Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 563 guests, and 58 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    justinwilliams, Jessica D, Xtydell, lll, A WA parent
    11,405 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    We've known our eldest was bright and when she was assessed at 6.5y between K & 1st, she tested as gifted, but due to her unmedicated ADHD the score was considered to be on the low end of her ability. Fast forward to now (9y, ending 3rd, & medicated) and through the school's testing on the WASI-II she had a FSIQ of 156.

    I know DYS doesn't accept the WASI and we're in the process of getting a full neuropsych done so we'll have scores from an accepted test. But is there any known correlation between how kids score on the WASI and how it would relate to possible WISC scores?

    Lastly, if she does end up getting qualifying scores, how much does the referral form matter to the process? She's definitely more of a 'still waters run deep' kind of child and even her teachers from last year were surprised to hear some of the audiobooks she was choosing to listen to at home. I don't get the sense that her teachers this year really get her (no gifted ed mandated by our state, no gifted programs in our regional area regardless of district, so no idea if they have any understanding/training on giftedness let alone 2e). If it weren't for her IEP and the resulting evaluations, I doubt there would be any thoughts/comments on her abilities as even with the school evaluations there's no discussion about them aside from a brief comment from the psychologist. After the year we've had, we're shifting to homeschooling her for next year so it's not like she'll have a different non-family teacher who may have a better understanding/appreciation of her.

    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    It�s been a while since I initially submitted; we�re now about a month out from the start of her testing. Does anyone have any insight?

    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    The WASI has a very close relationship to the WISC (in fact, if a WISC is completed very soon after the WASI-II, they will use the subtests from the WASI in the WISC composites, instead of retesting those subtests), but not exactly the same structure. It also depends a bit on whether she had the 2- or 4-subtest version. (Did you get any other composites, or just the FSIQ?) There are also, critically, no WMI or PSI index scores, which are typically the ones most affected by ADHD. In short, the WASI-II FSIQ is reasonably predictive of the GAI, but not necessarily of the WISC-V FSIQ in learners whose WMI/PSI (aka, CPI) are notably different from the GAI, which describes quite a lot of persons with ADHD or certain LDs.


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    I'm not sure about the subtests used; this re-eval cycle through the school was a hot mess so I missed that only the composites were included in the report.
    VCI: 146
    PRI: 160
    FSIQ: 156

    It's mostly shocking because it was a significant point jump compared to the earlier school assessment (2019 WASI-II: VCI 128; PRI 158; FSIQ 138) and that's even with the same person doing the assessments. [2019 WISC-V was privately done a few months before the school did the WASI (VCI 118, WMI 91, PSI 98, FRI 126, VSI 138, FSIQ 118, GAI 126, VECI 113, CPI 92) and the school report doesn't indicate if they used her WISC subtest scores.] I was expecting a bit of a point jump with the meds, but not to this extent.

    Her WJIV Ach scores don't seem comparable to her WASI-II results, but my daughter also told me that she spent an entire day testing so I wouldn't be surprised if she got tired/bored/disinterested if the WJ was done after the WASI.

    1. Letter-Word Identification 125
    2. Applied Problems 138
    3. Spelling 117
    4. Passage Comprehension 120
    5. Calculation 107
    6. Writing Samples 108
    8. Oral Reading 128
    9. Sentence Reading Fluency 121
    10. Math Facts Fluency 106
    11. Sentence Writing Fluency 105



    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    So actually, the WASI-II results are nearly identical to the previous administration on the PRI. It's the VCI that has gone up a bit. The main set of scores that is different is your previous neuropsych (WISC-V). Based on what you've provided, I agree about the possible impact of time limits and attentional dysregulation on her 2019 WISC. We also have to qualify the 2019 WASI scores by noting that there may have been a tiny bit of score inflation on that PRI due to practice effects (the items are not identical, but the novelty of the tasks themselves would have been lost). Another factor is what she said about herself this time around, which is that a WISC is substantially longer than a WASI. That WISC likely took at least an hour and a half, possibly longer (especially if she attempted a lot of block designs), vs 30-40 minutes for the WASI.

    IOW, for the upcoming neuropsych, they need to be aware that she fatigues quickly, and may need more frequent breaks.

