So I spoke with someone else at the school about my dd today and was told they have never allowed a child into the program who did not meet the specific criteria of the rubric no matter what other attributes the child possess, that the appeals is used more if there is a testing error. So in researching today I came across an article that states:
"Dr. Linda Silverman also highly recommends the use of tests with higher ceilings to reduce ceiling effects. The situation occurs when a student obtains one or more subtest scores at the 99th percentile; then the composite score is actually well below the student's capabilities"
On the Inview test my dd did get a 99 in one of the subtest, so is it fair to argue her results are not accurate? The article goes on to say:
"The major problem encountered in assessing the gifted is ceiling effects. Most people are unaware of the extent to which low test ceilings can depress IQ scores in the gifted range."
I feel that is a valid point on why her score is invalid and likely much higher than what is represented on her report.
Anyone have luck with proving the ceiling effect did impact their child's score or any articles to share on this that may help?
We are meeting on Tuesday, but I truly feel unless I can get them to accept her score may be inaccurate we are stuck for the next two years until they retest the kids. I was feeling very defeated after our phone call this morning, but finding this information has given me a little silver lining.
On a side note I am horrified by how little the people we are speaking with know about the test they are giving. Nobody has yet to be able to tell me why her CSI score is lower that what would be typical of a score in the 98th percentile. One answer was the sections must be weighted differently which is lowering the score another said they would have to read through the book and get back to me. I think they should be well informed on the test they are using.
Polarbear and Portia especially come to mind.