Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

SKL

Is this possible or almost certainly an error? Test result - update and rant in post 33

Recommended Posts

According to the paper in my hand (which I did not have a chance to look at when speaking to the psychologist), my 10yo 6th grader, who used to love doing puzzles since she was 1, currently assembles engineering kits etc. independently for fun, and has no apparent learning difficulties, scored a zero on the "visual puzzles" section of the WISC-V.  As a result her overall Visual Spatial score was "extremely low" and this affected her overall composite score.

 

A zero?  Is that even possible?  I suspect a clerical error.  But maybe you guys could talk me out of it ....

Edited by SKL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it should have been a 10 but the one got left off?

Edited by EKS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at page 58-61 http://www.myschoolpsychology.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ASAIF-WISC-V-12.12.14-Handout.pdf

 

I don’t think it’s possible to get a zero. Do you think your daughter somehow had three consecutive scores of 0 at the beginning of the test?

 

“Discontinue after 3 consecutive scores of 0†page 59 same link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I got a call back - "oh I have to apologize, there was an error, we ran more than one version, I think, um ... I thought I gave you the right version, I'm not sure,  I'll get back to you later in the week.  Erm... when did I give you my cell phone number?"

 

"But the important thing is to think about how to deal with the issues that she has, I can help you get accommodations when she needs them ...."

 

Really ....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at page 58-61 http://www.myschoolpsychology.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ASAIF-WISC-V-12.12.14-Handout.pdf

 

I don’t think it’s possible to get a zero. Do you think your daughter somehow had three consecutive scores of 0 at the beginning of the test?

 

“Discontinue after 3 consecutive scores of 0†page 59 same link

 

Hmm, they don't go back to an easier one if the kid can't get the age-appropriate ones?

 

What if the kid needs more than 20 seconds to get it?  Score is zero?  Does the kid know there is a time limit?

 

Still seems strange.  Seems pretty unhelpful to score zero if the kid is, say, 2/3 years behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a poster on here ages ago (KPzz, I think) said that if the test scores don't match the child you know, then there is something wrong with the scores.  You would know if your child had such a problem with tasks like the visual puzzles tasks (to the point of her getting a zero) without needing a test to tell you.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a poster on here ages ago (KPzz, I think) said that if the test scores don't match the child you know, then there is something wrong with the scores.  You would know if your child had such a problem with tasks like the visual puzzles tasks (to the point of her getting a zero) without needing a test to tell you.

 

Yeah ... I was tempted to tell the psych why I thought the low score seemed wrong (this was before I realized it was a zero) - I mean we were there because I wanted to see if she qualified for the gifted program, partly based on the things she's always been able to do.  On thing that sticks out in my memory was when she was 21 months old and I was assembling a household item.  She walked over, picked up a loose part, and immediately inserted it in exactly the place and position it needed to go - while I was busy telling her to get out of the way of my grown-up work.  But yeah - zero visual spatial abilities.  Complete lack of nonverbal skills.  :P

 

But I didn't argue because I figured she'd think, "yeah, everyone wants their kid to be a genius.  Mom in denial."

 

Eventually I did mention that none of that sounded like my kid, but she's the expert don't you know!

 

She is certain I'll be lobbying for accommodations at school in the near future.

 

(I mean, maybe my kid does have some shortcomings in the visual spatial area, but my confidence in the test is about zero right now.  So much for the 6 months and $$$ I've put behind that bright idea.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually I did mention that none of that sounded like my kid, but she's the expert don't you know!

 

Is it possible that you got some other kid's report and that the psychologist is confused about who's who?  Seriously--test results should have you nodding, not thinking that you've stepped into an alternate universe.

Edited by EKS
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible that you got some other kid's report and that the psychologist is confused about who's who?  Seriously--test results should have you nodding, not thinking that you've stepped into an alternative universe.

 

Honestly, I don't know what to think about this lady.  Even my kids think she's a little off.

 

But that did happen to me once, sort of.  My other kid was 6 and went to a developmental pediatrician for reasons irrelevant here.  Ped sent me a detailed report of her findings.  About halfway through the report, it starts talking about head circumference and then "she can pull herself up to a standing position but is not yet cruising."  Hmmm.  I had no idea where my kid's report stopped and some baby's report began.  :P

 

Seriously, with this psych, I checked the name and birth date while we were still in the office because the result didn't ring true.  I thought maybe they made her older or ???

