kearney_Gilman_Digest117

Kearney_Gilman - Second Day ASAT Assessment and Testing Conference

From: "Discuss the issues related to growth & development of gifted children" <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu> [ Save address ]
To: "Discuss the issues related to growth & development of gifted children" <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Subject: OURGIFTED-L digest 117
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:01:13 CST
OURGIFTED-L Digest 117

Topics covered in this issue include:

1) ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc
by Sally_L@comcast.net
2) RE: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?
by Leese Johnson <leesemom@comcast.net>
3) ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
by SMR <smr_424@yahoo.com>
4) ASAT: Testing teens w/IQ tests
by SMR <smr_424@yahoo.com>
5) ASAT:ADMIN - Webpage & digests of posts are available
by Sally_L@comcast.net
6) ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
7) Re: ASAT: Opening Statement by Kathi Kearney & Bobbie Gilman
by Corin Goodwin <corin@thegoodwins.com>
8) ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
by Bernadette Keeffe <bkeeffeuk@balex.freeserve.co.uk>
9) Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement available to view on the website
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
10) Re: from Malaysia
by dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
11) Re: assessments for pace? (was Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement
by "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>

12) Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
13) Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
by Kristina Shepard <kshepard@merr.com>
14) Culturally and linguistically different and gifted
by Kristina Shepard <kshepard@merr.com>
15) More "testing the young child" questions
by Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
16) Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
17) Re: ASAT: SB 5
by Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
18) Re: from Malaysia
by dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
19) ASAT: ADMIN - The Second Day has Started
by Sally_L@comcast.net
20) Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
by Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
21) Re: ASAT: Testing teens w/IQ tests
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
22) Re: assessments for pace? (was Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
23) Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which

test/grade to use?)
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
24) RE: More "testing the young child" questions
by Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com>
25) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary and preschool
by Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
26) Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
27) Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
28) Re: from Malaysia/more ideas
by =?iso-8859-1?q?Anthony=20Xavier?= <antshe2021@yahoo.co.uk>
29) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by mblochfamily1@comcast.net
30) ASAT: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
31) Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Urmi Ashar <urmiashar@hotmail.com>
32) ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
by Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
33) RE: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by "Carolyn & Mark K." <carolyn@thehoagies.com>
34) Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?

by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
35) Re: ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
36) Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
37) Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
by Rebecca Cunningham <slypigs@tampabay.rr.com>
38) RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
39) ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
40) Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
41) RE: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
by Barbara Hutton <blmh@rms.org>
42) Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
43) ASAT: ADMIN - I will be away from approving messaging for the next 4
hours
by Sally_L@comcast.net
44) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>

45) Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by Sylvia Zinser <szinser@zinser.no-ip.info>
46) Re: Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
47) Re: ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
by Kay Hall <kay@printerideas.com>
48) ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
by Shannon <shannon@childbrain.org>
49) RE: ASAT: questions on the ranges of 'gifted'
by "Logue, Theodosia Nowell (UMC-Student)" <tnltg2@mizzou.edu>
50) Re: ASAT: SB 5 Results
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
51) Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
52) Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
53) Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
54) Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
55) ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
by meg5000@att.net

56) Re: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
57) Re: ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
58) Re: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
59) Re: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
60) impact of SI, Vision on WISC
by Elan Long <elong@springsmart.com>
61) Re: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
62) Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?
by Corin Goodwin <corin@thegoodwins.com>
63) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
64) Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
65) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
66) Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
67) Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>

68) Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
69) Re: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
70) Re: ASAT: SB5: generalizes to homeschoolers; role of knowledge in
scores.
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
71) Re: Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
by "Kathryn M. Finn" <kitfinn@cox.net>
72) Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
73) Re: ASAT: SB 5
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
74) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
75) RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
by "main.family" <main.family@optusnet.com.au>
76) Re: ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
77) ASAT: Re: from Malaysia/more ideas
by "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
78) ASAT : IQ & the Bell Curve
by Lawver@aol.com
79) RE: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Aimee Yermish <ayermish@alum.mit.edu>

80) ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
81) Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
82) Re: ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
by adagio <adagiolet@comcast.net>
83) Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
84) ASAT : IQ & the Bell Curve
by Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
85) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
86) Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
87) ASAT Necessity for retest?
by KF Old Account <kathryn.friedlander@BTInternet.com>
88) ASAT-RE: Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
by Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com>
89) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
90) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
91) RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability

by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
92) Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
93) Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
94) Re: ASAT Necessity for retest?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
95) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
96) ASAT Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No. [Yes]
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
97) ASAT: International testing
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
98) Re: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
99) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
100) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
101) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
102) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by JDCWilker@aol.com
103) ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks - now is an appropriate time to start posting
online thanks

by Sally_L@comcast.net
104) Re: ASAT: SB5: generalizes to homeschoolers; role of knowledge in
scores.
by Debra B Walker <debbidee@hotmail.com>
105) Re: ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
106) Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
107) Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
108) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
109) ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
110) Re: Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
111) Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
112) ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
113) Re: ASAT Necessity for retest?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
114) Re: What about the SB-LM?

by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
115) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
116) Re: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
by Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
117) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No. - Disagree!!!
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
118) Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by mblochfamily1@comcast.net
119) WJ III
by Helene <helene@one.net>
120) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
121) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by JDCWilker@aol.com
122) RE: ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
by Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com>
123) Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
by "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
124) Re: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
125) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
126) RE: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
by "Logue, Theodosia Nowell (UMC-Student)" <tnltg2@mizzou.edu>
127) ASAT: WISC IV

by Maura MacKenzie <msmack44@yahoo.com>
128) Re: WJ III
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
129) Re: ASAT thank you Drew
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
130) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
131) ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by "Barbara A. Minton, Ph.D." <minmay@cableone.net>
132) ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks - now is an appropriate time to start posting
online thanks
by Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
133) Re: ASAT School GT gate tests
by Mft814@aol.com
134) ASAT:thank you
by Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com>
135) Re: WJ III
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
136) ASAT - prereading
by Mft814@aol.com
137) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
138) Re: WJ III
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
139) Re: ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
140) Re: ASAT - prereading

by "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
141) Re: ASAT:thank you
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
142) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
143) Re: WJ III
by Helene <helene@one.net>
144) Re: WJ III
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
145) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
146) Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by RDlouruf@cs.com
147) Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by ebn@rcn.com
148) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
149) Re: ASAT School GT gate tests
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
150) Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
151) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
152) Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>

153) Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
154) Visual LD and testing
by TODD CLENNY <TCLENNY@msn.com>
155) Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
by Barbara Minton <minmay@cableone.net>
156) Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
by Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
157) ASAT: Testing very young gifted children
by Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
158) Re: What about the SB-LM?
by Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
159) Re: ASAT: thank you
by Julie Knapp <littleredhenschool@yahoo.com>
160) Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
by "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
161) Re: Visual LD and testing
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
162) RE: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
by "main.family" <main.family@optusnet.com.au>
163) Re: ASAT: thank you
by "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
164) Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
by Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
165) Re: ASAT: thank you

by "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
166) ASAT: Book: Developing Your Child For Success
by Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
167) ASAT -- how are the tests changing
by Aimee Yermish <ayermish@alum.mit.edu>
168) Re: impact of SI, Vision on WISC
by Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
169) Re: ASAT SB5
by RDlouruf@cs.com
170) Re: ASAT -- how are the tests changing
by RDlouruf@cs.com
171) Re: ASAT --random musings
by "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
172) Re: ASAT -- how are the tests changing
by Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
173) Re: ASAT -- how are the tests changing
by Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
174) RE: ASAT -- how are the tests changing
by Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:23:11 +0000
From: Sally_L@comcast.net
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032120040623.18858.731a@comcast.net>

Hi List Members,

Since the list is international - I thought I would let people know the schedule
for the next while - approx 6 to 7 hours. The server is still functioning just
fine;)

Since it is quite necessary for our guest experts to "sleep" they will be
offline for awhile. (Yes, for those in California just getting your kiddos to
bed - continue posting;)Just becuse you don't see them online, I will process
them tomorrow.

For those in Australia - you keep posting too since it definitely Sunday, March
21. I will process whatever you send to the list as well.

Welcome and good morning for those just waking up in the UK and Europe. You get
to have fun and read all the posts that were posted during your night and
certainly when you post I will process them in about 6 to 7 hours. LOL

Again, thanks for everyone's patience due to the server being down. I think the
guest experts really have done a wonderful job!!! So many messages posted and
answered even with the delayed, but will still be our First day.

