Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WIAT-III testing - trimester for "scoring"?

DS 7y 9m was given the WIAT-III on July 31. The report I was given appears to be generated by Pearson. In the header, it lists his grade as "3" and right above the Subtest Score Summary it says "Grade Based Scores: Trimester: Spring".

So here's what I'm unclear about, and I asked the tester, and tried Googling a bit, but are his scores based on "Spring" as in the standards at the end of the spring BEFORE 3rd grade, or at the END of 3rd grade?

It seems like if it was testing him against what he'd be expected to know at the beginning of 3rd grade, that would be "Fall" not "Spring"?

For practical purposes, I'm not sure it matters because all his scores are firmly "average" (and he skipped a grade, so they would probably be "above average" for his "real" grade), but I'm girding for a likely uphill battle to convince the school to provide dyslexia support and I want to make sure I have all the details nailed down. "Average" will probably look great to them! BUT his standard scores are still well below where they "should" be based on his WISC.

ETA: Oops. Just read your other post. If he's entering third grade, he should have been scored on the Grade 2: Spring norms. Deleting the non-relevant portions below.

July should be considered the spring of the previous grade level. E.g., if enrolled in grade three during the 2016-2017 school year, a test administered in July of 2017 should be scored using the Spring Grade 3 norms. The same test administered in August 2017 should be scored using Fall Grade 4 norms.

(deleted) However, aptitude-achievement discrepancies are always supposed to be calculated using age norms. (deleted) And the score summary would not say anything about grade-based scores at any time of year; it would say "Age Based Scores". Also, in order to do the discrepancy, the examiner would need access to WISC scores obtained within 6 months of the WIAT scores. (And I should note that the field continues to have discussions about the appropriateness of using aptitude-achievement discrepancies for identifying specific learning disabilities.)

If your school district uses a different model of identifying learning disabilities, (RTI/dual-discrepancy, pattern of strengths and weaknesses, etc.) then the appropriate norms used for purposes of disability eligibility may be different.

Thanks aeh! I only have preliminary copies of the report and the tester said he also had an age-based report which I expect might be included in the final report--but the tester is going on vacation and I won't get it for 10 or 12 weeks.

I expect his scores will come out higher on the age-based norms.

The WISC-V was administered the same day as the WIAT-III. The preliminary results sheet I got also listed scores for the BEERY, CTOPP-2, and NEPSY-II.

A close reading of the state's booklet suggests age-based norms should be used, though it's only mentioned in one tiny place. There was an IQ-scores discrepancy table, but it only listed IQs up to 125, so even that was of limited usefulness in this case. >:|

So on further consideration of your other post, another possible reason that you have scores based on grade three norms is so that additional written expression evaluation could be completed (specifically essay composition, which is a measure of open-ended/extended writing, vs contrived sentence-level writing). I would also expect scores to be higher on age-based norms.

ETA: oh, and oral reading fluency also won't show up on the age scores. I hope he did alphabet writing fluency (grade k-2 only), as that allows for a written expression composite at age level, and also may expose additional deficits in writing automaticity.