Anonymous wroteC ACCEPTED. 83% FAT, 121 NNAT, GBRS 11, Wisc 120. Mostly 3s, two 4s, and a couple of 2s on report card. Parent referral.

That was my DC. Again, work samples can trup everything. AART had some amazing work samples for my DC and I assume that the panel saw them and realized test scores were not an accurate reflection of the ability/intelligence level. Thank goodness the AART at our school cared!

what is WISC?
My Daughter took nnat and cogat..
anyone tell me what is WISC and FxAT?

Yes, my friend is in the testing field and some testers are known for giving higher scores and some testers are known for telling parents what they want to hear.

One thing that our aart stressed was that the committee looks at the writing samples for evidence of higher level thinking and critical analysis. I know at our school the aart pulls advanced academic lessons for these samples that were given to the whole class. I would hazard a guess that for kids with great test scores that aren't admitted, maybe it is something about the writing samples given to the committee.

Maybe some local psychologists have a reputation for producing very high WISC scores.

^ Sorry, I guess that the WISC wouldn't have been a long time ago since it is only for ages 6 and up and the child has been described as the youngest in the class. But in general I wondered if anything about the WISC could be making it seem less valid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One other thing might account for this: An extremely low GBRS coupled with a WISC of 140 based on very high working memory/processing speed scores and verbal/perceptual scores below 120. Does that match your data?

No, DC's scores were very high in verbal and perceptual (18s and 17s in subscores), rather lower in processing speed. I am stunned!

Sounds surprising but what was the GBRS? And where was the WISC done?

Why does it matter where the WISC was done?

Curious if a WISC done by an unknown private psychologist could somehow be discounted. Have seen on this forum for example that the screening committee likes WISCs done at GMU and have also seen Diana Dahlgren's name mentioned often. But if the WISC was done a long time ago in another state, the writeup was poor, or something like that, maybe that could help explain why the WISC would have been given less weight than usual.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC ACCEPTED. 83% FAT, 121 NNAT, GBRS 11, Wisc 120. Mostly 3s, two 4s, and a couple of 2s on report card. Parent referral.

I don't believe this.

I don't believe this either. My DC with NNAT 99% (135), FAT 83%, GBRS 13 didn't get in. I didn't submit WISC though. All 4s in report card with 3s in art.

I *triple* do not believe it. NNAT 142 (99%), FAT 85%, WISC 140 (99.6%), youngest in the class, not in! WTF?

For real? This is so weird. Two years ago when my daughter was in the process, there was an "appeals" thread where people posted their scores, and the main thing that came through was that anyone with a WISC above 130 got in, regardless of the GBRS and anything else. WTF???? Did you find out the GBRS? I would think a WISC of 140 would trump a GBRS of 4! Definitely get a Stanford-Binet and appeal.

Sorry, included the wrong quote. I am responding to the above.

So the Stanford-Binet test, which is an IQ test, will show what to the committee? The WISC already places this child in the 99.6 percentile. Anything less than that will not help the case. Sounds like they black balled the kid on the GBRS, which IMO is crazy as the WISC is the gold standard in determining gifted children.

99.6 percentile of what? Ability to take an IQ test? That's about all it meaqsures. Doesn't prove a thing as far as academic performance.
And what's with all this "gold standard" stuff? Sounds like a tout for the for-profit testers trade association.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One other thing might account for this: An extremely low GBRS coupled with a WISC of 140 based on very high working memory/processing speed scores and verbal/perceptual scores below 120. Does that match your data?

No, DC's scores were very high in verbal and perceptual (18s and 17s in subscores), rather lower in processing speed. I am stunned!

Sounds surprising but what was the GBRS? And where was the WISC done?

Why does it matter where the WISC was done?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One other thing might account for this: An extremely low GBRS coupled with a WISC of 140 based on very high working memory/processing speed scores and verbal/perceptual scores below 120. Does that match your data?

No, DC's scores were very high in verbal and perceptual (18s and 17s in subscores), rather lower in processing speed. I am stunned!

Sounds surprising but what was the GBRS? And where was the WISC done?

you should find any shred of new info and resubmit.

once the committee rejects a file, all of those non-eligible files are looked at again by an oversight committee to check for consistency. so this file was already declined twice. maybe there is something in the WISC subtests? even a low GBRS should be countered by a 140. low DRA? 2's on report card?

Anonymous wrote:One other thing might account for this: An extremely low GBRS coupled with a WISC of 140 based on very high working memory/processing speed scores and verbal/perceptual scores below 120. Does that match your data?

No, DC's scores were very high in verbal and perceptual (18s and 17s in subscores), rather lower in processing speed. I am stunned!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC ACCEPTED. 83% FAT, 121 NNAT, GBRS 11, Wisc 120. Mostly 3s, two 4s, and a couple of 2s on report card. Parent referral.

I don't believe this.

I don't believe this either. My DC with NNAT 99% (135), FAT 83%, GBRS 13 didn't get in. I didn't submit WISC though. All 4s in report card with 3s in art.

I *triple* do not believe it. NNAT 142 (99%), FAT 85%, WISC 140 (99.6%), youngest in the class, not in! WTF?

For real? This is so weird. Two years ago when my daughter was in the process, there was an "appeals" thread where people posted their scores, and the main thing that came through was that anyone with a WISC above 130 got in, regardless of the GBRS and anything else. WTF???? Did you find out the GBRS? I would think a WISC of 140 would trump a GBRS of 4! Definitely get a Stanford-Binet and appeal.

Sorry, included the wrong quote. I am responding to the above.

So the Stanford-Binet test, which is an IQ test, will show what to the committee? The WISC already places this child in the 99.6 percentile. Anything less than that will not help the case. Sounds like they black balled the kid on the GBRS, which IMO is crazy as the WISC is the gold standard in determining gifted children.

Anonymous wrote:One other thing might account for this: An extremely low GBRS coupled with a WISC of 140 based on very high working memory/processing speed scores and verbal/perceptual scores below 120. Does that match your data?

So the Stanford-Binet test, which is an IQ test, will show what to the committee? The WISC already places this child in the 99.6 percentile. Anything less than that will not help the case. Sounds like they black balled the kid on the GBRS, which IMO is crazy as the WISC is the gold standard in determining gifted children.