Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment WISC-IV low comprehension scores for gifted child

My daughter grade skipped Kindergarten based on TEKS scores and we later decided to have her tested with the WISC-IV because of inconsistent CoGat scores. She received the following scores on the WISC-IV (tested at 6 years 1 month) about a year ago.

VCI 121
PRI 137
WMI 120
PSI 136
FSIQ 137

Raw Score/Scaled Scores are as follows

Similarities 17/15
Vocabulary 26/15
Comprehension 13/11
(Information) 12/13

Block Design 22/13
Picture Concepts 17/22
Matrix Reasoning 22/19

Digit Span 13/12
Letter-Number Sequencing 15/15
(Arithmetic) 17/15

Coding 62/17
Symbol Search 34/16

The examiner found issues with comprehension, which also showed up in CoGat scores and TPRI testing. She started reading when she was 3 years old and can phonetically attack almost any word. The issue turned out to be that while she could read everything perfectly, she did not understand meanings of the words and therefore was missing a lot of the comprehension questions. At the first of school year, she missed almost half of the comprehension questions on the TPRI testing including all of the implied questions. Once we discovered the problem, we were more diligent about defining words and she is starting to overcome this stumbling block. At the end of Second Grade (just turned 7), she was reading at 165 WCPM and finally hit 100% across the board on the comprehension questions.

Has anyone else run into a similar issue? I know that high VCI is more typical for gifted kids on the WISC-IV but are there any other instances on lower comprehension gifted children?

Oops, you are absolutely correct. Picture Concepts was off.

Picture Concepts 17/16

First Grade CogAT is as follows taken when DD was 5, already grade skipped.

National Age Scores (Stanine/Percentile Rank)

Verbal 6/71
Quantitative 7/87
Nonverbal 8/96
Composite 8/91

Ability Profile 7B(N+)

She did qualify for GT because of a lower threshold at her school. Kids qualify for gifted services with 85% (verbal or qualitative and non verbal based on CogAT), plus there is a matrix that incorporates parent and teacher recommendations as well.

I know she was the #1 ranked student in 1st Grade, but have not received rankings for 2nd Grade yet.

On the 1st Grade CogAT, there may have been two contributing factors to the lower score. The teacher had told me that she was only allowed to read each question once (the kids did not have a copy of the questions�only the answers) and if the child was not paying attention when she was reading, they would miss the question. The second factor was that my DD5 was always placed sitting next to behavioral problem children because she would do what she was supposed to be doing instead of joining in with the problem kids.

I've come across a similar issue. Although my scores were both high in the comprehension area and word attack, my IQ was average and the visual part was very low. About the Asperger's remark on one of your other posts: there are kids that I know in my class who scored extremely poor on comprehension, yet are probably highly gifted. It seems puzzling, but it makes perfect sense that you could be poor at comprehending the meaning of the passage, but you are find with the word. I hope this helps any, Dottie!

Do you think it would be in my DD�s best interest to retest and try to hit qualification for Davidson Young Scholar Program? On the WISC-IV at 6.1 years, DD tested gifted with FSIQ 137, but examiner said she didn�t push and based on feedback in the results meeting, she suspected that DD�s IQ was higher. For example, DD knew how to do all math problems on the page presented, but she chose the easy way out and attempted only about half and the examiner did not push. (The examiner made the mistake of asking her what she was comfortable doing.) DD went in cold to the PhD that tested her, so the tester had no preconceived notions of what to expect. I did note on the sign up that I thought DD may be gifted, but nothing else. I think DD has come a long way verbally and with comprehension (her prior weakness), which I feel will raise her overall FSIQ. In addition, on the Block Design, examiner stated that DD was just not interested and she did not push because she was trying to maintain the casual relationship. One of the findings from the exam was that the examiner believed that DD did not like to be pushed and she tended to hold back whenever she was not 100% certain of the correct answer. This was an accurate assessment, and I teamed up with DD�s teachers to encourage DD to answer all questions and try all things even if she wasn�t sure�it is okay to be wrong. She has come a long way and grown so much in a year. After hanging out and reading about other people�s experiences, I suspect that she is even more gifted than the prior test shows.

We did not do any type of test preparation the last time. I know they say that IQ tends to stay within about a 10 point variance and I was wondering if that was accurate based on actual experience. Has anyone retested who can share their experience?