    To be fair, she probably didn't literally take an entire day on recent testing (unless she needed a lot of breaks, which is possible), based only on the WASI and the core WJ subtests. With her fluency scores (which are age-appropriate or above), the WJ shouldn't have taken more than about two hours or so (all told, no more than about three hours of testing between the two tests). But yes, it is still tiring to do one's entire cognitive and achievement testing in the same day.

    As to the results, taking into account regression to the mean, her achievement scores generally are not unreasonable given her current and past cognitive measures. Reasoning (strong) has historically been much stronger than efficiency (age-appropriate), and nonverbal reasoning stronger than verbal reasoning, and that's how the academic measures come out.

    The average scores are all ones that are affected by automaticity skills (MF & SWF, and their multi-step analogs Calc & WS). The VCI would predict language-based skills in the 120s, and that's where they fall in reading. The PRI would predict math skills in the 130s, and that is likewise where they are in reasoning.

    The only skills that are consistently below personal expectations are her written expression skills, which are probably affected by the automaticity and organization vulnerabilities that are often associated with her existing diagnosis (although I would still want to keep a close eye on the possibility of an additional learning challenge in writing). If your neuropsych wants to take a closer look at writing (e.g., a TOWL-4, PAL-2 or similar), it might not be a bad idea.

    Last edited by aeh; 07/28/22 08:09 AM.

    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    Yeah, the school psychologist said she finished all the block designs on WASI-II. She ran out of time on the last one, but apparently still got the correct answer. The calculation narrative was surprising though; the psychologist's report said she skipped every division problem - even problems like 4/2 which she knows - which was very odd; but when we were reviewing it at the meeting, he showed us the page with the division problems highlighted and every one of them used the 'long division bracket' symbol instead of the � symbol. I don't think she had any idea what the bracket meant; all of the schoolwork that had been sent home only used the � symbol.

    Thankfully the clinician doing the neuropsych is the same one who did her private neuroedu in summer 2019. She just had her first appointment on Monday and I think they made it through about half the WISC. The clinician said she was going to be adding a couple extra appointments for her to make sure there was enough time booked since she needs more time; I'm not sure if that's from her lower processing speed, needing more breaks, hitting ceilings, or all of the above.

    We're definitely taking a closer look at reading & writing. She received a provisional SLD in reading (mild, reading rate, reading comprehension) and a rule out SLD in writing (written expression) last time and I want to figure out if they are still separate issues now that the ADHD meds should be mitigating the attention issues. During distanced learning for 2nd grade was where I really saw the struggles in writing come to the fore; her school/teacher weren't concerned since she was working at grade level, but I'd much rather know now so we can work on scaffolding and direct instruction however she needs instead of waiting for her to fall flat in middle school/high school/college when she can't skate through anymore.

    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    That's quite impressive. The WASI-II is normed through adulthood, so completing all of the block designs means she was able to solve items presented to the highest-functioning adults, albeit somewhat more slowly. (In that sense, the WASI actually has a higher ceiling than the WISC.) The observation regarding the calculation subtest does explain that discrepancy. That's more of an instructional gap than anything else. You can fix that easily this next year in homeschooling.

    Sounds like your neuropsych has a pretty good handle on her. I'm assuming they know that DYS is a thought? To make sure that natural ceilings are obtained, in case extended norms are relevant (most likely for the FRI/VSI).

    On SLDs, it appears that the possible reading delay previously noted isn't supported by current documentation (yay!), but writing still warrants a look. I'm guessing that's a factor in the jump on the VCI. Previously, she wasn't accessing text at her cognitive level, which would have limited her vocabulary and general information to environmental exposures. Now that she's reading closer to her cognition, she's picking up verbal knowledge skills more commensurate with her reasoning. I wouldn't be surprised if her next triennial eval finds the gap between verbal and nonverbal thinking closing even more. (BTW, good to see she is listening to audiobooks, which are extremely valuable for learners like her, since they give/have given her access to language beyond her fluent decoding skills.)

