Hello. I�m a newbie here. I have searched the forum but still have questions and am looking for some help understanding these numbers from a test given around identifying possible dyscalculia and appealing for classroom accommodations if it is found. I had myself tested at a local college. My testing is also a step in the process to see why my son and I have always been � math-haters�. The tester was a student at a local college, either working on an undergrad or master�s in psychology, don�t recall which. An assessment was sought because I cannot remember certain math facts, for example, the rules around decimal placement or higher order manipulation of fractions, despite understanding the concepts and adequate time practicing, even the next day, certainly not the next week or month. Understanding higher order math, such as calculus, doesn�t seem to be a problem. Processing speed on the WAIS-IV is 70. FSIQ reported to be 93. Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-educational Battery IV cluster results:
Reading 112
Broad Reading 109
Basic Reading Skills 114
Reading Fluency 105
Mathematics 108
Broad Mathematics 118
Math Calculation Skills 121
Written Language 133
Written Expression 143
Academic Skills 109
Academic Fluency 115
Academic Applications 129
Brief Achievement 110
Broad Achievement 119
Sub test scaled scores:Word Attack was 120, Passage Comprehension was 113, Writing Sample was 157 and Math Facts Fluency was 130. The others were between 100 and 110.
I just did not come away from the post-test meeting with a good idea of what is going on with me. I was given accommodations, but was told I have no notable issues. So confusing. Could I be 2e? Any help would be so very much appreciated.
Welcome!
It might be easier to get a good picture with a more complete set of data, as the composites you've shared appear to have some diverse scores inside them (e.g., with a PSI of 70, the FSIQ of 93 is probably not fully communicating what your strengths might be; the other index scores might help (VCI, PRI, WMI), and possibly even the subtest scores, if there were disparities within indices). You do also have a very wide range of academic achievement scores, from average all the way up to the upper extreme. If you feel comfortable posting a few more elements, we might be able to give some more feedback. If you'd rather not publically, I would be happy to share some thoughts via pm.
And as a general note, of course one should be somewhat cautious about interpreting results obtained by a trainee, depending on where they are in their training, and how closely they were supervised. (At an accredited institution, they would have to be at least a graduate student, if not a post-grad, to give the assessments you've listed.)
But a couple of thoughts here first: Big picture, you have no academic scores that are remotely below average, so that's good. That's probably also why you were told you have no notable issues.
You describe a history of difficulty with math, yet your actual assessed math skills are extremely strong, particularly in computational skills--which is the opposite of how you experience math. You report more success with concepts and higher-order math, and difficulty with procedures and facts, but your actual testing appears to demonstrate strong facility with procedures and facts, and (presumably) weaker concepts and applications. (I gather the latter from how much lower your Mathematics composite is than your Math Calculation Skills composite. The difference between them is that the former includes concepts and applications (Applied Problems), and the latter includes Fluency. Broad Mathematics is higher because it has all three.)
Which brings up another curious thing: the cognitive testing suggests low processing speed, but your actual academic fluency skills appear to be average to very strong (overall in the high average range, with math fluency in the extremely high range). Reading fluency was average, and presumably writing fluency was at least average, given that all of your subtests were 100+.
I will say that it appears you have exceptionally strong writing skills, which might also be why you experience math as a weakness; in contrast, it is, even though it's technically within normal limits.
Anyway, all of these inconsistent results are why it might be difficult to interpret your performance solely from the scores you've reported, especially if there were no other factors that might have impacted performance (e.g., fatigue, fluctuating attention, anxiety, examiner factors). But to answer your question in short, yes, it is possible that there is some twice exceptionality here.
aeh, I tried to pm you, but got a � aeh has reached limit of pms�? I will add some info here if you wouldn�t mind pming me? I really appreciate it. WAIS-IV:
Verbal Comprehension 108
Perceptual Reasoning 96
Working Memory 105
Processing Speed 70
Full Scale 96, not 93
Block Design 7
Similarities 9
Digit Span 9
Matrix Reasoning 12
Vocabulary 12
Arithmetic 13
Symbol Search 4
Visual Puzzles 9
Information 14
Coding 5
Letter-Number Sequencing 9
Figure Weights 7
Comprehension 12
Cancellation 9
Picture Completion 5
Again, thank you.