Does anyone know if it means anything that my daughter's WIAT test results are much higher than predicted by the WISC?

Her FSIQ - 134, with a lower processing speed
WIAT Math = 160 (predicted 122)
Reading = 137 (predicted 120)
Written Language = 144 (predicted 118)
Oral Language = 151 (predicted 121)

I've posted before about the math, but now that I have all of the results, I am curious as to why someone might 'overperform' across the board on the achievement tests. It seems to me like the opposite would be more likely. No 2e issues or anything and she's definitely a hard worker -- maybe that's all it is? Anyone experience something similar?

Exposure to higher level material?

With the right effort and exposure it is nearly always possible to improve how well you do. There are limits to this but it doesn't seem unreasonable - especially if processing speed is depressing he FSIQ but not her WIAT (don't know the test).

IQ is the fixed-ish bit that achievement can leverage off of. Figure then that hard work and opportunity interact with IQ to get achievement results. Opportunity wouldn't just be the socie-economic stuff either, it would include how well the school meets them at their level of challenge. It seems like 3/4s of the folks here have kids who are being underchallenged at school so that would likely depress their relative achievement.

Where do these predictions come from (WISC scores predicting WIAT) scores?

At some point somebody co-normed and correlated on the same national sample both of these tests...so there is some table or some app that you put in the WISC score and it gives you the predicted wiat.

To me this just indicates that the gai might be a better indicator...I bet if you stuck the gai in the magic predictor app the adjusted scores would have had better predictive value

tortuga, my children have had the WISC but not the WIAT so I am not familiar with WISC/WIAT combo scoring or how the prediction is made. My kids have had the combination of WJ-III Cognitive + Abilities tests, which also gives a predicted measure, and with that battery the predictions are made based on different combinations of individual cognitive subtests compared against broad reading/math/writing etc achievement subtests. I suspect the same is true for the WISC/WIAT combo, and that may give a clue to why your dd's scores are "predicted" at the level they are. So basically what you want to find out (which you might find on either your dd's report or by googling or by finding someone here who's familiar with WISC/WIAT combo reporting) is which ability+achievement subtest scores went into each prediction. Once you know that there are several things to consider: is there scatter in any of the subtests, particularly on the ability testing? How/in what order is each subtest score administered? Was the WISC given before the WIAT? Is it possible that any of the testing either isn't reflective of your dd's true ability (I'm referring to *under* estimating), or is it possible that whatever caused the lower processing speed score also impacted other scores on the WISC?

The other thing I'd consider is that an FSIQ of 134 is a really high FSIQ (not DYS level, but it's greater than 98th percentile). If she has a lower processing speed, I'm guessing that looking at her GAI (takes wm and processing speed out of the calculation) might be > 99th percentile. The WIAT scores your dd have are 99th percentile except for reading which is > 98th (I think... I am actually guessing the WIAT percentiles so I might be incorrect)... so when you look at the scores from that perspective, the achievement scores seem to make sense. What doesn't fully make sense to me is why are her predicted scores lower (which is different than wondering why her actual scores are so high). Again, I suspect that the key lies in understanding what her subtest scores are and which subtests go into the "prediction" calculation.

Can you ask your dd's tester what his/her impression is re why the actual results vs predicted are different?

Best wishes,

polarbear

tortuga, I agree with many of the PP. I would suspect that in your DD's case, the WISC FSIQ alone is not a great indicator of her potential or abilities. I do not have time to look up the sources at the moment, but I've recently read cautions about simply utilizing an FSIQ to understand a child's abilities. The GAI would probably be a better measure to understand her. Also, your DD may be an one of those children who simply performs better on a SB, or other type of test.

If someone doesn't beat me to it, I can try to post sources later.

My DD's FSIQ on the WISC is 135 or 136 and her GAI is 150 (155 if you calculate extended norms). The below 100 processing speed (with a particularly bad coding score) pulled her down a lot for FSIQ. Working memory was Ok at 96th percentile. I don't understand why the WISC puts so much emphasis on processing speed as a factor of intelligence. But processing speed is not going to affect achievement that much unless the achievement test is timed. She hasn't had the WIAT so I'm not sure how she'd do.

Thanks for the thoughts Polar Bear. I will definitely follow up with the tester. I was wondering the same thing -- maybe the 'predictions' are off. They seem very low to me. Not sure what components of the WISC go into those or if it is just a correlation between the FSIQ in total.

