Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-V - question about FRI/VCI discrepancy

My daughter was recently evaluated with the WISC V and WIAT III for her school's gifted program. Her FRI was 134 (99th%), while her VCI was 100 (50th%). FSIQ was 122. Should FSIQ have been calculated due to this 34 point discrepancy? We were surprised as she's an avid reader who's consistently been reading above grade level- she's also shy and anxious so wondering if that affected verbal scores. They do not recommend her for the gifted program (IQ requirement is 130). We are wondering if we should appeal and/or get her retested (she was so stressed about the evaluation, so I'd rather not go through that!). Her WIAT scores were superior/very superior in math and high average/superior in reading comp.

Sure.
For VCI: similarities (11); vocab (9); information (10)
For FRI: matrix reasoning (16) and figure weights (16)
Visual Spatial: block design (14)
Working memory: digit span (13)
Processing speed: either symbol or coding was given, report is unclear (12)
Thanks!

It's not so much that the FSIQ should/should not have been calculated, as that it doesn't fully capture her range of abilities. How were her other index scores (if they were calculated--if not, if you don't mind sharing her subtest scores, I may be able to comment on her overall profile)?

Anxiety can affect any scores, however, her achievement score profile does back up the piece of the cognitive profile you reported, which suggests that, even if there was some underestimation, the FRI > VCI probably represents a genuine cognitive difference, rather than purely anxiety (which one would expect to have wider-ranging effects, or to affect math, working memory, or processing speed more). Reading in the HA/S range, though definitely above grade level, is not necessarily in the GT range for reading. (Though her math scores are excellent.)

How are her writing skills?

Thanks. It also appears that more subtests could have been given, but here's what I have:
Similarities (11); Vocabulary (9); Information (10); Matrix Reasoning (16); Figure Weights (16); Block Design (14); Digit Span (13); and either symbol or coding (report wasn't clear; but said score was 12).

As for her writing, her teacher reports she is one of the strongest writers in the class and she scored "advanced" on her most recent writing benchmark (but I don't know the actual score). Last year she was pulled out of class for writing enrichment because she was advanced beyond her classmates (at a different school than she's at now).

Yes, more subtests could have been given. A LOT more subtests. But the main ones that would have been nice to have would have been the remaining VS (Visual Puzzles), WM (Picture Span), and PS subtests (Symbol Search). For GT qualification purposes, though, the seven she was given are usually all that are recommended, as FSIQ, GAI, VCI, and FRI can be derived from them.

Her profile is strongest in abstract thinking, nearly as strong in visual spatial (though it's hard to tell if this may have been affected by her slightly slower processing speed, since the one subtest given has bonus points for speed), also decent in auditory working memory, and average in verbal and processing speed. The VCI relative weakness is pretty consistent across all of the VC subtests, and distinct from the stronger performance in almost all of the other areas, which suggests that it is a real difference.

Good to hear she does well in writing. I expect she is using her high abstract thinking and reasoning skills to drive her reading and writing achievement, because her actual verbal comprehension ability is distinctly lower than the other areas. The best composite indicator of her overall ability would probably be the Nonverbal Index, which would require administration of a few more subtests (Visual Puzzles, Picture Span). Given the BD and Cd scores, though, she would really have to hit it out of the park on these two subtests to make it above 130 on her NVI.

More importantly, her profile suggests that you may wish to keep an eye on the possibility of subtle language-based learning disabilities (twice exceptional GT/LD, in this case) revealing themselves in the future. At the moment, she appears to be functioning rather well, but the curve does spread more as you move up through the grades.

I do believe that the FRI conceptualizes her ability the best, but in terms of GT program eligibility, there probably is not a high likelihood of benefit from re-testing. Unless they accept the Ravens or NNAT-2 as qualifying cognitive measures. (Two tests that play to her strengths.)

Oh, and I'm assuming that she's a native speaker of English, living in an immersive English environment. If that is not the case, then it would not be as strange for her VCI to be a bit of a low estimate, even with her reading and writing as strong as they are, especially if she's young.

Thank you! This is all so helpful. She took the NNAT in the fall as an initial screener, and scored a 118. Is this surprising given her high FRI score? It's just not adding up for me. I'm particularly stuck on the low verbal score since she's always been an extremely voracious reader, reading multiple books at the same time, and has been 1-2 years above grade level since K (until this year where she seems to be just at or just above grade level according to teacher; which seems to comport with your note about the gap potentially widening over time). The school will consider other criteria for gifted beyond IQ- meeting with them next week to see if worth pursuing as I do want to make sure her high math abilities are nurtured. Thanks so much for your insight, and I'd welcome any more thoughts you have on this.

She is a native English speaker living in an immersive English environment. Her grandparents are bilingual/ESL, but 99% of the time she's immersed in an English speaking environment.