they tried to drop OT from his IEP, and seem to have no concept of what dysgraphia even is), but if I get detailed instructions for the school in a neuropysch report I'm wondering if it would help.

I have already rejected 2 proposed IEPs and nothing is signed. I'm not sure what is going to happen at this point.