 

Which brings up another thing.  I thought IQ was mental age over chronological age.  So there were two sections where the average "age equivalent" was over 15yo, which would give a quotient close to 150, but the score and percentile did not fit with that.  So color me confused.  I should be able to ask the psych about this, but I don't trust her at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds unprofessional. I believe that the report is completely messed up - maybe her assistant or office personnel plugged in the wrong numbers or maybe the score belongs to another child or maybe the lady forgot to do the "visual puzzles" section completely.

 

Since your daughter is in middle school without any accommodations so far, I find it really difficult to believe that any of the subsections in her test would have a zero score. Ask the psychologist to refer to her testing notes that she wrote during the test, ask her to rewrite the report if needed. Also tell her that you need to apply to some programs (like DYS) where the scores matter and that she needs to carefully recheck her work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which brings up another thing. I thought IQ was mental age over chronological age. So there were two sections where the average "age equivalent" was over 15yo, which would give a quotient close to 150, but the score and percentile did not fit with that. So color me confused. I should be able to ask the psych about this, but I don't trust her at this point.

Link is a sample WISC-V report. The visual puzzles section wasn’t used to calculate FSIQ. How did your daughter do for Block Design? If she score well for Block Design and the Visual Puzzle score is not used for FSIQ, then it won’t pull the FSIQ score down.

https://images.pearsonclinical.com/images/assets/wisc-v/WISC-V-Score-Report.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which brings up another thing.  I thought IQ was mental age over chronological age.  So there were two sections where the average "age equivalent" was over 15yo, which would give a quotient close to 150, but the score and percentile did not fit with that.  So color me confused.  I should be able to ask the psych about this, but I don't trust her at this point.

 

IQ was indeed originally designed as mental age over chronological age, multiplied by 100. That is no longer the case.

 

Modern IQ tests are standardized tests, with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. This means that raw scores are converted into standard scores, using data from thousands of test subjects to arrive on the mean and standard deviation. This data uses age in that the test subject's standard score is derived from a comparison to other children with that same age. As a result, a child can get the highest available standard score without answering everything correct (for example for a younger child taking a test) or a child can get every single test item correct and still not get the highest available standard score (for example a child taking a test very near the age ceiling).

 

There is an extremely knowledgable test expert who posts regularly on a public forum (Davidson). If you post your IQ test questions there, you will get the best answers available online. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the zero listed as a "raw score" or a "scaled score"? 

 

A raw score of zero is possible, but the lowest possible scaled score is 1. Either way, it's an error of some sort. If your daughter got a raw score of zero, she clearly didn't understand the task and the psychologist should have found another way to assess her visual-spatial skills rather than just report "extremely low". If there's a zero listed as a scaled score, that has to be a clerical error. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible that you got some other kid's report and that the psychologist is confused about who's who?  Seriously--test results should have you nodding, not thinking that you've stepped into an alternative universe.

 

Yes to this. I remember being annoyed at some of the way tests went (some of ours, it was pathetically, painfully, obvious that my child didn't understand what he was being asked to do, but the script kept getting read without even a moment's hesitation regardless, but when I observed these situations, it wasn't part of a WISC since they didn't allow me to observe that one), but my husband and I both felt like most things in the report just made sense when we thought about our kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the zero listed as a "raw score" or a "scaled score"? 

 

A raw score of zero is possible, but the lowest possible scaled score is 1. Either way, it's an error of some sort. If your daughter got a raw score of zero, she clearly didn't understand the task and the psychologist should have found another way to assess her visual-spatial skills rather than just report "extremely low". If there's a zero listed as a scaled score, that has to be a clerical error. 

 

It was a raw score of zero.

 

I mentioned this to my daughter this evening.  She said "I did great on that test."  In her opinion, the number of puzzles she solved in less than 20 seconds was definitely more than zero.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Link is a sample WISC-V report. The visual puzzles section wasn’t used to calculate FSIQ. How did your daughter do for Block Design? If she score well for Block Design and the Visual Puzzle score is not used for FSIQ, then it won’t pull the FSIQ score down.

https://images.pearsonclinical.com/images/assets/wisc-v/WISC-V-Score-Report.pdf

 

Block design was also supposedly below average, as was coding (processing speed).  But within a range where it could have been her being distracted or whatever.