I too will be signing off and will start approving more messages in about 6 to 7
hours from now - whatever that time may be where you live and play;))

More later,
Sally_L
Conference Coordinator
List Manager
www.neiu.edu/~ourgift

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:25:47 -0800
From: Leese Johnson <leesemom@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040320222529.28DDF1AC005@mailgate.neiu.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C40ECA.4AE9DE80"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C40ECA.4AE9DE80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks Kathy,
In our state we just have to test annually with one of quite a long list of
standardized tests. We don't have to produce the results to anyone. Thank
goodness for that!

In our local area the most accessible tests are the ITBS, SAT, CAT5 and the
MAT. I'll pay the extra amount to have an individual test given periodically
but am hoping to try to work within what we "have" to do. Right now I feel
like we are just going through the motions of having the child take the

test. Can any of these tests actually be useful for kids like this?

Leese
leesemom@comcast.net

_____

From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu] On
Behalf Of Kathi Kearney
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 11:59 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?

Leese wrote:

<<<We have used the Stanford and the California (both one year above level)
and receiving 99%tile scores. The Johns Hopkins SCAT test (due to my grade
placement error) scored the student against kids 4 grades above their public
school grade and the child still qualified. The child is homeschooled and
does work 2 grades above level.

What do you think about jumping two grade levels above their "public" school
grade on a group achievement test? Our state requires a "nationally normed"
test so we'd like to use the level and test that will yield the most useful
results. We'd like suggestions both for the best test within these limits

and grade placement for the tests.>>>>

Well now, Leese -- the answer to this question depends more on your state's
homeschool law, unfortunately, than on which test will give you the most
information.

In some states, you must score at or above a certain percentile rank on a
nationally normed achievement test in order for your homeschool program not
to be put "on probation." In many states which have this sort of law, the
percentile is quite high -- I believe both NH and NY state require the 40th
percentile, or higher.

So, if you chose to do an out-of-level achievement test in order to get
useful information, you *could* run the risk of the child scoring below the
40th percentile (as compared to older students), but then having the state
or local school district (depending on who the scores go to in your state)
saying a 39th percentile is a 39th percentile, and deciding to put your
program on probation.

If this is the situation in your state (or, for those few states where

homeschooling comes under local district approval, your district), then I'd
say don't give the out of level test, give the regular on-grade-level test.
You don't want to potentially jeopardize your right to homeschool, just for
giving an out-of-level test.

If your state homeschool law requires testing, you can always give both the
on-grade-level, age-appropriate test to satisfy state regulations and then
give the out-of-level test for your own information and use.

This advice generally contradicts much of what I believe about testing --
that testing should be useful, instructionally relevant, and shouldn't be
driven by politics. But the right to continue to homeschool is an option
that gifted children *have* to have, especially when the winds of school
"reform" mitigate so much against gifted children having access to
appropriate education in conventional settings. You shouldn't jeopardize
that right over one test.

The other option, of course, is having an individual achievement test such
as the WJ-III, WIAT-II, K-TEA, or PIAT administered by a qualified examiner
instead. These are all nationally normed tests with ceilings up through 12th
grade (college level for the WJ-III).

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C40ECA.4AE9DE80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D514421806-21032004><FONT=20
face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000ff>Thanks Kathy,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D514421806-21032004><FONT=20
face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000ff>In our state we just have to test =
annually=20

with one of quite a long list of standardized tests. We don't have to =
produce=20
the results to anyone.  Thank goodness for that! =
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D514421806-21032004><FONT=20
face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><SPAN class=3D514421806-21032004><FONT=20
face=3D"Comic Sans MS" color=3D#0000ff>In our local area the most =
accessible tests=20
are the ITBS, SAT, CAT5 and the MAT. I'll pay the extra amount to =
have an=20
individual test given periodically but am hoping to try to work within =
what we=20
"have" to do. Right now I feel like we are just going through the =
motions of=20
having the child take the test. Can any of these tests actually be =
useful for=20
kids like this?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV align=3Dleft><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Leese</FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=3Dleft><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20

