Also, a related question on the WJ -- in general, do kids usually score their age equivalent or higher on the WJ ? I am not asking from a grade-skip perspective ; I am asking more from the perspective of some enrichment in class. Should I even be asking for this (the report does recommend that his abilities be taken into consideration), given his low processing speed ?
In general, children score in a range around their age equivalent. The distance in age equivalents from the average child's performance is quite variable in terms of skill differences, as different skills have different growth curves and different ages. For instance, word attack (phonetic decoding) has a very steep developmental curve in the early elementary ages, when children are learning to read. By the time you reach early adolescence, the vast majority of children have plateaued in terms of word attack, and are just working on broadening their vocabulary. So a one or two age equivalent difference can be huge when you are seven years old, but is really rather negligible at age 14. To look at enrichment, I would actually prefer the RPI, a score which looks like #/90, where the first number is this child's RPI for this task, and the /90 represents 90% mastery in the index population (age, in this case). This is an indication of the difficulty level. If a child scores above 90/90 (95/90 is the technical cut-off), this predicts that they would find quite easy tasks that the average child performs at a mastery level (90% accurate). These do not always vary at the same rate as the SS or age equivalent, though they will all line up right at the population mean (SS 100, AE = your child's age, RPI 90/90).
This may be more information than you were looking for.
So, yes, block design was lower than the other 2. How did you infer this ?
Block Design is a hands-on timed task, unlike the other two PRI subtests, which are neither timed nor hands-on. My experience with students with low PSI, especially if fine motor is a suspected issue, is that the loss of bonus points for speed (i.e., a child who may be slow but accurate) artificially lowers the BD scaled score. When it is sufficiently marked, I sometimes substitute, or supplement the interpretation, with the extra Picture Completion subtest, which is timed, but motor-free.
...he does very well on fluency based tests. However, he is very slow with classroom work. For example, if there is a page on math and if he has to color bears (who have numbers on them) (for example) based on the result of the math problems -- he takes very little time to solve the math question; it takes him forever to color the appropriate numbered bear. For most kids, if anything, it would take them much longer to do the math, than to color. He does do much better with a timer, though sometimes he does get stressed out with the timer.
Do you mean that he does well with fluency when the responses are oral, motor, written, or some combination thereof? Your example suggests that his retrieval fluency is good (oral recall of math facts), but that his written fluency is not (even for a nonsymbolic task like coloring). The coloring story and the high matrix reasoning score together suggest that it is more of a motor issue than a visual or perceptual issue.
So, piecing together various parts of the report, should I be requesting the school for an OT assessment ? Or should I be pursuing this on my own (through a private OT practice)?
You may pursue OT assessment through either avenue. Just make sure that future assessors have access to past testing, so they don't just give him another VMI (aka Beery) (sans subtests), and call it a day. You want to see the BOT, or some such.
The neuropsych was iffy on dysgraphia as he has legible writing, but I still wonder about it sometimes.
As you should. Some children generate legible handwriting at great cost to effort and attention, which can detract significantly from their ability to generate, in particular, quality written language products.
Also, regarding the writing test, the neuropsych evaluated his writing on the WJ and found it superior (but that was mostly spelling which he excels at, as well as some writing prompt that was super easy for him)
I was actually expecting something similar to the Test of Written Language to be administered; should I be requesting this of the school instead ?
Yes. The WJ is one of my least favorite writing assessments. The only really good thing about it is the writing fluency subtest. (I guess I find value in the phoneme/grapheme knowledge subtest, too, but so few examiners administer it that it's benefits are rarely felt.) The written expression tasks are very limited, requiring only a few words in response, especially at this age. Please hunt down someone to give him the TOWL-4, or the writing portion of the PAL-2, which would actually be my top choice for a child of this age.
