Is this something? (Iowa test scores)

[musicianmom]

If a child has mostly high scores on the Iowa, say 80th percentile or above, but their listening score is much lower, around 40th percentile, does that indicate an issue that needs addressing in the form of an evaluation? 

 

 

[luuknam]

If a child has mostly high scores on the Iowa, say 80th percentile or above, but their listening score is much lower, around 40th percentile, does that indicate an issue that needs addressing in the form of an evaluation? 

 

Not necessarily. It could be that the kid was just tired/hungry/etc during that section. Also, a lot of kids bomb the last part of a test (based on threads I've read here), so if you administered that part last that'd be worth taking into consideration too.

 

I'd also look at the raw scores. How many out of how many questions did the kid get wrong? If only a few mistakes dropped the percentile score that much, I'd be inclined to worry less, as the test would have been too easy for kids in general. E.g. if 3 mistakes out of 20 got 40th percentile, then it's quite possible that if the kid had taken the test on a different day the kid would've made only 2 mistakes and scored way higher. Whereas if the kid had 8 mistakes out of 20, I'd be more inclined to trust that the percentile score is more or less accurate.

 

Also, I'd try to see whether that score fits my own experience with the child. Do you remember what the questions looked like on the test? Does your child tend to do worse with those kinds of questions?

 

If you feel that the test results don't make sense given everything you know about the child, I'd probably be inclined to just wait a year and see what happens on next year's test, while keeping an eye out for listening issues throughout the year. If you feel that the test might be on to something, I would start looking into some further evaluations, assuming I have the money (since the school district is practically guaranteed to not care since 40th percentile is still firmly in average range).

[SebastianCat]

My test administrator told me to look at the stanine levels as a "snapshot" of whether the child was working "at grade level" for each skill.   A stanine of 1-3 would be below average, 4-6 is average, and 7-9 is above average compared to other students at each grade level.   

 

Do the test scores reflect what you've seen in your homeschool, or do you feel they are an aberration?   If you see no issues in listening skills on a normal basis, then I wouldn't be concerned at all.   If you find that listening is a skill your child struggles with during schoolwork and normal household tasks, then an evaluation may be warranted.   But if it's not an issue you see in normal tasks, I'd probably just wait for next year's test results before pursuing anything.   

 

My kids have taken a couple of different standardized tests over the years, and each time the results have shown their strengths and weaknesses exactly how I would have predicted.   We haven't had any test results that have come as a huge surprise - but having several years' history of test scores would help me evaluate any surprises that come up.

[EKS]

Did you administer the test yourself?  If not, I will tell you that the listening test is totally ridiculous.  Unless there is some other reason you are concerned about your child's listening ability, I wouldn't worry about it at all.

Edited August 4, 2016 by EKS

[musicianmom]

 

I just wondered if the huge disconnect between their overall scores and the listening score indicated something was amiss.

Edited May 21, 2022 by musicianmom

[PeterPan]

nt

Edited August 5, 2016 by OhElizabeth

[purpleowl]

Did you administer the test yourself?  If not, I will tell you that the listening test is totally ridiculous.  Unless there is some other reason you are concerned about your child's listening ability, I wouldn't worry about it at all.

 

Yep.

 

My DD#1 has also scored lower (in K and in 1st) in listening than in every other area on the Iowa test. I'm not concerned.

[EKS]

To elaborate on my previous response, in the listening section the child listens to this long drawn out *boring* and seemingly inconsequential thing and then is asked about trivial details about what was said.  It is very different from being able to follow verbal instructions.

 

Also, the 40th percentile is still well within the average range.

Edited August 5, 2016 by EKS

[purpleowl]

To elaborate on my previous response, in the listening section the child listens to this long drawn out *boring* and seemingly inconsequential thing and then is asked about trivial details about what was said.  It is very different from being able to follow verbal instructions.

 

 

Yep again. Plus, for the K and 1st grade levels, almost the entire test is read to the student. If they really struggled with listening to a great degree, they would not be able to perform well on the other sections of the test, either. (I don't know what level it switches to having the students read the questions instead of the test administrator dictating them. I've only used K and 1st grade.)

[RootAnn]

I wouldn't worry about it at all.

 

If you notice it when you are homeschooling them, then come back & we'll talk about it. But not the listening section of the ITBS. (That's one of the many reasons I don't give the ITBS when the kids are that young. By the time my kids take it, that is no longer a section on the test.)

[luuknam]

To elaborate on my previous response, in the listening section the child listens to this long drawn out *boring* and seemingly inconsequential thing and then is asked about trivial details about what was said.  It is very different from being able to follow verbal instructions.

 

Also, the 40th percentile is still well within the average range.

 

Thanks - I was wondering what it was (we do the CAT, because no BS required).

 

But, wrt 40th percentile, if a kid is standard deviations apart in skills, there probably is an issue, which can lead to frustrations in a kid, even if the lowest skill is still within normal range. Now, the OP didn't specifically state the percentiles the kids were at, beyond 80+. The 80th percentile is probably about one standard deviation above the 40th, which is not too big a deal, but if most of the kid's abilities are in the 99th percentile, for example, then the gap would be more like 2 (or possibly more) standard deviations, which could be really frustrating. Of course, that assumes that the test isn't just stupid, and the kid's scores reflect the kid's ability, and not that the kid just happened to be tired/hungry/etc while taking that subtest.

[HeatherL]

Here is my personal experience with the listening portion of a standardized test.  When I was a public school teacher, my first year teaching I was shocked by the listening passages.  The first portion my second graders were listening to had something to do with a girl and her dad who worked with animals.  It repeatedly said he worked with and took care of sick animals.  The first question said "What job did the girl's father have"  It listed several specific jobs as answers including "veterinarian".  No where did it say "cared for animals"  Right away several hands went up saying the answer wasn't there.  I asked, (I was young and inexperienced at standardized testing, so forgive me)  a few what they thought the correct answer was and they said "animal doctor" or "a person that helps animals"  They did not know what veterinarian meant.  

 

I am sharing this story to show that the kids did do a great job of listening.  If that's what was actually being tested, they would have had no problem.  But it turned into a vocab test, that sadly 7 and 8 year olds, many whom English was not their native language, had no idea how to answer.

[musicianmom]

Thanks for all the comments! I will not worry about it then.