Please help! Re Stanford Binet V

[bigmomabiglove]

My son was tested using Stanford Binet V. He's 4 years old but the tester used the module for a 5 year old. He got 108 but subtest scores were varied, some were high and some were low. The results were yet to be explained as several tests are still to be administered. My question is, was the 108 score his real score given that what was administered was that for a five year old? My son just turned 4. I have him tested because I suspect him to be 2E, or at least has some learning disabilities. Kindly enlighten me. Thanks! :)

[EKS]

I would find out what the "module for a 5 year old" means.  My understanding of the SB5 is that it is a continuous, single test.  But I could be wrong.

 

As for the 2E thing, when my son was tested at 7, his FSIQ was below 100.  I spent much too much energy worrying about that score, and why my impression of him was so different.  Five years later, after much therapy and remediation, his GAI (the business end of a WISC IQ score) was 40+ points higher, and absolutely in line with what I knew to be true about him.

 

My point here is that, frankly, there is no such thing as a "real score."  He is not defined by his IQ score, and IQ scores can change over time (as my son's did).  If you think there are 2E issues, you are probably right.  Your job is to remediate the disabilities as much as possible while, at the same time, helping him run with his strengths.  

Edited June 26, 2017 by EKS

[kbutton]

Usually IQ tests are continuous as EKS said. Maybe the person administering the test scored him as if he's five (used norms developed by testing tons of 5 year olds, and compared his results to that). I have no idea why though. That would be pointless. Sometimes, achievement tests (which are NOT IQ tests) are given out of level, but only certain kinds of achievement tests (Examples: Taking the SAT or ACT early, giving a 5th grader a 7th grade achievement test if they have previously been scoring really high on grade-level assessments, to see if they can get a more accurate picture of actual performance). A psychologist running an achievement test usually runs tests that are NOT dependent on grade level. Usually schools do the grade-level dependent tests.

 

IQ is a funny thing--there are lots of reasons a test can be invalidated or considered an estimate, particularly with a four year old. I absolutely think IQ testing can be worth it, but it's not without error.

 

I hope that someone simply misspoke about what was run.

 

 

[bigmomabiglove]

Backround: He was first assessed using Leiter and I was told his mental age was 4, could have been 5 but my son lost interest and does not want to participate anymore. During the 2nd test-SB5, the tester's secretary asked if for what age is about to be used, 4 or 5? Then the psych answered "5, he could do 5". So I was wondering whether 108 is his score assuming he's 5 or 108 is already the adjusted score. Im new to all of these and I know little about psych evals I want to thank you guys in advance for the enlightenment. My mama instincts tells me that he couldn't be just 108, but you guys are right IQ score are just numbers. He's homeschooled but looking at the provider's syllabus he basically knew stuff in K1, I'd like to believe it's sound to start with K2 or even grade 1. Except that he has poor fine motor skills he can barely write or even hold a pencil using tripod grip, he still use palmar grasp. The list of signs of giftedness goes on but of course I could be wrong.

[bigmomabiglove]

BTW I was told that he's showing signs of adhd during the 1st visit.

[Pawz4me]

It's my understanding  that FSIQ and GAI can be difficult to calculate with much degree of accuracy in 2e kids due to the often large variations in subtest scores. The variations make it difficult to condense things down to one single number that provides any relevant info. The psychologist who did DS18's testing told us to pretty much ignore his FSIQ (110) and pay attention to the subtest scores, which place him anywhere from profoundly gifted to low average/borderline. And those scores line up very well with what I always saw in real life (an academically gifted kid who struggled with motor/visual/spatial stuff). As someone here said (OhElizabeth?) treat him as gifted as his highest subtest score indicates and as struggling as his lowest score indicates.

[AlexaBarret]

My son was tested using Stanford Binet V. He's 4 years old but the tester used the module for a 5 year old. He got 108 but subtest scores were varied, some were high and some were low. The results were yet to be explained as several tests are still to be administered. My question is, was the 108 score his real score given that what was administered was that for a five year old? My son just turned 4. I have him tested because I suspect him to be 2E, or at least has some learning disabilities. Kindly enlighten me. Thanks! :)

On my mind, it`s not fair! He`s too small! Maybe, it`s worth to speak with the specialist in this sphere? Or with another teacher? Or, maybe, talk to this teacher to fill in the blanks? I don`t know...You have to do something...

 

 

[kbutton]

Is this private testing or through a school? It all sounds very strange.

 

But yes, give him work that you think is appropriate to his IQ in the areas that fit. Continue to work on fine motor, and get occupational therapy if you need to. It's too early to give up on fine motor, but it doesn't have to hold school back. You can do things orally and scribe for him or find materials that require less writing (for instance Miquon doesn't have as much writing). Some people use letter/number tiles or stamps, or any number of manipulatives to work on phonics, spelling, etc.

 

If he has ADHD, it's a bit young to treat it, but some kids with severe ADHD benefit from meds even this early. ADHD can definitely suppress scores on a test like this. We are pro meds and pro teaching skills. We basically treat the ADHD with meds once we feel we have a good understanding of where are kids are at and how it will/can benefit them to have meds--we have more than ADHD going on. Some kids need meds to figure out that much! 

 

At this age, it's an unfolding process. You might find that he needs physical or occupational therapy, or that he's really middle of the pack for motor issues. You might find that he has visual motor issues or a language issue. It's good to start figuring things out now, but it is hard to know things absolutely at this age. 