My dd9 retested on the WISC-IV one year after her first test and came out 20 points lower. Her first score was very high, though with a 99.7th percentile on verbal and 99th on PRI. She is a very erratic child, though, and I'm not sure that either score is a true representation of her. I'm assuming that she is gifted at this point b/c both GAIs were gifted, but how gifted, I really don't know.

Recognize that once you're in the GT range, the error bars on scores tend to get pretty broad, so some amounts of "fluff" are quite normal.

Violet, Comprehension is very commonly a low score for Asperger's kids -- it has nothing to do with listening comprehension or reading comprehension, but rather, it's about knowledge of basic social rules, like what the right thing to do is in certain circumstances or why people act in certain ways. A high Comprehension doesn't prove that a kid doesn't have AS, nor does a low score prove that they do, but it's something that often goes with it.

Similarities is also sometimes low for AS kids, but again, nothing is proof one way or the other.

The factor structure of the WISC is rather funky, and I suspect that you're running into it. They claim it's a verbal vs. nonverbal split, but what it's really more like a split between crystallized intelligence (stuff you know, primarily tested on the VC side) and fluid reasoning (ability to solve novel problems, primarily tested on the PR side). Some GT kids (who are commonly perceived as "high verbal") are seen as GT because they know a lot, and they tend to have VC > PR. Some GT kids don't know as much stuff, but are really good at figuring things out, and they tend to have VC < PR. But the PR factor is complicated by Block Design's heavy load on visual-spatial skills and speed. So it's a bit of a mess. Key thing is to understand that the name of a test or subtest may not mean what you think it means (or even what the test publisher claims it means).

Thanks Dottie, Violet, Cricket2, and Aimie Yermish. I appreciate the feedback. My DD will take 3rd Grade CogAT in the fall and I will wait to see the results before I decide on further testing.

Aimie, you had some interesting remarks. The WISC IV examiner told me that she had never seen anyone with the processing speed of my DD. The examiner said on one test designed as a two minute test that my DD finished with 40 seconds to spare. (I think she hit the ceiling on that test.) The examiner went on to say that she could not turn the pages fast enough, so DD totally took over the test. I think DD�s math scores were depressed, because the examiner asked her what she wanted to do, so she took the easy way out. Based on the worksheet given, DD was fully capable of doing all the problems that were included on the written math test...she just decided that she did not want to do them. On another portion of the test, the examiner said that DD would give her lots of information with details, but then not answer the question. I think that is what lowered her comprehension score.

I was surprised about the block design though�my DD would work puzzles all the time when she was 2-3 years old (left to right, right to left, top to bottom, and bottom to top) and could put together a 100 piece puzzle in less than 10 minutes and is a whiz with all the Think Fun puzzles. May have been test fatigue.

The other factor that may have depressed scores is the fact that my DD is an early bird. She is up at 5:00 a.m. in the morning and typically lulls a little in the afternoon. The test was given at 1:30 p.m. which was the only time that this particular examiner gave this type of test.

Again, thanks for the feedback! This forum is totally amazing! I wish I had found it about 6 years ago!

I did not receive a separate score on math, other than the arithmetic subtest. I know it was a single page and there was everything from simple addition to triple digit addition and subtraction on it (DD was 6.1 years old), although she told the tester that she only wanted to do the 2 digit math questions and therefore the examiner circled the problems she wanted her to do that matched that criteria.

You may be on to something with the speed thing. DD does have a tendency to rush through what she is doing. For example at school this year, she lost over 100 grade point total for not putting her name on her papers and additional points for leaving blanks. The teacher said that she jumped on any assignment immediately with intensity and excitement that is very rare for kids her age. (However, teacher also had a fun station in back of the room for kids to play at when they finished their work. Unfortunately, I did not find out about this until the last quarter!) My DD just didn't seem to grasp the importance of careless mistakes, which may be some sort of maturity issue (or maybe an absentminded professor mentality).

I also did not realize that they gave the block test first. Tester was an hour away and DD fell asleep in the car and I had to wake her up right before the testing began. This gets more and more interesting.

I also edited out the requested information on the prior post. Thank you for your feedback.

Yes, despite the name, the Arithmetic subtest is really just designed to see how well you can hold and manipulate information in memory. The actual math is quite easy for the most part. Whatever was on paper must have been a different test altogether, probably the WIAT or the WJ-Ach.

Giving details but not getting at the heart of the question is another common problem in Asperger's.

Note that if a timed subtest is finished extra-fast, they get bonus points for speed, even if there are errors. So there may have been quite a lot of errors.

In any case, one would hope that the tester will interpret the data thoughtfully for you.