href=3D"mailto:leesemom@comcast.net">leesemom@comcast.net</A> =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft>
<HR tabIndex=3D-1>
<FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2><B>From:</B> owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu=20
[mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Kathi=20
Kearney<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 20, 2004 11:59 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to=20
use?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Leese wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><<<<FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans =
MS">We=20
have used the Stanford and the California (both one year above =
level) and=20
receiving 99%tile scores. The Johns Hopkins SCAT test (due to my =
grade=20
placement error) scored the student against kids 4 grades above =

their public=20
school grade and the child still qualified. The child is =
homeschooled and=20
does work 2 grades above level. <BR></FONT></FONT><BR><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Comic Sans MS">What do you think about =
jumping two=20
grade levels above their "public" school grade on a group =
achievement test?=20
Our state requires a "nationally normed" test so we'd like to use =
the level=20
and test that will yield the most useful results. We'd like =
suggestions both=20
for the best test within these limits and grade placement for the=20
tests.>>>><BR></FONT></FONT><BR>Well now, Leese -- =
 the=20
answer to this question depends more on your state's homeschool law, =

unfortunately, than on which test will give you the most=20
information.<BR><BR>In some states, you must score at or above a =
certain=20
percentile rank on a nationally normed achievement test in order for =
your=20

homeschool program not to be put "on probation." In many states =
which have=20
this sort of law, the percentile is quite high -- I believe both NH =
and NY=20
state require the 40th percentile, or higher.<BR><BR>So, if you =
chose to do=20
an out-of-level achievement test in order to get useful information, =
you=20
*could* run the risk of the child scoring below the 40th percentile =
(as=20
compared to older students), but then having the state or local =
school=20
district (depending on who the scores go to in your state) saying a =
39th=20
percentile is a 39th percentile, and deciding to put your program on =

probation.<BR><BR>If this is the situation in your state (or, for =
those few=20
states where homeschooling comes under local district approval, your =

district), then I'd say don't give the out of level test, give the =
regular=20
on-grade-level test. You don't want to potentially jeopardize your =
right to=20

homeschool, just for giving an out-of-level test.<BR><BR>If your =
state=20
homeschool law requires testing, you can always give both the=20
on-grade-level, age-appropriate test to satisfy state regulations =
and then=20
give the out-of-level test for your own information and =
use.<BR><BR>This=20
advice generally contradicts much of what I believe about testing -- =
that=20
testing should be useful, instructionally relevant, and shouldn't be =
driven=20
by politics. But the right to continue to homeschool is an option =
that=20
gifted children *have* to have, especially when the winds of school =
"reform"=20
mitigate so much against gifted children having access to =
appropriate=20
education in conventional settings. You shouldn't jeopardize that =
right over=20
one test.<BR><BR>The other option, of course, is having an =
individual=20
achievement test such as the WJ-III, WIAT-II, K-TEA, or PIAT =
administered by=20

a qualified examiner instead. These are all nationally normed tests =
with=20
ceilings up through 12th grade (college level for the=20
WJ-III).</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C40ECA.4AE9DE80--

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:35:27 -0800 (PST)
From: SMR <smr_424@yahoo.com>
Subject: ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321063527.65604.qmail@web10105.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hello -
I was wondering if you could provide any correlation
studies that look at student's SAT scores at various ages
and "guesstimate" IQ based on those scores?

For example, if a 12 yo scores a 1340 on the SAT, can you
say that child is porbably/possibly/likely HG? EG? PG?

If a 14 yo scores a perfect 1600, what does that tell
you?

If there is any research in this particular area, I
would love to see it!

Thank you,
Susan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 22:43:31 -0800 (PST)
From: SMR <smr_424@yahoo.com>
Subject: ASAT: Testing teens w/IQ tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321064331.1015.qmail@web10108.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hello,
I am wondering if you can tell us whether or not it
would be wise to test an older child (15/16 yo) to
determine how gifted that student is? Are there any
situations that arise later in a person's life where you
would find yourself saying "I really should have had an
SB-LM (or some other version) score for my child/young
adult"?

Our child ceiling'ed many sub-tests of the WISC-III and
WIAT when tested at age 12...and those are the only tests
she has done, besides SATs and OLSATs group achievement
tests.

