These are the scores from the Ability-Achievement Discrepancy Analysis Predicted Method section of the report. The first number is the Predicted WIAT-III Score, the second number was his actual WIAT-III Score, then the spread/Difference and lastly she put a Y or N to note if it was a "Significant
Difference"

WIAT-III Subtest
Listening Comprehension 136 135 1 N
Reading Comprehension 134 160 -26 Y*
Math Problem Solving 134 160 -26 Y*
Sentence Composition 129 155 -26 Y*
Word Reading 126 145 -19 Y*
Pseudoword Decoding 121 136 -15 Y*
Numerical Operations 131 160 -29 Y*
Oral Expression 134 152 -18 Y*
Oral Reading Fluency 123 152 -29 Y*
Spelling 129 154 -25 Y*

WIAT-III Composite
Oral Language 139 148 -9 N
Total Reading 131 156 -25 Y*
Basic Reading 123 150 -27 Y*
Reading Comprehension and Fluency 136 160 -24 Y*
Written Expression 129 154 -25 Y*
Mathematics 136 160 -24 Y*
Math Fluency 136 141 -5 N
Total Achievement 139 158 -19 Y*

Good to know that these discrepancies are not something we need to really pay attention to. I just saw these flagged as "significant" and was wondering if it indicted anything we should be worrying about/focusing on. Your explanation was fantastic - thanks for that.

The biggest reason we got these tests done was to figure out where/if he might need subject acceleration at school. At the recent parent-teacher interviews the teacher suggested he may be cheating or looking at the answers at the back of the book because he was writing down the answers to math problems without showing his work. He said it was because he could figure them out easily in his head and I felt I needed to bring some "proof" to the school to advocate for more of a challenge. He is in his first year at a gifted charter school (grade 5), so I was somewhat surprised to hear this comment and thought maybe he was still not being challenged enough - even in an advanced school - thus the testing to see where his strengths may be. The school has not really provided "grades" as such so far this year, as most of his work has been integrated project work and when we asked how he was doing in individual subjects, the teacher said it was hard to tell and used that example of writing down the math answers so quickly.

So, while it would be interesting to ask for the raw scores, and see how things would look with the extended data, I don't know that we need them for anything formal at this time. I am really hoping to use these results (from WIAT) to meet with the school and come up with a plan - even within this designated gifted school - to make sure he is not still bored.

The school was also saying they had some concerns about autism or ADHD, so we had all of that tested for at this time as well - using: the Connors behavior rating scale, the Connors Executive Functioning Inventory, Autism Spectrum Rating Scale, and that the CPT 3 and CATA, and the Cognitive Assessment System 2 ,CAS2.

DSM-5 criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder yielded a T-score
of 48 (90% CI = 45-51), which is ranked at the 42nd percentile and falls in the Average Score range.

Additionally, the clinical interview and behavioral observations did not support the diagnosis of ADHD. He was able to focus during both the continuous performance test and
achieved an excellent level of attention on the CAS2.

I will be also bringing these findings to the school and hopefully this will also help! My suspicion is that the energetic behaviors, etc that the school was saying were autism or ADHD were due to (still) boredom with the level of curriculum, and this was supported by the psychologist who administered these tests.

Anyway - thanks for listening!! This place is such a great resource.