Is Everyone's Child 90th percentile and above on the WPPSI III or just the DC's on this board?

[Anonymous]

Care to share your TRUE scores and percentiles?

[Anonymous]

This exact question has been asked and discussed before--please check archives.

[Anonymous]

DC's TRUE score (as you put it): 99.7 percentile

Good Lord, why would someone lie on an anonymous board??

[Anonymous]

My DC's score was in the high 90s %-ile. When the edu consultant saw his test report she sounded orgasmic. I said, these scores are common, aren't they? She replied they are but not really. She thought he had a real shot. On one of the school interviews an AD said with DC's test scores he would have many options.

DC was admitted to no schools and went to public.

[Anonymous]

That is crazy!!! Not being admitted with such high scores. I'm so confused by what the heck they are looking for. My DC did awful on the test so I guess I won't feel bad when he doesn't get in. I would feel worst though not knowing the "why not" if he had great scores. He had a bad morning and wasn't in the mood for puzzles and questions. His scores (true ones..lol) are 88% verbal and 70th Performance and overall 80th. They didn't give him a processing speed? that is talked about on this board even though he is 4.5 years old.

[Anonymous]

Don't stress about it too much. I think just as it was possible that the high scoring child is rejected across the board the "80th" child can be admitted across the board. Personality counts as do many other intangibles.

I find it incredible that there are all these 99+ kids as well. Low 90s I would expect but the 99+ really surprised me. It just makes the scores that much less reliable.

[Anonymous]

I have debated whether to post on this thread but I have three kids who have taken the WPPSI (all have gotten in to an independent school). Their scores from oldest to youngest were as follows: #1 perf 96 verbal 97 full scale 99 #2 perf 97 verbal 96 full scale 99 #3 perf 99.8 verbal 86 full scale 99.

They are all normal kids, they have done well in school and are challenged by the work. As you can see, different scores can add up to the same full scale. I think it tells only that the kids are able to do the work of an independent school, not how they will do there. HTH.

[Anonymous]

DC is like Lake Wobegon: "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."

[Anonymous]

Our DC had a full scale of 81 (I'd have to go look up the specific verbal and performance scores, but he was lower on verbal and higher on performance.) He got a mediocre recommendation from his preschool teacher, as she was quite offended we were interested in private over public. We are not wealthy (but needed no financial aid) and are certainly not connected other than to our lovely relatives spread across this fine country. We did not apply to "big 3" primarily because they were geographically impractical. DC got into a nice private school that is well respected in Virginia.

Don't stress. Apply and see what happens. If the answer is no, then there are truly fine public schools in this area.

[Anonymous]

99th percentile covers a large range of IQ - and this is noted in the test scores. 130 range is the low end and the best fit for private - above 145 is highly gifted and not as common - these kids typically are often the ones being declined - they require more accommodations and are often left out of the selection process. Public schools are supposed to have better accommodations for the highly gifted, but I'm not convinced that is the case - a small, private (not big 3) is a better bet for the highly gifted if they demonstrate that that they are willing and capable of offering a differentiated program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:99th percentile covers a large range of IQ - and this is noted in the test scores. 130 range is the low end and the best fit for private - above 145 is highly gifted and not as common - these kids typically are often the ones being declined - they require more accommodations and are often left out of the selection process. Public schools are supposed to have better accommodations for the highly gifted, but I'm not convinced that is the case - a small, private (not big 3) is a better bet for the highly gifted if they demonstrate that that they are willing and capable of offering a differentiated program.

Interesting analysis. You seem to have very detailed info about how local schools view the WPPSI scores. Where did you learn this? Have you heard it directly from admissions people in the area? Did you read it in a book? Are you passing along a summary of comments you have read on DCUM? Could you please give some sourcing/explanation? Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Combination of sources - good friend is a talented and gifted educator (general source), school principal (public school source),2 DC educational consultants (private school source), books and various gifted internet sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Combination of sources - good friend is a talented and gifted educator (general source), school principal (public school source),2 DC educational consultants (private school source), books and various gifted internet sources.

Thanks. Which of these sources gave you the basis for your claim that:

above 145 ... these kids typically are often the ones being declined - they require more accommodations and are often left out of the selection process

And what exactly did your source say? The idea that kids with scores above 145 are summarily "left out" of the selection process strikes me as odd and perhaps not quite correct. Maybe I am not interpreting you correctly. Are you really claiming that schools will reject children with scores above 145 outright, or even count those high scores as negatives against them? Or are you instead claiming that schools will look unfavorably on children that "require more accommodations," and that in some children high scores could correlate with "requiring more accommodations"? The former claim (rejecting kids simply because of high scores) makes little sense to me because I am sure many kids with high scores require no special accommodations at all. The DCUM boards are full of people posting about how surprised they were at DC's high score, since DC seems just a normal but bright kid (and thus requiring no "special accommodations"). I suspect you are making the latter claim -- it strikes me as potentially reasonable that some schools would be concerned about taking on children that require special accommodations, for example ... intense remedial sessions for children that are behind in certain areas, special management for ADHD kids, extra attention for extremely shy kids, or extraordinary efforts to feed the needs of junior prodigies. So if schools are wary of "special accommodations," and a significant percentage of kids with scores above 145 need those accommodations, then it makes some sense that schools end up rejecting more high-score kids than one might initially suspect. Put simply, it's a question of what drives the rejection: special accommodations or high scores?

Thanks for relaying the input from your sources. I look forward to reading more specifics about what your source said on this topic (and which source it was).

[Anonymous]

Did your child score 145+? Is that why you're posts are bordering on interrogation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did your child score 145+? Is that why you're posts are bordering on interrogation?

My guess is that like many parents, this parent wishes that there was a way to have more control over this process, which is largely a black box, or to know something in advance in order to ease the anxiety of just waiting for someone else to make a decision that's very important to their family.

Most parents on this board are accustomed to shaping their own destinies. Having this decision in other people's hands is torture, and a common instinct is to try to rationalize it to death.

It's not that different from "will he call me? There was definitely a vibe there, so he'll call me. Why wouldn't he call me when he said he would? Okay, so when a guy says that he had a nice time, is that a blow-off or are they serious? Who here has ever had a guy tell them that he had a nice time but then he didn't call? Or do they mostly call on Wednesday so they don't seem over-eager? Are there statistics on this????????????????"

Prety much the same thing.