Absolutely not Neato!!!!! In fact, this whole discussion has really forced me to look more closely at this new report, and I think I understand it better for your questions! Keep 'em coming, and please don't forget to take everything *I* say with a huge grain of salt as well! I'm "well read", but still learning as I go.

don't think the WISC-IV can discern 1:1000 from 1:10,000 if that is what you are asking. I don't think it could before, and I don't think it can now, with this change.


Yes, this is the question, thanks for answering.

I

You're not annoying me! I'm reading every word with interest! I have no comments of my own to add, but I have great interest in the conversation.

K-

I wonder if this Technical Report is related to this article http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/About_GDC/newiqtests.htm

See recommendation 13.

I wonder if they will be doing the same for the SB5, as well.

Good points, all.

I feel that if the new norming study drastically changes how any previous WISC-IV scores are viewed, then the entire test should be revised. Maybe the new norming study should apply to a WISC-V so that there is no confusion.

Can you see any of us explaining to some GT administrator, "my kid's 148 score really IS in the 99.9th percentile, because he took the test before a certain norming study was released"? Huh??

Tara

I know. I was also wondering if any testers sort of slack off once they know that a kid has reached the top score for their age. Since it's never made a difference once you hit 19, why should they try for a higher raw score before the report was issued? Maybe that's cynical, but I did wonder.

I wouldn't be surprised if they slacked off before that. Oh, little Johnny is twitching in his seat. He must be at the frustration point..."It's okay if you can't answer any more Johnny, you did quite well!"

Tara, no fears about the straight 99.9th. No matter how high they extend the norms, the 145 still marks the beginning of the 99.9th percentile. And if you present the scores like that, it really should say it all.

I'm finding at our school that actual achievement speaks louder than IQ numbers anyway.

I think it's that way with most schools. IQ scores only really seem to matter in the early elementary years. And by middle school, no one talks IQ anymore.

That's not really fair....I think most psychs give these kids a fair shot. But I don't think many are really expecting 19's. And why should they? They are statistically very rare. I just remember the team that tested DS at the local university. They were amazingly impressed with his abilities, and the looks on their faces when I expressed disappointment in the numbers was truly priceless. But as I've said before, not a 19 in the full 15 subtests given. Now maybe DS is only a 17/18 kid! He's pretty global, and that could explain his above the 99.9th performance (a 17 is only at the 99th percentile and an 18 is only at the 99.6th). But he seems capable of a few peaks in that range, and he was clearly tired/bored with the whole affair by the end of the 2.5 hours.

My not really fair comment was for my own post, LOL! You snuck in there on me CFK. But yes, that's been my experience as well.