WISC experience - what did you tell your child? How did they react to taking the test?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

OP wants to know how to prepare a child for the WISC. Your response does nothing to answer that question, but does heap a lot of unnecessary judgment on OP. And BTW, I am assuming that you are opting out of the "batteries" of SOL that take many more hours to administer each year than a WISC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

OP wants to know how to prepare a child for the WISC. Your response does nothing to answer that question, but does heap a lot of unnecessary judgment on OP. And BTW, I am assuming that you are opting out of the "batteries" of SOL that take many more hours to administer each year than a WISC?

*slow clap*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

OP wants to know how to prepare a child for the WISC. Your response does nothing to answer that question, but does heap a lot of unnecessary judgment on OP. And BTW, I am assuming that you are opting out of the "batteries" of SOL that take many more hours to administer each year than a WISC?

Sometimes in this area a little judgment is necessary given that people now automatically assume their kids need a WISC. And why even ask how to tell the kid if the parent doesn't think this is a big deal?

As for SOLs, that's hardly a comparison, though I ignore SOLs as I do most of the work my kids are doing at school. That's their thing.

[Anonymous]

And sometimes parents have WISCs done for reasons that have nothing to do with AAP-- ADHD, LDs, etc. OP didn't say why her DC was having a WISC done, so PP has no idea. Many people post WISC questions here because lots of readers have experience. Why would PP attack OP, who may be very concerned about her DC? The whole "I would never subject my DC to a battery of tests" is just mean-- especially since PP knows nothing about OP's situation. I standby uncalled for and unhelpful. And mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And sometimes parents have WISCs done for reasons that have nothing to do with AAP-- ADHD, LDs, etc. OP didn't say why her DC was having a WISC done, so PP has no idea. Many people post WISC questions here because lots of readers have experience. Why would PP attack OP, who may be very concerned about her DC? The whole "I would never subject my DC to a battery of tests" is just mean-- especially since PP knows nothing about OP's situation. I standby uncalled for and unhelpful. And mean.

+1

[Anonymous]

We told him he'd be taking a test to see how he learns and to help us make some decisions about school placement. The test did not tire or stress him out in any way. He enjoyed it and went to school afterward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

Who's being snotty? One of the psychologists is one who's name comes up often here. The other was at GMU. This was done as research for something I was writing about the topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

Who's being snotty? One of the psychologists is one who's name comes up often here. The other was at GMU. This was done as research for something I was writing about the topic.

You write and yet you still don't know when to use they're, their, and there? It's not a mistake even non-writers make who know well when to use those words.

[Anonymous]

^^^Looks like someone's run out of comebacks if you're correcting a day's old typo that I addressed in a post the minute I made it. Good one.

Game. Set. Match.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

Who's being snotty? One of the psychologists is one who's name comes up often here. The other was at GMU. This was done as research for something I was writing about the topic.

Really? I don't believe it for one minute...but feel free to share this researched paper to prove me wrong. If you won't do that, please state the name of these 2 psychologists who allegedly made these statements to you "on the record" for your research. What's to hide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

Who's being snotty? One of the psychologists is one who's name comes up often here. The other was at GMU. This was done as research for something I was writing about the topic.

You write and yet you still don't know when to use they're, their, and there? It's not a mistake even non-writers make who know well when to use those words.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids didn't react because they never took the WISC. There innate intelligence was fairly obvious from any old test teachers wanted to give them. I feel sorry for all the kids who are subjected to these additional batteries of testing.

*their*

These are the DCUM responses I HATE THE MOST-- the ones that in no way, shape or form answer the question asked, but instead point out that they are #blessed not to have the problem-- with a healthy dose of smug judgment thrown in. PP: when you read the question and realized you had nothing substantive to add, why did you not STFU and keep moving? Does your response do anything except give you a chance to congratulate yourself? --signed a mom whose child also qualified for AAP based on his dazzlingly obvious brilliance ( ) , but still had to "subject him to batteries of tests" for ADHD.

Because I believe all this additional testing is over the top and too often done for the wrong reasons (to find an "excuse" for other test scores that don't meet parents expectations). I'm not saying this is true in all cases, or your cases. But I have been told this by more than one psychologist administering the WISC in this area, so I think my viewpoint is as valid and useful as anyone's on this thread.

Yes, your viewpoint is valid if the OP asked do you think the additional testing is over the top. Did she ask that? No, you wanted to be snotty. Oh, please let me know the names of at least 2 psychologists who told you this AND how you came to have a discussion about this with them since you didn't test your own kids.

Who's being snotty? One of the psychologists is one who's name comes up often here. The other was at GMU. This was done as research for something I was writing about the topic.

You write and yet you still don't know when to use they're, their, and there? It's not a mistake even non-writers make who know well when to use those words.

+1

Appears PP immediately corrected her own mistake, if you'd bothered to read the original post and one after it. So +1 seems a bit gratuitous.

[Anonymous]

To answer OP's question, I told my twins that they were taking a test to see if what they are learning in school matches their intelligence level. I know this wasn't the best explanation, but they didn't press further, so I didn't say anything more. I took them in on separate days and they were both extremely nervous. I still feel guilty thinking about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To answer OP's question, I told my twins that they were taking a test to see if what they are learning in school matches their intelligence level. I know this wasn't the best explanation, but they didn't press further, so I didn't say anything more. I took them in on separate days and they were both extremely nervous. I still feel guilty thinking about it.

Do you wish you gave them a different explanation, now in retrospect?