Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Retaking WPPSI III

Hi, I'm new to this whole forum thing, but I've been reading for a few weeks and have a couple of questions that I am hoping I can get answered here. My DS10 (4th grade) took the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence III test at age 5-2m. He had the following results:

Verbal Scale:

Information 15
Vocabulary 16
Word Reasoning 16

Performance Scale

Block Design 8
Matrix Reasoning 14
Picture Concepts 16
Picture Completion 17

Scale Quotient Scores

Verbal 135
Performance 116
Processing Speed 113

Full Scale I.Q. 127

My first question is why might the block design portion be so low and how much would that throw off the full scale I.Q.

Would it be worth have him retested now to see is there has been an improvement.

He scores high on all the stadardized testing he's taken (ex. Map scores are in the mid 220 in all subjects, He scored in the 98% in his 3rd grade Illinois Standard Achievment tests, and we are waiting on the results from the explore test he just took.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Bill

Does he need a certain score for access to gifted services? Do you have concerns about possible learning disabilities? Is he having some kind of trouble at school?

The block design could have been just a fluke... by itself, I wouldn't think it is cause for concern.

If you decide to have him retested, he won't be able to do the WPPSI again anyway since it only goes up to age 6.5 (I think.) You could have him retested with the WISC-IV or Stanford-Binet V.

I think WPPSI goes to 7:2, but in any case, it is the WISC you'd need.

Before I read the rest, the low block design caught my eye right away. My dd took it at 4:6 and blocks was also her low score. Testers usually start with blocks, so maybe your ds was just warming up. That might have been the case with our dd, we really don't know.

As to how much it affects, you can perhaps sort it out since he was given the full test. You could substitute for picture completion. That would make his total scaled score for Performance 47. 47 is the total of the verbal IQ, so perhaps his performance would have also been 135, I am not sure if they do correspond like that.

For my dd, substituting the 9 she got for the 13 (4 points change) which is more in line with the rest of her non-verbal subtests, changes her Performance from 116 to 125. Her full scale jumps from 132 (98%) to 136 (99%).

Neither the tester nor us can guess what the better estimate is. I tend to think that the 9 is too low for what I see her do; but other times I am not so sure.

The 98% in the standardized tests would probably align with the IQ scores, especially with the substitution (my best guess). In that case, I see no real reason to retest. However, consider Cathy's points above.

One last thing, did the tester say anything about it? I find it interesting that he took only the 3 core verbal tests, but tester added an optional performance test. Optional subtests are usually listed between parenthesis to indicate that they are not used for score calculations.

Thank you both for your quick responce.

Cathy, we haven't had any problems with him at all, academically or in his behavior. I was just not sure if the could be a problem we were missing.

Mam, The Picture Completion portion was in parenthesis so can I use that as a replacement for the block design portion to get a better idea where is really is.

Thanks again,

Bill

My son's block design score was very low....he has dyspraxia so we were expecting to see some possible issues arise and they did....the block design number pulled his overall down. With Dyspraxia it affects fine motor coordination so he had trouble getting his fingers to do what his brain was telling him to do with the blocks. We knew the test score wasn't accurate and the tester told us as well...we retested with another test that didn't need the child to use fine motor skills...and we finally got an accurate look at DS7 :-)

I have to say that I would really put a lot more store in what you see now, than in one subtest score from a test that your DS took 5 years ago. That's a long time ago, and there are many reasons why a five-year-old might have scored lower on a particular subtest.

If you don't see anything now that gives you cause to worry, then don't. And keep in mind that how your son functions in the real world--in school and activities and at home--is far more important than whether he can arrange blocks into a given pattern within the specified time limit. Yes, testing can be useful, but it's very limited in what it can tell you.

On the other hand, if there is a reason to test--some particular concern, or you need the scores to qualify for some services, schools or programs--then test.

Let me tell you what the Block Design tests

In this subtest, a child is presented with a picture of a flat red-white design. He is to make this design out of blocks by putting together red-white blocks. The designs to make get progressively harder.

This subtest tests the ability to analyze a whole into its component parts since in order to recreate a given whole design out of individual components (blocks/squares), a child has to mentally correctly segment (cut up) the given whole design.

This subtest is very sensitive to any kind of brain damage/neurological dysfunction (I did abysmally on it as I have cerebral palsy brain damage). A child has to get that what he is actually expected to do is to mentally cut up the given picture (otherwise the task seems completely impossible and overwhelming) and once he gets it, he has to cut it up correctly and keep it all in his head. Somewhat lower performance on this subtest is in no way indicative of an organic brain problem, however, the converse (if you have an organic brain-based problem, you'll do below the 50th%ile on it) is almost always true.

I believe you did not list his Processing Speed subscores (Coding and Symbol Search) while you listed the PSI composite score. It's totally unimportant and you should never post anything you don't want on this forum, but I'll be honest, ever since getting a neuropsych. testing myself (for LD) at age 20, I became a score junkie.

P.S. I am a 25 year old girl, not gifted, and don't have any kids. I just like reading this forum.

If you are wondering about what Picture Completion (the optional subtest) assesses.

In this subtest, a child is shown a picture of a scene and he has to identify what's missing from this picture. For example, a child may be shown a picture of a volleyball game where the net is missing and he has to say that what's missing is the net. In order to do that he has to recognize that the scene is of a volleyball game, know that a volleyball game has to have a net, and of course, notice that the net is missing.

An easier item might be a picture of a mouse eating cheese and the mouse's tail is missing. The child has to identify that "what's missing is the tail". For that he has to think in the right mindset and not get frantic searching for what may be missing looking at the background, the cheese, etc.

This subtest tests several cognitive functions: an ability to recognize a whole picture from an incomplete picture, an awareness of one's environment, flexible thinking, as well as attention to detail.

While this subtest did factor into the full scale IQ on WISC III, it was relegated to a supplementary status on WISC IV (and is supplementary on WPPSI III) to pave way for a more abstract reasoning based "Picture Concepts".

Yes, you could to give you an idea. Now, to formally substitute a subtest, is not as easy as saying that one would lower the score. A tester is allowed to substitute a score if the tester somehow messed up on it; or if there was some other problem.

For you, you'd be doing it informally, and it would just give you an idea of where he'd be at.

I know that research has been done that correlates math ability to the block design subtest. As I said, since my dd scored low on that one, I am paying attention.

I would like to comment from personal experience about the Block Design and math ability correlation.

Since I am clearly deficient in Block Design and also know what my weaknesses in school and life are, I believe that a weakness in Block Design would first and most acutely be manifested in tasks like writing a paper or doing an independent project rather than in math class since it is a somewhat overwhelming undertaking requiring breaking a task into component pieces and organization. Also subjects like history and literature (especially the more difficult books) which are broad and require synthesizing information in order to make sense, appreciate, and enjoy would be effected.

Math in earlier grades is more reliant on abstract reasoning and "Matrix Reasoning" which is figuring out and completing visual patterns would correlate far more with math performance than Block Design. Only in higher math like Calculus and beyond would a deficit in Block Design ability be an insurmountable detriment. Block Design assesses simultaneous processing rather than sequential processing.