Good point on the working memory and processing speed. I had to go back and dig to find the paperwork (i only remembered the highest # off the top of my head which was the GAI), but it shows:
FSIQ-128; PRI - 131; VCI - 128; WM- 113 and PSI (processing) - lowest at 109.

So definitely lower, but, again, enough to have such a low NNAT?

When DS took the WISC-IV, I literally gave him no heads up whatsoever...I did not optimize his rest, pre-test meal (none!), or otherwise make him comfy cozy. DS did complain a little bit that there was music in the background and that he had to 'turn the music off in his brain'. The doc did confirm there was background music the whole time, at a very low low level...and even offered to re-test in 6 months if DS felt distracted, but really, I didn't see the point..seemed unlikely to have a big impact, IMO, and more importantly, scores indicated to me what i needed to know- he did ok enough to suggest he would not struggle academically by skipping a grade.

I see the difference between high achiever and 'gifted' in my own kids, which is why I am questioning the NNAT in DS's case, and what could cause it to be so low. Oldest DD showed similar traits (early reader, got concepts easily, etc. though not as rapidly as DS) and had similar but slightly higher scores (139 GAI on WISC-IV and a 145 OLSAT when she applied to a magnet school at age 10..they also gave her the NNAT as an initial screener and it was 94). Her WM was higher than DS though on WISC-IV (129). My second DD is a high achiever (straight A's) but never exhibited the classic signs - not an early reader, curious but not intensely so, etc., really works to learn new concepts, etc. and I've never had her tested.

Who knows, maybe DS was 'out of sync', and a little ahead at age 6, and not now that he is 8. But he's still an avid reader (a good two hours a night); jumps on Khan academy for fun (not far ahead, just working through 4th grade math); will still work through a huge lego set alone and voraciously for hours unassisted, and has yet to have to 'review' or 'study' anything to understand it. That 69 doesn't match up with that profile, though clearly I'm not objective about the situation.

Last edited by catova; 03/13/15 05:38 PM.