polarbear - yes his PSI was 9th%tile and his WMI was 63rd%tile. That is interesting about the dysgraphia.
Whether or not it's dysgraphia, I think it is important to understand why the PSI score was so low relative to the other scores. Same with the WM scores, but definitely with the PSI.
I'm also curious if there is any chance retesting might result in a higher score if he had answered something for that part instead of going off on a tangent.
I had emailed the psychologist that did the testing and she said that the odds of his score changing were extremely slim to none and said not to retest.
Honestly, I'd want to do further testing not for the higher score, but to understand the scores you have. I'm not sure you need to *retest* but might instead need to add in a few additional types of tests to help understand why his PSI scores were so low. They aren't just relatively low, 9th percentile is truly a low score. It's possible it was nothing - maybe he didn't attend to the task or whatever - but you need to know if it *is* something that is impacting the scores because chances are - if it is - it is also going to eventually impact him academically if it's not understood and either remediated or accommodated/etc.
There was nothing in the original report regarding the low picture concepts. There was lots on the low working memory and processing speed.
What did the report say about the low working memory and processing speed?
Best wishes,
polarbear