We know she's gifted but we don't know whether she's
HG/EG/PG....and the actual IQ score doesn't matter to us
now, but we don't know if somewhere down the line we/she

will wish that we had had her do an SB-LM.

Thanks for your insights,
Susan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:50:49 +0000
From: Sally_L@comcast.net
Subject: ASAT:ADMIN - Webpage & digests of posts are available
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032120040650.19689.3338@comcast.net>

Hi List Members,
I have updated the website to include Digest 115 - 4 posts contains the Welcome,
etc and Digest 116 - 73 posts for the past day's posts:) Yeah the list server
became available. LOL

The digest are available at

http://www.neiu.edu/~ourgift/pages/Conference.htm

Scroll to the bottom of the page and click on the links.

More later,
Sally_L
Conference Coordinator
List Manager
www.neiu.edu/~ourgift
C

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:35:14 +0100
From: Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
Subject: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <005701c40f1f$6e7f0f00$8a7ba8c0@spc2>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> The book *Developing Your Child for Success* by Dr. Kenneth
> Lane also describes these issues and offers vision exercises (helpful if
> you don't have a behavioral optometrist nearby).

Thanks for the suggestion, Bobbie.
Do you know of any other books or websites, because this book appears to be
out of print, and therefore it's hard to get?

Luc K (Felix jun98)

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 11:44:02 -0800
From: Corin Goodwin <corin@thegoodwins.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Opening Statement by Kathi Kearney & Bobbie Gilman
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405C9F02.30508@thegoodwins.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Sally_L@comcast.net wrote:

>Assessment and Testing: What about the SB5, WISC-IV, and Other
>Tests?
>
>Kathi Kearney M.A. Ed. And Barbara J. Gilman M.S
>March 20th & 21st, 2004
>
>
>
Have we started yet? :-)

>We would love to explain what safeguards
>we use to ensure accurate test results (*please* ask us),
>
I'm asking... Some of the questions on the WISC III that my dd took
seemed so arbitrary, or at least the values attached to them did. As a
homeschooling family, I couldn't help but think that some of the general
knowledge information was poorly correlated with expected level of

ability or intelligence. I can get more specific upon request...

>One difference in both the individual and group assessment of
>gifted children is that, unlike other areas of special education (and,
>increasingly today, general education) a major purpose of the
>assessment of gifted children is to uncover patterns of strength,
>rather than deficits. (This is not to say that deficits may not be
>discovered during the assessment process, but it is usually not the
>primary focus of the assessment).
>
>

I don't know a whole lot about testing, but I guess I'm wondering if the
point isn't to uncover neither strengths nor weaknesses alone, but to
get a whole picture of the child in question. Isn't that more important
than either strengths or weaknesses in isolation, or as a focus?

Thanks,
Corin

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:36:00 +0000
From: Bernadette Keeffe <bkeeffeuk@balex.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <007801c40f27$ec9140e0$ed2686d9@bunnys>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hello all and Kathi and Bobbie,

We live in the UK, but I think the tests are the same. I have a son aged 7
(ASD, atypical, socially interested, CAPD) who was tested at 5 using
WPPSI-R achieving a PIQ of 141 and a verbal of 81. It was double checked as
the gap was so huge and unusual. Other non-IQ tests have also revealed this
discrepency (eg the British Ability Scales).

I recently tested him using a non-verbal reasoning test in which he scored
the equivalent of an 11 year old, but his verbal scores are still way down.
He is receiving a little therapy for his verbal handicap.

I am meeting with his clinical psychologist to discuss where to go, but she

is unfamiliar with the SB in any form and doesn't really think testing more
is the answer, but I do!

I am really keen to suggest tests which can break down areas of strength for
visual/spacial people and weakness for the verbally challenged so that I may
get a more accurate picture of how to deal with this.

Biggest headache is that the school don't accelerate and also don't really
acknowledge his ability.

Hope these questions aren't too personal for the list.

Bernadette
London, uK

Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 08:24:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement available to view on the website
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040320162416.89869.qmail@web20206.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1255926847-1079799856=:89643"

--0-1255926847-1079799856=:89643
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Since I cannot open the website page and haven't received any messages yet this
morning, I'll start with a question about test instruments.