    Your neuropsych will give you more specific recommendations, but as a general thought, learners with her profile typically do quite well with writing strategies that are visual and conceptual, such as graphic organizers/mindmaps (paper or electronic--there are lots of interactive ones), mastery approaches, and judicious use of assistive technology, such as speech-to-text or scribing during the idea generation and drafting processes.

    My own reluctant writer also benefited from the tight focus and small bites structure of materials like Evan-Moor Daily Six Trait Writing, which we settled on as the writing core for homeschooling DC beginning from about your DC's age. (15 minutes a day of writing was about as much structured writing instruction as DC could tolerate at that point.) And FWIW, DC finished high school with college English credits obtained from AP tests and dual enrollment courses. (BTW, make sure to document any extended time or typed-response accommodations, to establish a history, which may help if she needs to apply for those for future standardized tests, such as the AP exams.) So I whole-heartedly agree with remediating early.


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    So the neuropsych results were interesting. We got lucky and found out about the adderall shortage in time to save her meds for test days and started trialing new meds the rest of the time. She needed WAY more time for testing so one rec is to have a SLP eval to see if she has fluency issues. She was confirmed to have a SLD in Written Expression, re-confirmed her DCD/dysgraphia dx (visual motor issues in 2019, graphomotor issues added), and now we know she's autistic as well. Her provisional dyslexia dx was removed as those issues in 2019 weren't present now, so they were likely unmedicated-ADHD related.

    She's got an asynchronous profile, even with significant differences in her GAI and EGAI subtests. According to the 3rd technical report, her expected FSIQ was 152-160 based on her WASI-II FSIQ, but that's definitely not what she scored.

    FRI-140
    -Matrix Reasoning 20
    -Figure Weights 14
    -Arithmetic 11
    -Picture Concepts 16
    **Figure Weights Extra Time 20
    Difference between Matrix Reasoning and Figure Weights was significant with <8.0% base rate.
    Difference between FRI & WMI was significant with <4.0% base rate.

    VSI-126
    -Block Design 13 ("She completed nearly all the designs within the time limit, except for the last one.")
    -Visual Puzzles 16
    **Block Design Extra Time 15
    **Block Design Partial Score 17 ("Her score for number of blocks in correct positions within the time limit best reflects her skills.")
    **Visual Puzzles Extra Time 19
    Difference between Block Design and Block Design Partial was significant with 1.4% base rate.

    VCI-130
    WMI-107
    PSI-108

    FSIQ-129, GAI-136, EGAI-126, VECI-119
    CPI-109, EFI-135, QRI-114, NVI-134

    Obviously, none of the composite scores meet criteria for DYS, but does DYS look at the subtest level? I'm not really sure if the variety of conditions/scores for Figure Weights, Block Design, and Visual Puzzles, would mean that she would qualify.

    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    A
    aeh Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Apr 2014
    Posts: 4,046
    Good to hear some of those diagnostic questions have been clarified.

    On DYS, I mean, it can't hurt to try, especially if the examiner writes a clear and well-argued clinical explanation for why some of these scores may not fully represent DC's ability--keeping in mind that the additional process scores are not all official. BDpartial is a clinical score with real norms behind it. But the way it's written, it does not look like FWextra time, BDextra time or VPextra time are real scores (although there is an official process score called BD no time bonus, which addresses related factors).

    FWIW, although I'm not quibbling with the way the extra time versions of the subtest scores are being interpreted, there actually is a clinical instrument with real norms that could have picked up/accounted for some of the impact of processing speed on timed tasks. The WISC-V Integrated has analogous subtests for several of the WISC-V subtests, such as a 50% extended time version of Figure Weights (Figure Weights Process Approach), and a motor-free analog of Block Design (Block Design Multiple Choice). (No hint of timing questions for your DC's Arithmetic score, but that subtest also has a 50% extended time version, as well as a couple of other clinical versions. I'm guessing, if anything, it was working memory that impacted this subtest--addressed by some of the alternate administration conditions.)

    I'm also a bit curious about what the VECI subtests were, since that's an 11 point drop between just Si-Vo and Si-Vo-In-Co. Especially since there are noises about further evaluation by speech and language, and there are differences between the receptive and expressive language demands of those subtests, as well as in their relationship to knowledge vs reasoning skills.