Her subtest scores were all about the same, except for processing speed. Within those, she scored highest in Block Design and Vocabulary (17), followed by Verbal Similarities (16) and Digit Span (16). The rest were 13/14 except processing. Working memory is right up there, so I'm not sure if the GAI would be that much higher. She doesn't seem to me to be a 99.9 kid, either. But at the same time, she's my kid, so I sometimes fear I could be selling her short. I guess that is what surprised me -- her percentiles on the achievement tests:

Reading = 99
Math = >99.9
Written Language = 99.8
Oral Language = >99.9

We do math outside the curriculum so I expected that to be pretty high. But we don't do anything 'extra' per se for the rest. She reads a ton, though.

I have been cautiously thinking recently that what her teacher and I have come up with this year really is working, but as always it has taken until December to really get buy-in from the powers-that-be. We had her tested because I am growing weary of the battle. She goes to a new school next year and I was afraid that all of the hard fought credibility she (as a student) and I (as a realistic parent) have earned is going to be lost as we enter the a new system and we'll waste tons of time banging our heads against the wall. Plus I have three more kids coming down the pipeline, so I need it to get easier!

Zen Scanner -- I was thinking the same thing: maybe this is what it looks like when a MG kid gets challenged appropriately. In that case the percentiles would be more a statement how underchallenged gifted kids are across the board in this country. Given what it has taken for me to get what I want (in a friendly school system and as an educator myself), I guess that shouldn't be a total surprise. Perhaps that is the most likely scenario.

Thanks again for your thoughts everyone!

Loy58 -- I posted before seeing your reply. I would love to see those sources. That's exactly what I am trying to rule out -- am I selling her short based on FSIQ?

tortuga, fwiw, I think that sometimes it's easy to read through Davidson info and think that if a child isn't > 99.9th percentile they aren't "highly gifted" - but the reality is, a > 98th percentile FSIQ *is* a really really highly intelligent and highly capable child! JMO, but if you have a 98th percentile kid who's doing great and seems to be capable of more, I'd give the "more" to them, encourage them to shoot for the stars, and advocate like crazy to get them appropriately challenging work at school. JMO again, but I don't think that IQ as one measure in and of itself is a predictor of how far any of our children will go - personality, motivation, ability to take advantage of intellectual strengths - all of that matters in a big way.

I would personally focus on her passions, what she's interested in, and keep advocating like crazy to give her challenge within school and also give her opportunities to explore her passions outside of school.

Best wishes,

polarbear

tortuga - I do not have any knowledge about how the WISC may have been used to predict achievement in your DD's case, but I would look at it as a "bare minimum." Your DD's WISC FSIQ, remember, is still very high, but your DD has shown she may also have high motivation, curiosity, and drive. I would suggest these are also extremely important to achievement, and are not always evident on an IQ test result. Just a few things I have recently run across, that you may find interesting:

Malone - Testing Gifted

Hoagies - Why Scores Vary

Silverman - Using IQ Tests

IQ Change Over Time?

You mention she is a hard worker. Combined with that IQ, I would say she has tremendous potential - and I would see the WISC FSIQ as a bare minimum estimate of what she can do when she puts her mind to it!

OP,

Looking at all of this another way, your kid qualifies for gifted programming in most areas because the cutoff is usually 98th percentile and above. Furthermore, she is motivated and can apply her intelligence in measurable and practical ways which is seen in the stellar achievement test results.

There are a lot of people with higher IQs but lower achievement scores and in life achievement counts for far more than mere potential.

I so appreciate everyone's insight! I hope I don't sound like I am sandbagging her. I know she's very bright and that her work ethic and attitude will get her a lot farther than 'innate' ability. In large part my efforts have been about that: Making sure the work isn't too easy so she can feel the rewards of working hard and mastering challenging material. Clearly that's working and I should keep at it. I feel like I know my daughter and have a handle on things, but presented with all of this data, I am drawn to pulling it apart ten different ways just to make sure it matches up to my intuitive sense of where she is at, especially when the numbers don't exactly come out how I would expect. Everyone's comments have made that so much easier, so I really appreciate it. I guess I am also curious to see what the school's reaction is going to be to these results -- in other words, does their perception of her match up to these test scores and will they want to do anything about it? But that is a post for a different day! Thanks again!