 

I see several other things that make no sense.  For one, in the verbal section the age equivalent of 14:6 and 14:10 get a scaled score of 14, but in the fluid reasoning section 14:10 gets a scaled score of 11 and 63%ile.  (Kid's age was 10:8 so if 14:10 is accurate then I don't think that is 63%ile.)  Another FR subtest is  ">16:10" age equivalent but only 91 %ile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Block design was also supposedly below average, as was coding (processing speed). But within a range where it could have been her being distracted or whatever.

How fast is her fine motor skills, hand eye coordination? Both block design and Coding is timed if I don’t recall wrongly. My older was much faster than my younger when it comes to seeing and doing. The tester also realizes my younger knew the answer but was slower to get the answer down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Block design was also supposedly below average, as was coding (processing speed).  But within a range where it could have been her being distracted or whatever.

 

I see several other things that make no sense.  For one, in the verbal section the age equivalent of 14:6 and 14:10 get a scaled score of 14, but in the fluid reasoning section 14:10 gets a scaled score of 11 and 63%ile.  (Kid's age was 10:8 so if 14:10 is accurate then I don't think that is 63%ile.)  Another FR subtest is  ">16:10" age equivalent but only 91 %ile.

 

Age equivalent refers to the age at which an exactly average child (50th percentile) will score the same as your child on a particular subtest, so they can vary between subtests even if the scaled scores are the same. For example, Ds9 had a higher scaled score on Vocabulary than on Visual Puzzles, but his age equivalent was higher for Visual Puzzles. It sounds like there are some errors in your report, but this isn't necessarily one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Block design was also supposedly below average, as was coding (processing speed).  But within a range where it could have been her being distracted or whatever.

 

I see several other things that make no sense.  For one, in the verbal section the age equivalent of 14:6 and 14:10 get a scaled score of 14, but in the fluid reasoning section 14:10 gets a scaled score of 11 and 63%ile.  (Kid's age was 10:8 so if 14:10 is accurate then I don't think that is 63%ile.)  Another FR subtest is  ">16:10" age equivalent but only 91 %ile.

 

The way to read the report is to understand that the raw score is converted to a scaled score through comparison to children of the same age in such a way that converts the raw score into a score with an average of 10 and a mean of 3. Knowing those numbers, you can easily calculate the percentile rank based off of that. All scaled scores of 11 will get a 63% rank, and all scaled scores of 14 will get a 91% rank. 

 

Age equivalent scores means that the raw score received by was similar to the average child at the age given for the age equivalent. That means that the raw score your daughter got in the verbal section to earn a scaled score of 14 would have been equivalent to a scaled score of 10 for a fourteen-year-old. The scaled score of 11 with an age equivalent of 14 seems off. It's possible it's a mistake, but it's also possibly correct for that subtest. The age equivalents have no bearing on the FSIQ, but any mistake would make you question the integrity of the rest of the report.

 

16:11 is the highest age for which the WISC was standardized, so >16:10 is the highest age equivalent. Your daughter's scaled score was then 14, since the percentile ranks are just a one-to-one correlation with the percentiles based on the mean and standard deviation, and the raw score obtained is higher than the average raw score for the highest normed group. 

 

The two glaring issues are the subtest with a 0 raw score and the scaled score of 11 with an age equivalent of 14:10. The child could have misunderstood the directions, or the test administrator could have failed to properly direct her. You're right that it's strange and seems off. You'll need to ask the psychologist directly about that. The scaled score of 11 with a high equivalent could be accurate, but it's worth asking about. It should all be listed in tables, so it's a trivial thing to check if you have the tables. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How fast is her fine motor skills, hand eye coordination? Both block design and Coding is timed if I don’t recall wrongly. My older was much faster than my younger when it comes to seeing and doing. The tester also realizes my younger knew the answer but was slower to get the answer down.

 

She's not the best with motor skills.  For example, playing ball sports she usually misses because the ball comes before she has time to decide what to do.  She's pretty messy in general.  She can write legibly and draw nicely if she tries.  She is a very very tactile person.  Learned to tie shoes at age 3 and knit at age 5.  Seems to do well with video games.  I really don't know how she compares with her age mates, but she gets by.

 

She did do some vision therapy at one point.  I'm not sure if vision could be a factor.  More likely she was stressed out by the timed aspect of the tests.  She does not test well compared to her actual ability, which is why I thought getting an individualized outside test made sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She did do some vision therapy at one point. I'm not sure if vision could be a factor. More likely she was stressed out by the timed aspect of the tests. She does not test well compared to her actual ability, which is why I thought getting an individualized outside test made sense.

