Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Got scores, hoping for feedback

In order to obsess properly you're going to need the raw numbers.

I didn't notice the two block design numbers until very recently, they're buried somewhere in the back of the report.

This at least is clear to me! LOL!

thanks -

This is so interesting. So, do kids with attention issues generally do better on the SB, as it is un-timed?

Also, I kind of got the idea that our tester didn't want to give us any information that would encourage us toward putting him in a gifted program. For example, there is no GAI on the report she gave us. When I asked her about it, she was dismissive and said, "most programs don't take GAI". That's o.k. with me because I was paying her for more than scores; I also wanted her opinions about placement for him and other subjective thoughts. I'm going to try to get those block design scores from her and report back, though. It would be interesting.

In the meantime, can I ask an embarrassing question? The way that I understand the WISC scores is that VCI/PRI are upper brain tasks and WMI/PSI are midbrain tasks. So, when he's put to the task, his upper brain may be sort of compensating for his lower brain and that's why the full scale is a blend of both. It's as if he's being slowed down by his midbrain. Does that sound right? So, if we improve his lower brain development/skills, his upper brain will be free to work on more cognitive tasks and we might see those achievement scores improve. If that's true so far, would it follow that we might even see improvement in his VCI/PRI or is that just set?

Hmm... for the GAI, there are specific rules for when it is and isn't calculated, independent of whether a program will accept it... It's a matter of the differences being "significant and unusual", which requires some figuring. It might be worth asking her if she checked on that, as it would let you know whether you could use the GAI if you come across a program that would accept it.

I thought there needs to be specific point spread (maybe 23 pts?) between the highest and lowest scores in order to use the GAI. Let me see if I can find it... here, the full scale score must not be used if the point spread is 23 or more, but it doesn't say not to calculate the GAI if the point spread is less, at least I don't see it here (I'm glad because that wouldn't make sense). Other interesting tidbits at this link too...

http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/About_GDC/newiqtests.htm

I think Silverman's argument is interesting - I don't know if she says it quite this way, but it seems like she's saying, either use the GAI or lower the bar for admission to a gifted program to 120 for full-scale IQ.

I agree. I wonder then, whether it indeed is easier to compare FSIQs alone (whether or not the bar were to be lowered, as Silverman suggests). I think the problem lies with the fact that one single number cannot explain the scatter, and the scatter better reflects the child's needs than the single number. I wonder, perhaps, whether someone could come up with a method to quantify the importance of lower or higher processing/wm scores that makes more sense. (How are they weighted currently in the FSIQ - does that half of the test, say on the wisc - have the same weight as VCI and PRI? Or is the weight less? Has the affect on "g" by processing and WM ever been "calculated"? is there such a thing?) Maybe, LOL, they could assign a letter grade to denote the level of processing and wm, and so someone could have a 130-D or a 130-A, etc., though that doesn't quite do what I would want it to. Or maybe come up with a separate number for the other half of the test, so it gets reported in two separate numbers - GAI and processing - though I think then the temptation would be to add them together (like the old SAT) which again would give processing/wm equal weight. I can't come up with any idea that still isn't comparing apples and oranges. I guess I'm equally befuddled.

I kind of picked up from another page on the gdc site (I posted it on this thread already, I think) that the idea is to remove the speed question for most/all questions of gt *BUT* speed is important for good performance in school and other traditional settings so..?
(why not work kids this young into that speed, if their subtests which better correspond with 'g' are really nice looking? )
I am assuming that speed inevitably improves with age, and practice - but these tests are more of a statement of a 'static' percentile of speediness, right?

Not sure, 'tis be-fuddling!


Again, definitely no answers here... but I wonder if the differences between fsiq and gai come down to 'traditional' settings for iq to be apparent and 'non-traditional' settings...?
(Sorry if I ramble.)

I like that, too, Dottie. It just seems like a more well-rounded way to look at things.

Our district seems to put more stock in achie3vement testing. My DS took the WJ III and part of an IQ test. It was enough for them and enough for DYS too!

Giftedticcyhper - (GTCP???) lol

I have no idea about your son's IQ whether it's reflective of him or not, I'm not commenting on that. BUt when I read your post, it brought to mind something I read. A kid w/ a 125 IQ (again, not saying this is your son) can still be very bored in the wrong environment. It all depends on where the class is taught to and what the peers are like. I've also been told by a teacher that the top 20% of most classes, could stand to be accelerated to the next grade. So, depending on your son's school and to what level instruction is aimed, he could very well be perfectly at home in a 1st grade class. I think people get too hung up on IQ numbers and don't look at the whole child and also don't take into account the school environment. I have a friend's district where the avg IQ is about 115-120 or so due to demographics and so their curriculum is always a good half year to year ahead of ours. Plus their cutoff is 5months earlier than ours so the kids are 6months older! that makes a huge difference in curriculum.

In my son's case, you might look at his IQ scores and think, hhmm, he just needs a little differentiation. Well, our district is not known for his critical thinking at the elementary level...more reminds of a factory. My son thrives on critical thinking and being stretched. I don't think accelerating him a grade level would have done much good...it would have been slightly higher content but delivered in the exact same way. he needed DIFFERENT. So not saying this is what is going on with your child, but just to emphasize, don't let them get hung up on his IQ score...afterall, it might not be an accurate reflection of him. And if he's been underchallenged and is losing his spark, you're not going to get stellar achievement scores either.

My friend's DD has ADHD and for her food dyes send her climbing the walls. Unfortunately, the diet that works for her is difficult for her mom to stick to for the whole family.

I've read some kids get skipped a grade and then are comfortable near the top and are happy the rest of their school lives.

I agree w/ Kriston to look at the options. If you can convince them of the skip and it doesn't work and he doesn't want to go back to K but to HS, and that is OK with you - what you do have to lose by trying?