Join Date: May 2009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Mom to a teenager and a middle schooler.
Her Working Memory and Processing Speed scores were much lower than her PRI and VCI scores (one was a 29 point difference) but still considered average according to the tester.
|So I know that the GAI is sometimes taken into consideration for entrance into gifted programs, but can it be compared to WIAT-II results for diagnosing learning disabilities? If so, how much of a point difference is considered significant?|
Is she in school? If so, could you ask the SN/resources teacher if a district psychologist could analyze the results for you?
Is there a supervisor to the tester? If so, you could graciously ask for their analysis.
The other thing is that it could be a matter of maturity. It's easy when reading here to think that gifted kids are universally able to do all things, across the board, at an early age. But that's part of asynchrony - perhaps her motor skills/hand-eye coordination/heavy reading load skills aren't properly lined up with some of her other abilities and a bit of time will allow the lagging areas to catch up.
I don't know if WISC assesses Visual Spatial; we used the Stanford-Binet. Some of this sounds like it may be VS issues, and with time many VS's develop standard skill sets. DS is highly VS and we noticed a real jump at 7-7.25 in his standard skills.
Have you read The Mislabeled Child, by the Eides? It's a very good read regarding subtle, and not so subtle, variations.
Now that I have a little more time, I'll answer a little more extensively . If I could get it to link, I'd just link that report for you, but if you google "wisc technical report #4," like I mentioned above, the first link will give you a PDF that you can download. A score discrepancy of that size should warrant using a GAI. My eldest had about a 26 or 27 pt difference and they calculated a GAI. Her WMI, PRI, and VCI were all in the mid-upper 90s (percentiles) & her PSI was at the 42nd. My youngest had PRI & VCI scores at the 99th percentile and above and WMI and PSI indices at around average.
Yes, if you scroll down to page 12 and on on that technical report, you'll get tables for expected scores on the WIAT based upon the GAI. PG 16 will tell you how much the actual WIAT scores would need to differ from the predicted scores to be considered statistically significant. If the actual scores are that much below the expected scores, you can suspect a learning disability. If you need specific help trying to compare scores and figure it out, feel free to pm me. We've had some experience trying to figure this out with dd#2 who is a confusing kid and I've taken some psychological testing & assessment courses.
Just wanted to chime in on the dyslexia concern. Your concern seems valid. There is a great yahoo group for dyslexia. I am constantly recommending it--so I apologize if I have already given you the link.
I have liked "reading reflex" (a book you can find at your library) But, ABeCeDarian is supposed to be similar and is more laid out. Here is their yahoo group. http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...guid=215953130
If my dd wasn't progressing with this, I would be looking into the Susan Barton program. It is a bit expensive for us though so we are trying the above first. After using the assessments in the back of the reading reflex book, I was able to work on my dd's weak areas and saw tremendous improvement.
And, of course, it has to be mentioned. . . has she had a recent eye exam by someone who could diagnose such things as tracking problems, etc. I believe you are looking for a developmental optometrist?
So I went by her GAI score and used that to find her predicted score on the WIAT.
You are looking for a statistical significance of at least .05 which means that there is only a 5% chance that the occurance was purely chance or error. If her scores were different enough from the predicted scores to reach that .05 level, that would indicate that in 95% of the instances when that happened, it was due to an actual issue. If you are at .01 statistical significance, then there is only a 1% chance that the score difference was error or chance.
On the subtests she was:
- 9 points less on the Numerical Operations than predicted she should
This does not reach the .05 significance level for a 6.5 y/o
- 8 points less on the Reading Comprehension
A 7 point difference is at the .05 significance level, so this is definitely something that would raise a red flag for me.
- 14 points less on Pseudoword Decoding
This is huge. A 7 point discrepency would be at the .01 significance level.
- 10 points less on Math Reasoning
Again, this is one point more of a difference than would be needed for the .05 significance level. I'd also be concerned here.
On the Composite Scores she was:
- 12 points less on Reading
7 points is all that is needed for .01 significance, so this should certainly warrant further testing for a reading LD.
- 11 points less on Math
This reaches the .05 significance level, but not quite the .01 level. This is still enough of a difference to be of concern, though. It just appears that reading is more of the issue & I wonder if a vision or reading issue may have affected all of her scores on parts where she had to do pencil & paper tasks or read instructions. I don't know how much reading the math sections of the WIAT require if any. That could have been a confounding factor on her math scores if reading or visual acuity was necessary, though.
On all the others subtests/composites she was 2-4 points higher than predicted. And the total predicted score was only 6 points less on the WIAT than on the GAI.
Six points on the total score is still at the .05 significance level, though, so it should have raised the question of a learning disability for the tester, though.
|47 members and 16,422 guests|
|bellesmom , BirthFree , bluejanuary , chamomileflower , Crazybean , CricketVS , DahliaRW , Deborah , girlspn , happymamasallie , hillymum , imisscoffee , Iron Princess , Janeen0225 , japonica , JElaineB , kathymuggle , lalalovely , lilmissgiggles , lisak1234 , mama24-7 , mckittre , MeanVeggie , Michele123 , Mirzam , NaturallyKait , oaksie68 , plantbasedemma , RollerCoasterMama , Saladd , SandiMae , shantimama , Skippy918 , Socks , Springshowers , sren , SweetSilver , thefragile7393 , VsAngela , worthy , Xerxella , zebra15|
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 01:21 PM.|