At the time my younger boy did the WISC-IV, he had mild tracking (vision) issues. His scores was still high enough to show a visual spatial strength just that he would likely have very similar scores to older kid for visual spatial if he did not have the tracking issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some sections have low ceilings. The one with a top score being 91% would be an example. I think it was the SAT-10 where it was quite literally not possible to get a CTY qualifying score on the kindergarten test because perfect scores were below the 95% on so many sub-sections, with one being something like 75%. When I called CTY, the response was "oh, that's just the way that test is, and yes, she qualifies".

 

I wonder if your DD was having fun with the puzzles and didn't realize time mattered? DD did that on the eIMACS placement test-she was having such fun with the traffic puzzles and trying out different combinations that she barely qualified based on the number done in the 30 minute limit-but actually had gotten almost all of them correct, often on the first try. She just wanted to play, and did so by hitting "try again".

 

FWIW, I have a similar level of discrepancy on those sorts of subtests, but for me, it was more a relief than anything else. It explains a lot.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just don't know which numbers to believe at this point, which means I am skeptical about all of it.  If the psych fixes the obvious things, the rest of it is still the work product of someone who would make those kinds of mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well nobody called me back "later in the week" so I finally called them on Friday - 10 days later.  Of course they took a message and the lady called me back (blocking her number this time lol) and left a voice mail encouraging me to make another appointment to discuss "what I don't understand" about the test.

 

I almost never complain formally about anything, but I think this calls for some action on my part.  Tell me if this is unreasonable:

 

1) I will not make another appointment nor pay for any more services as I have gotten no satisfaction.  Part of me wants to ask for my money back.

 

2) I want email access so we can stop this annoying phone tag.

 

3) I want to email the test paper with circles around the clear errors I identified.  Then I want them to either find or make the correct test results and email the corrected report to me.  I don't need another explanation.

 

4) I also want a copy of all the psych's handwritten notes, which she promised to give me but never did.

 

5) I want all of this within a week.

 

6) If they can't do this then I either want my money back or I want them to do another kind of intelligence test for free (and do it right this time, and have someone other than the current psych do it).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would want all of those things too.  You paid for a product, it was done incorrectly, you haven't gotten satisfaction regarding fixing the errors or even clarifying exactly which parts of the test were in error.  They owe you a refund or a redo, pronto.  I don't know who you'd complain to if you can't get a good result, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, they don't go back to an easier one if the kid can't get the age-appropriate ones?

 

What if the kid needs more than 20 seconds to get it?  Score is zero?  Does the kid know there is a time limit?

 

Still seems strange.  Seems pretty unhelpful to score zero if the kid is, say, 2/3 years behind.

 

we back up to try and establish a base score - but of course there are only so many questions to go back through.. if you reach the bottom of the test with no correct responses then it is, indeed a zero. Some tests the child knows there is a time limit, some they don't.  We usually try to prompt a response if we think they have it but are running out of time.  That's something I'd comment on in the narrative report though.

I remember a poster on here ages ago (KPzz, I think) said that if the test scores don't match the child you know, then there is something wrong with the scores.  You would know if your child had such a problem with tasks like the visual puzzles tasks (to the point of her getting a zero) without needing a test to tell you.

this is so true... there shouldn't be too many suprises in test results, more like aha moments usually.  I tell clients though, that I can only report on what I see on the day, and it is merely a snapshot of the child at that time.  I cross reference with extensive background info and school / home reports to try and make sense of what I'm seeing.

 

Which brings up another thing.  I thought IQ was mental age over chronological age.  So there were two sections where the average "age equivalent" was over 15yo, which would give a quotient close to 150, but the score and percentile did not fit with that.  So color me confused.  I should be able to ask the psych about this, but I don't trust her at this point.

this is the old fashioned ratio IQ score, but is not relevant to current scores

 

Block design was also supposedly below average, as was coding (processing speed).  But within a range where it could have been her being distracted or whatever.

 

I see several other things that make no sense.  For one, in the verbal section the age equivalent of 14:6 and 14:10 get a scaled score of 14, but in the fluid reasoning section 14:10 gets a scaled score of 11 and 63%ile.  (Kid's age was 10:8 so if 14:10 is accurate then I don't think that is 63%ile.)  Another FR subtest is  ">16:10" age equivalent but only 91 %ile.

you mentioned poor motor skills - this could certainly impact on coding which is a pencil and paper task.  The rules for block design are also fairly tight, so if motor skills are poor enough they can impact on the result.  This would e commented on in the narrative report.