I have now read the Assessment Bulletin for the SB:5 and the new Interpretive
manual that addresses scores for the gifted. I am impressed by the areas
covered by the SB:5 for gifted, and particularly like the Quantitative Reasoning
and Fluid Reasoning clusters that are minimal - if existent at all - in the
WISC-IV.

I would like your opinions about using the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) for
gifted children. It has been my instrument of choice up to this point, as, like
the SB:5, it doesn't penalize kids for processing speed and significant memory
problems.

Opinons about the DAS?

Thank you - Laurie Jensen

Sally_L@comcast.net wrote:
Hi List Members,

The Opening Statement is available to also read on the website

http://www.neiu.edu/~ourgift/pages/Conference.htm

It is the "pretty" version:)and error free

Thanks,

Sally_L
Conference Coordinator

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1255926847-1079799856=:89643
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Since I cannot open the website page and haven't received any messages yet
this morning, I'll start with a question about test instruments.  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have now read the Assessment Bulletin for the SB:5 and the new
Interpretive manual that addresses scores for the gifted.  I am impressed
by the areas covered by the SB:5 for gifted, and particularly like the
Quantitative Reasoning and Fluid Reasoning clusters that are minimal - if
existent at all - in the WISC-IV.  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I would like your opinions about using the Differential Ability Scales
(DAS) for gifted children.  It has been my instrument of choice up to this
point, as, like the SB:5, it doesn't penalize kids for processing speed and
significant memory problems.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Opinons about the DAS? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you - Laurie Jensen<BR><BR><B><I>Sally_L@comcast.net</I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Hi List Members,<BR><BR>The Opening Statement is
available to also read on the
website<BR><BR>http://www.neiu.edu/~ourgift/pages/Conference.htm<BR><BR>It is
the "pretty" version:)and error free<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR><BR>Sally_L<BR>Conference
Coordinator<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1255926847-1079799856=:89643--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 03:34:41 -0800 (PST)
From: dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: from Malaysia
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321113441.47572.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

We have the same problem with our son.
He is 9, was born in the USA, lived in Mexico from 6
months to 4 1/2, then in Canada for 2 years and now in
Belgium for 2 1/2 years. He went to school in Spanish
(preschool), English and Dutch.
He was tested 8 months after moving to Belgium, on the
Dutch version of the WISCIII.
He scored PIQ 141, VIQ 128, TIQ 140.
Two weeks after the test an hearing loss of 20-40 %
was discovered, due to blocked Eustachian canals, one
month later he was found to be quite nearsighted.
I have always thought that the fact he bearly spoke
Dutch 8 months before the test compressed his verbal
score. After all, this is an extremely verbal child
who reads books at a very high level in both Dutch and
English.

His extreme personality and other issues makes me
wonder if he isn't more gifted than was measured.
My question is : how do you measure giftedness in
children who have been educated in different languages
? Aren't they virtally untestable in tests that are
normed on a population who's fluent in only language ?

Dominique

--- Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>
> <<<<No, English is not her first language but she
> only converse in English
> both at home and in school. Though she understands
> tamil and Malay
> language, she still chooses to speak in English.
> >>>>
>
> Then it's quite likely that her bilingualism
> affected her test performance
> -- if the WISC-III was given in English.
>
>

=====
Dominiquetvp

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:07:15 -0500
From: "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: assessments for pace? (was Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405D8573.2040908@optonline.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Kathi, thank you for the example of how to calibrate pace in math. it
seems that something similar would have to be done in every subject,
especially for those for whom math is not (currently) their strong subject.

I guess I was hoping for a simpler way to *start* compaction, really an
assessment or test that would be an aid in requesting it - to show that
a faster pace was needed or to suggest an appropriate pace. I can see
some teachers and administrators not making an intuitive leap that
compaction may be needed just b/c the child was bright and asking for
more work, and/or b/c they had mastered extra information on their own

already. (I can see them balking at needing two new tests for each
chapter in each subject to pre- and post-test. I can see (many) kids
shying away from it to, depending how it is done, esp. if they only need
to learn 20% of a chapter.) You have given me more to think about.

somewhere on the advocacy road for my child,
r.j.