[Lecka]

My son has taken a standardized test not normed for his age, but he couldn't get a normed score.

 

They could say how he did and it provides information, but they can't give a normed score if it isn't normed for his age.

 

I think they may have given me an age equivalent score like the age where his score would have been at the 50th percentile.

 

This was for a test he was too old for, not too young, but there were reasons they thought it would be good to do.

 

I wonder if they thought they could provide you certain information, but that it would just be a given you couldn't get normed scores?

 

It sounds strange to me too without them giving you an explanation.

[Daria]

Stanford Binet is like the Wechsler Series (WPPSI, WISC, WAIS) in that it has multiple versions of the test that serve overlapping ages.

 

A 4 year old can take either the 

 

Stanford Binet Scales for Early Childhood (Early SB5)  which is normed for 2.0 - 5.11 year olds, with an abbreviated battery that goes through 7.3

 

or the 

 

Stanford Binet V  which starts, I believe at 4.0, although I could be wrong.

 

So, an examiner with a 4 or 5 year old needs to choose which one to go with.  I have more experience with the WPPSI/WISC decision or the WISC/WAIS decision.  In my experience, if an examiner expects that a child will have significant delays, especially delays that impact a child's ability to understand the directions of the test, they will choose the younger test, to reduce the likelihood that they'll have subtests that the child isn't able to attempt.  On the other hand, if it's anticipated that a child would do fine with either, then they may choose the later one, so they can compare results down the road.  

 

I imagine that your tester was saying "usually, I only do this test on 5 and up, but because I anticipated that your child would do well, I chose it for him".  But he then compared the child to the 4 year old norms.  Of course I could be wrong.

 

 

[bigmomabiglove]

Stanford Binet is like the Wechsler Series (WPPSI, WISC, WAIS) in that it has multiple versions of the test that serve overlapping ages.

 

A 4 year old can take either the

 

Stanford Binet Scales for Early Childhood (Early SB5) which is normed for 2.0 - 5.11 year olds, with an abbreviated battery that goes through 7.3

 

or the

 

Stanford Binet V which starts, I believe at 4.0, although I could be wrong.

 

So, an examiner with a 4 or 5 year old needs to choose which one to go with. I have more experience with the WPPSI/WISC decision or the WISC/WAIS decision. In my experience, if an examiner expects that a child will have significant delays, especially delays that impact a child's ability to understand the directions of the test, they will choose the younger test, to reduce the likelihood that they'll have subtests that the child isn't able to attempt. On the other hand, if it's anticipated that a child would do fine with either, then they may choose the later one, so they can compare results down the road.

 

I imagine that your tester was saying "usually, I only do this test on 5 and up, but because I anticipated that your child would do well, I chose it for him". But he then compared the child to the 4 year old norms. Of course I could be wrong.

Now it all made sense to me! Thanks! Then I guess 108 is really 108. Now it's a waiting game for me to know the subtest scores since I was told that some scores were high and some were low. I hope when she says its low its really significantly low and when she says its high its significantly high because what I cannot conform to is the thought that my son has a flat profile which made his FSIQ on the average. If that's the case then I can't accept that everything I thought of my son was wrong and all of these are just all in my head. :( The results will be given at least months from now cause we are still scheduled for 2 more sessions (July and August). What puzzles me more is that we were told that she has to change her modules and that there are still several tests that they have to run. Also we were told that she cannot delegate the testing to other psychs and she's the only one who could handle my son's case. So I'm completely at a loss on what we are expecting here. The psych is the pioneer psych handling giftedness and 2Es in our country so I really have to wait as she is always fully booked and appts are almost always canceled.

[kbutton]

If that's the case then I can't accept that everything I thought of my son was wrong and all of these are just all in my head.

 

It's not as black and white as that, particularly at his age.

 

I think I heard in a talk once that parents are actually reliable judges of giftedness in their children. The stat I hear is that they are right 80% of the time, and the other 20% of time, most of those kids end up being very good at something in particular where they really stand out. 

 

It is possible for things to shift over time as well. We had our son tested at a pretty reliable age (almost 9), and his results on recent testing were very different, and it was good data.

[bigmomabiglove]

It's not as black and white as that, particularly at his age.

 

I think I heard in a talk once that parents are actually reliable judges of giftedness in their children. The stat I hear is that they are right 80% of the time, and the other 20% of time, most of those kids end up being very good at something in particular where they really stand out.

 

It is possible for things to shift over time as well. We had our son tested at a pretty reliable age (almost 9), and his results on recent testing were very different, and it was good data.

Part of me now regrets that I had him tested this early but part of me will also feel guilty if I didn't push through with the testing and won't be able to give the necessary intervention that he needs. I'm trying not to overthink, now it got me thinking maybe I myself have adhd too lol. Thanks guys for the response I really appreciate them! :) Edited June 29, 2017 by bigmomabiglove

[kbutton]

Part of me now regrets that I had him tested this early but part of me will also feel guilty if I didn't push through with the testing and won't be able to give the necessary intervention that he needs. I'm trying not to overthink, now it got me thinking maybe I myself have adhd too lol. Thanks guys for the response I really appreciate them! :)

 

No guilty second-guessing! Many of us wish we had testing earlier!!! It will be okay.