 

The variance in the subtest scores reflects how rapidly those skills develop at different ages.  So if a particular skill is likely to develop quickly at, say age 10, then 5 more points might not make much difference to the scaled score, and only move the age equivalence a few months, but if another skill is likely to develop slowly, then 5 points could be a huge leap in scaled score and a few years in age equivalence.  I'm thinking of one subtest on a test battery that goes something like 7y3m, 7y5m, 7y6m, 8y, 9y6m, 12y, 14y for consecutive scores.  I can also idenitify at least two subtests on that same battery where a 10 year old scoring at 14 would be at the mid 60th percentile... it just means that it's not too unusually to have 10 year olds score at that level on that subtest.  The scores you're mentioning above are entirely possible.

 

It sounds like you have a number of valid concerns and more information should definitely be forthcoming (and not at extra cost to you!)  Any subtest that is scored (genuinely) at 0 would get a specific comment from me about what was going on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so far as complaining - all psychs should be registered to a supervisory board (at least that's how it works here and I assume the rest of the world).  If you don't get any joy from their office directly, or what ever organisation they work through, you could contact that board and ask how to proceed - there shold be a complaints policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a multiple choice test is it? I once did a visual spatial test and circled all my answers for one question above it that makes sense. I would have got a score of zero had I not realised at the end that I'd run out of letters to circle one problem early and been allowed to correct the circling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a multiple choice test is it? I once did a visual spatial test and circled all my answers for one question above it that makes sense. I would have got a score of zero had I not realised at the end that I'd run out of letters to circle one problem early and been allowed to correct the circling.

The WISC is not multi choice but it is possible the tester filled in the record card wrong or transferred the data to the computer wrong. She is being very unhelpful though. SKL if you make another appointment and there are indeed errors I can see no reason you should pay. I also think your list of demands is fair. While it may be possible to score zero I think everyone would have noticed if it was a realistic score. She could have lower processing though and still be gifted - it is fairly common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got a chance to call call the office on Monday and they agreed I should get the revised report at no additional cost by mail, but they could not accept an email, so I faxed the report with my written comments and requests/demands.  (I wanted revised report and a copy of the psych's notes.)

 

Psych called me today and tried again to convince me to come in, "at no charge," so she could spend more time explaining the report.  She insists that the report is correct, my kid actually did get a zero by missing the 3 easiest questions on that section of the test.  She is also refusing to send me a copy of her notes.  She is offering to do more testing to better explain why my kid is so incapable in nonverbal.  LOL.  No thanks.  She did say the kid probably isn't that incapable but that is what the test results are.  In other words the test results are meaningless I guess.

 

Wondering if I should go back and ask her boss to insist that she send me those notes.  I paid for them.

 

Oh if I could go back and do (or not do) this over again.  My kid wanted to know how she did, of course, so I shared, while telling her I believed some of it was inaccurate.  It has been a big distraction for her.  She got the worst school GPA of her life this last trimester.  I did not realize this was going to affect her so much.  I guess I failed that test.

 

Of course I would be feeling differently if my kid did great on the test.  I guess there's only one way to know.  But I wish I had not done this.

 

She did come out pretty good in verbal and reasoning.  They didn't test her in math, but we had another test done by Sylvan that showed she was pretty ahead in math.  And the good side of my kid not getting into the Excel program is that I won't have to deal with extra work and stuff - she is not the most motivated student after all.  Time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IQ is a loaded concept, so I'm not surprised she was affected by learning the results.  I never shared my kids results with them, and the first time my older son found out about them was when he was 19, and I had to give him a copy of his evaluation report so he could get accommodations in college.   

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, IQ test results are just a snapshot of the brain at that given moment. Just like we can take great pictures of ourselves as well as not so great pictures, IQ test reports are also all over the place, as you have found out. Is there another way that she can qualify for this program? Teacher Recommendation, Talent Search, Work Samples, Standardized testing?