    Your neuropsych could also have administered some retrieval fluency tasks themselves, actually, on the WISC-V. The Naming Speed Index is a pair of rapid naming tasks. But if a s/l eval is going to be completed, someone else can assess for those skills too.

    BTW, one of the reasons the VSI may have been lower than you were expecting (in addition to impacts of visual-motor speed) is that no natural ceiling was reached. You need two zero items to reach a ceiling, and only one seems to have been obtained. Remember that on the WASI, there were a few more adult-level items to go through. And on the FSIQ prediction, recall that I pointed out that the WASI cannot predict the CPI (WMI + PSI), since it has none of those tasks, which means the closest thing to a prediction would be the GAI. Even then, the WASI does not include FW (which was the lower of the two FRI subtests). So you have a number of changes going from the WASI to the WISC that might impact the reliability of the prediction.

    It occurs to me that, although DYS can make their own decisions on whether to take them into consideration, some of the clinical nonmotor indices/composites on the WISC-V might have been appropriate for someone with a DCD Dx. (These all require the WISC-V Integrated supplementary tasks.) VCI and FRI would, of course, be unaffected, but there would be the option of nonmotor VSI, GAI and FSIQ.

    ...I think I'm probably drifting off into excessively niche professional musings at this point, so I'll stop now!


    ...pronounced like the long vowel and first letter of the alphabet...
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    M
    Mali Offline OP
    Junior Member
    OP Offline
    Junior Member
    M
    Joined: Mar 2022
    Posts: 6
    I'm enjoying your musings! I swear, trying to understand some of the testing (and being unable to find/access the manuals) almost makes me want to go back to school so I could buy the manuals myself. laugh

    There's nothing special called out detailing what extended time means. The only additional comment was after the narrative on quantitative reasoning and visual spatial: "She can show the full extent of her visual spatial reasoning when given additional time." Not terribly helpful.

    Similarities - 17
    Vocabulary - 14
    Information - 13
    Comprehension - 9 (dramatic drop from the 14 in 2019 - she didn't understand the metaphors and aspects of social dynamics which are apparently considered much more advanced for 6yos so she may not have even gotten to those questions in the 2019 eval)

    She did do the D-KEFS and FAW, do any of those subtests compare to the Naming Speed Index on the WISC?
    Verbal Fluency
    Letter Fluency - 12
    Category Fluency - 4 ("... couldn't come up with names of people which significantly dampened her score." She had to come up with boys names; I don't know if it has any relevance, but our whole family and most of our friend group is primarily girls.)
    Category Switch - 11
    Cat Switch Total Switch Accuracy - 11
    1st interval 8
    2nd interval 9
    3rd interval 9
    4th interval 7 ("ability to generate words tended to flag over time")
    FAW Retrieval Fluency 109

    Her DCD/dysgraphia is "apparent not so much in typical fine motor measures, but in fine motor planning tasks when writing at the sentence level." She was slow copying sentences within a time limit, had trouble spacing a sentence to fit in a limited area, and when she had to generate her own thoughts and ideas, she was abysmally slow and struggled (FAW Executive Working Memory 66). She had solid fine motor abilities (grooved pegboard 33%ile for dominant R, 52% left; Beery VMI 120, VP 120, and MC 110). I couldn't find anything specific about when to use the integrated version, but maybe the average/above average scores were why those weren't used even though she struggles when it comes to getting the words out of her head and onto the page.

    I was actually surprised when I found that the block design subtest only had 13 questions. I had assumed there were more than that. Is there some benefit to keeping the number of questions low? Does that make it harder for kids who are closer to the age limit of the WISC to be able to get accurate scores since they have less runway?


    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Patents and Trademarks and Rights, oh my...!
    by indigo - 03/02/24 12:03 PM
    529 savings for private high school?
    by lululo4321 - 02/27/24 04:28 PM
    Finding 2e informed medical providers?
    by millersb02 - 02/27/24 05:39 AM
    Book: Gifted and Distractible (Oct 2023)
    by indigo - 02/23/24 12:15 PM
    I sent aeh a reply to an old message
    by 13umm - 02/21/24 04:11 PM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5