Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Detailed results on DD's test

Total IQ : 144
Mental age: 6 yr and 10 months
Percentile : 99%

Non-verbal IQ : 132 ('spatial insight' is the translation of the Dutch term)
abstract and concrete reasoning capacity IQ : 146

Mental ages: 6;5 and 7;3 respectively.

Subtest:
1. Mosaics: score: 12 - mental age: 7;0
2. Puzzels: score 11 - mental age: 6;3
3. Paterns: score 12 - mental age: 6;0

these subtests contribute to the non-verbal IQ

4. Categories: score: 12 - mental age: 7;7
5. Situations: score 11 - mental age: 6;11
6. Analogies: score 14 - mental age 7;4

these subtest contribute to the 'verbal' (=reasoning) IQ.

I think there is big difference in her spatial IQ and the 'resaoning' IQ and this means that I should insists that she does her eye exercises. Hopefully we will be able to see a behavioral optometrist in Spain this summer.

What I do not understand: the ceiling of the test is 150 and the standardization was performed using a sample of children from 2;3 to 7;3 years of age.
So, it looks like DD was close to the ceiling. Yet, her raw scores are far from 19. Maybe I should ask the tester...

For the rest, what do you think?

LOL Dottie! We love you!

WOW those look like great scores. I agree it looks like Raw scores and not scaled scores. I'd ask for clarification.

Dottie, don't you wish you get your hands on the test? LOL

How about IQ 144 and 99%? It the test has a standard deviation of 15 points then it's 99.8%, isn't it?

And that's the FSIQ!

Great scores!

and now I will make evident my total ignorance ...

what and how do you calculate raw and scaled scores?

I guess that you get one point for every item completed successfully.

In any case, doesn't the big difference btw the verbal and non-verbal IQs indicates some LD? In this case I think it is clear vision problems are the culprit.

What bothers me is that the tester does not even mention LD or twice exceptional in her report.

Well, at least she says DD should go to 'group 3' = grade 1 in the US. (kindergarden count as groep 1 en 2). Pity the school officials are dead against it

I will open another topic with our school hunting....

Scoring could be 0/1 or 0/1/2, for example, depending on the test. I think you take the raw scores and look up the scaled scores in a table depending on the child's age.

To get composite scores, the scaled scores are added and the totals are looked up in a table to determine the composite score.

Thanks, Dottie! That means a lot coming from you

So if I'm reading what you wrote correctly, she had 146 and 132 for her scores. Even though that's a large range, the 132 is in the gifted range. I'm not sure that would be considered an LD since it's still up there. I don't know if it would be considered an LD if it were 146 and 110.

For example, for the WISCIV, when deciding to calculate GAI, the Verbal comp and Perceptual reasoning must be within 22 points of each other in order to combine those two into one composite GAI. If they are larger than 22pts, they shouldn't calc FSIQ or GAI as it won't be an accurate reflection.

I'm new to all this so someone PLEASE correct me, if I'm heading off in the wrong direction here.

Some additional information - it seems indeed that we have been looking at raw data - as these are specific to each test and therefore not comparable, therefore their publication as such may have been meaning- and therefore pointless.

More interesting are the processed data, read IQ estimates - and the variance thereof, pointing to some bias caused by DD's visual problems - which, once corrected, should push the total a bit further, well beyond the three sigma already touched now...

On the other hand, I have some doubt about the reliability of any scoring methods beyond plus two sigma, as the statistical evidence gets thin.

But all this distracts from the real issue at hand - how to organise proper schooling for DD.

(posted by Isa's hubby)

Yes, I don't think you'll find anyone here who's a big fan of the tests we have for HG+ kids. They're just not designed for use that far out in the tail of the curve!