Edited by mathnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no way possible that she missed the three easiest questions at her age on the Visual Puzzles subtest. The WISC-V can be administered to children as young as 6. There is no way your daughter couldn't even solve the easiest questions. If it was administered properly, she would have had to start at the item number where 10 year old start then if she missed so many in a row they would reverse and have had to administer items for younger students. There is no way she missed the items for the younger students because they are designed so that even a 6 year old who is low can get the first item correct unless they are really quite cognitively impaired. They are essentially a matching item. No way your kid can't match. If she is saying your child really got a raw score of zero, I would call the supervisor and tell her she needs to review the protocol and you want your money back. 

 

ETA: Ask your daughter if she remembers picking three parts that make a shape and if the problems got harder or they started getting easier. 

Edited by Nart
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A gifted program is not supposed to be more work, its supposed to replace busywork with actual meaningful opportunities.  Dodging the sham is good. Have you two read "Surviving the Applewhites"?  You live it, but it would be fun to discuss with your dd.

Edited by Heigh Ho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no way possible that she missed the three easiest questions at her age on the Visual Puzzles subtest. The WISC-V can be administered to children as young as 6. There is no way your daughter couldn't even solve the easiest questions. If it was administered properly, she would have had to start at the item number where 10 year old start then if she missed so many in a row they would reverse and have had to administer items for younger students. There is no way she missed the items for the younger students because they are designed so that even a 6 year old who is low can get the first item correct unless they are really quite cognitively impaired. They are essentially a matching item. No way your kid can't match. If she is saying your child really got a raw score of zero, I would call the supervisor and tell her she needs to review the protocol and you want your money back. 

 

ETA: Ask your daughter if she remembers picking three parts that make a shape and if the problems got harder or they started getting easier. 

 

I did mention this to my daughter a while back, and she said "I did great on that test."  She thought it was easy and she got many of them right.  I am not sure she knew it was timed.  When I asked her after the test how it had gone, she mentioned talking about German Shepherds.  I also remember her saying on the first testing day that the psych tricked her into playing with some puzzles without telling her the test had begun - as a way to ease her nervousness.

 

You see, this is one reason I want to see the psych's handwritten notes.  When did she do that test - was it that first one when my kid was just fooling around?  What else was happening?

 

I totally agree it is not possible that my kid got a zero on any section of this test, if it was administered correctly.  I told the psych this, and she started saying she agreed that it was off, that maybe the kid was fatigued or whatever because it was after school etc.  Well if you sensed the child was not functioning well enough to take the test (which I very much doubt as she has no history of freezing on tests nor after-school fatigue), why did you continue with the test and prepare a report and present it to me as if you thought it was accurate?

 

I now realize that subtest does not impact the overall IQ number, but if this is the standard being applied to the testing process, then as far as I am concerned, the entire process was Bogus with a capital B.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did mention this to my daughter a while back, and she said "I did great on that test."  She thought it was easy and she got many of them right.  I am not sure she knew it was timed.  When I asked her after the test how it had gone, she mentioned talking about German Shepherds.  I also remember her saying on the first testing day that the psych tricked her into playing with some puzzles without telling her the test had begun - as a way to ease her nervousness.

 

You see, this is one reason I want to see the psych's handwritten notes.  When did she do that test - was it that first one when my kid was just fooling around?  What else was happening?

 

I totally agree it is not possible that my kid got a zero on any section of this test, if it was administered correctly.  I told the psych this, and she started saying she agreed that it was off, that maybe the kid was fatigued or whatever because it was after school etc.  Well if you sensed the child was not functioning well enough to take the test (which I very much doubt as she has no history of freezing on tests nor after-school fatigue), why did you continue with the test and prepare a report and present it to me as if you thought it was accurate?

 

I now realize that subtest does not impact the overall IQ number, but if this is the standard being applied to the testing process, then as far as I am concerned, the entire process was Bogus with a capital B.

 

Block Design is the first test administered. Visual Puzzles is right in the middle. 

 

In order to get a raw score of zero and move on to the next subtest, your daughter actually would have had to get the easiest 5 questions wrong in Visual Puzzles (after going through a couple of sample items to make sure she understood what to do), so it's clear that the psychologist didn't even refer back to her protocol when you were speaking to her. 

 

If this psychologist has a supervisor, I would have contacted them long ago. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, contact the supervisor if you can. And get the revised report. How many of these has she done? Maybe she is a rookie?

 

She says she's been doing this for 7 years.  Even told me about another intelligent person who was surprised about how bad she did in the nonverbal part. 

 

Makes me feel sorry for other people she has tested.

 

So far I have not received the report she promised to send.  I was planning to wait and then call to complain if she didn't send the handwritten notes or to complain that the notes prove she screwed up.  Right now I'm so busy I don't know what to do.  This will probably have to wait until January to get resolved (if it ever does).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She says she's been doing this for 7 years.  Even told me about another intelligent person who was surprised about how bad she did in the nonverbal part. 

 

Makes me feel sorry for other people she has tested.

 

So far I have not received the report she promised to send.  I was planning to wait and then call to complain if she didn't send the handwritten notes or to complain that the notes prove she screwed up.  Right now I'm so busy I don't know what to do.  This will probably have to wait until January to get resolved (if it ever does).

 

You can be doing something wrong for 7 years and not realize it. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being surprised at scoring lower than expected is different that scoring zero. If someone is below the first percentile in something it is going to be obvious to everyone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When DD took that test, she had never had anything given to her that she could not do. I forgot to warn her that the test kept going until she could not complete something. She discombobulated and started crying when it got too hard. The psychologist who was giving the test stopped the test right then and said she was not ready for school. We had already decided to homeschool her by then, so we did not care. This was my child who graduated high school at 15, was sought after and contracted by a large computer company, and is making straight “A’s†in college. What was your purpose for getting the test?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When DD took that test, she had never had anything given to her that she could not do. I forgot to warn her that the test kept going until she could not complete something. She discombobulated and started crying when it got too hard. The psychologist who was giving the test stopped the test right then and said she was not ready for school. We had already decided to homeschool her by then, so we did not care. This was my child who graduated high school at 15, was sought after and contracted by a large computer company, and is making straight “A’s†in college. What was your purpose for getting the test?

 

My purpose was to see if she qualified for the school gifted program.  (She is already accelerated a year, but wants more challenge.)  Imagine my confusion when they started telling me she would need accommodations in school....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My DS scored really really low on one of the spatial sub tests, I can’t remember which one. He was in the 3rd %tile I think. His GAI with that section thrown out was well within the gifted range so it made zero sense to me that there would be that much of a spread. I ended up talking both to the test administrator and to a different child psych and they both basically told me that some of these tests just don’t show accurately what the child knows or what their brain is capable of. I think it was a test where he had to draw lines through pictures or something and he a.) wasn’t into it and/or b.) didn’t have the dexterity to move fast enough.

 

ETA because I failed to make my point before I posted, I wouldn’t put too much stock in it. Yes maybe the tester screwed up, but it could also be a fluke; maybe your daughter thought she was doing well but the tester didn’t explain the test properly or she just saw it differently. Our brains were not created on a conveyer belt, so the idea that every GT kid will excel on the same 10 skills is kind of silly IMO.

 

I don’t love he idea of IQ tests, and so I’ll openly admit my bias. I know they are a necessary evil sometimes like in your situation. I’d see if there is another test she could take with the school district. (I’m not up on the story here so just ignore me if this has already happened.)

Edited by Runningmom80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just remembered that one of my kids took a visual processing test (TVPS) and he was totally unable to do one of the subtests.  Given how he had done on the rest of the subtests and the evaluator's knowledge of his functioning, she decided he didn't understand the directions.  So she went "off book" and showed him more explicitly what he was supposed to be doing.  (I think the test involved looking at a picture with a missing piece and deciding which picture was the complete version, and that the evaluator actually drew in the missing part so my son could see it, if that makes sense.)  Anyway, after that, he went on to get all of the items correct and score at the 99th percentile (or thereabouts).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My purpose was to see if she qualified for the school gifted program.  (She is already accelerated a year, but wants more challenge.)  Imagine my confusion when they started telling me she would need accommodations in school....

If you are really motivated to get her into the gifted program and if this private school is the only schooling option that works for your family, then find out if your school allows scores from Standardized Testing like ITBS, ERB or whatever they follow for the gifted program entry in lieu of IQ test scores? It might be easier for them to accommodate such a request.

 

Another option is to take Talent Search tests and use those results as outside validation when talking to the gifted co-ordinator. Talent Search tests are short and the results are out in a few days and you have the option of reviewing the results before approaching the school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER & RECEIVE A COUPON FOR
10% OFF
We respect your privacy.You’ll hear about new products, special discounts & sales, and homeschooling tips. *Coupon only valid for first-time registrants. Coupon cannot be combined with any other offer. Entering your email address makes you eligible to receive future promotional emails.
0 Shares
Share
Tweet
Pin
×