>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:13:52 -0500
From: "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405D8700.6070603@optonline.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Barbara J. Gilman wrote:

> Discrepancies between Verbal and Performance IQ scores on Wechsler
> tests are diagnostically important.

but not on theWISC III? is that b/c people are supposed to have
subscores? We did not get hers after the test but I have requested them
and do not know whether they are still available. dd's probably
ceilinged on verbals and the V/P gap is 16 points. I am asking more b/c
I have heard of others with much larger gaps who wondered.

thank you

r.j.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:46:28 -0600
From: Kristina Shepard <kshepard@merr.com>
Subject: Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <002801c40f42$878adf60$15b28ad8@ksheppard>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristina Shepard" <kshepard@merr.com>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 10:48 AM
Subject: ASAT: Full evaluation and its uses with 2E children

> Good morning, Kathi, Bobbie, and conference members. Thank you
> so much for participating in this conference! Sometimes the
> internet just amazes me! If it weren't for modern technology,
> I'm sure I would not have the opportunity to "meet" you as we
do
> here. I am looking forward to learning a lot over the next two
> days.
>
> My first question has to do with full evaluation of
> twice-exceptional (2E) children. Our DS8 has been identified
as

> highly gifted (HG) and learning disabled (LD) (visual and
> auditory processing slow, dysgraphia, written expression)
through
> IQ, achievement and neuroprocessing evalations conducted by our
> school district (SD). As a result of the testing he's already
> had, I feel we have some good information except for his actual
> level of giftedness (as measured by IQ tests) because he hit a
> hard ceiling on 4 of the WISC-IV subtests and his LD processing
> issues produced a >30 point discrepancy between his verbal and
> performance scales.
>
> I have considered full evaluation so that we could get a better
> picture of his strengths and weaknesses and, then, try to
create
> something approximating a reasonable educational program for
him.
> Right now, he receives about 2 hours a week of pullout talented
> and gifted (TAG) programming in reading and math and once a
week
> mentoring in science. He receives some accomodations and
> modifications, but no remediation, for the LD issues. We are

> just starting to evaluate radical acceleration and have not
come
> to any conclusions yet.
>
> My dilemma is this: I suspect that if we go ahead and have a
full
> evaluation done, we'll find out that he may even be "more" than
> HG and his needs can't be met in our SD. We are not in a
> position to homeschool or to pay $7,000+/year for tuition at
the
> only gifted school in this part of the state (although I am
going
> to a parent open-house there next week).
>
> So, my question is: would the benefits of going through
> additional evaluation outweigh the nagging doubt I have about
> actually being able to implement the recommendations in his
> current school setting? I realize that's a very subjective
> question. I guess what it comes down to is that I fear that if
> we had a complete evaluation done we might have to seriously
> reconsider our position on homeschooling or gifted schooling.
> Maybe a better question would be, how beneficial would the

> results of a full evaluation be in a situation of radical grade
> acceleration?
>
> Wondering, pondering, and mulling subjectively,
> -Kristina
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:46:46 -0600
From: Kristina Shepard <kshepard@merr.com>
Subject: Culturally and linguistically different and gifted
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <002e01c40f42$92688cc0$15b28ad8@ksheppard>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristina Shepard" <kshepard@merr.com>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 10:59 AM
Subject: ASAT: Culturally and linguistically different and gifted

> Dear Kathi and Bobbie,
>
> I am very interested in assessing giftedness in secondary
school
> students who are culturally and linguistically different (CLD).
> I am finishing up a teacher licensure program and plan to teach
> high school English as a Second Language and/or bilingual
Social
> Studies (in Spanish). My personal interests in gifted
education
> are overlapping (quite nicely, I think)) with my professional
> goals here.
>

> As part of my licensure program, I am also working on a
research
> project/paper on identifying gifted students who are CLD. One
> piece of the identification process is formal assessment and
> evaluation, in addition to informal assessments and
observations.
> So far, I have found that a few IQ and achievement tests are
> available in Spanish or maybe Chinese but I have also heard
from
> practicing teachers that the results are sometimes not helpful.
> Now, that could open a whole other can of worms and we won't go
> there right now. But what about working with students whose
> heritage language is something other than Spanish or Chinese?
> Which instruments for gifted assessment are used with CLD
> students ages 14-18? Do you have recommendations about which
> ones are more useful?
>
> Atentamente,
> Kristina
>
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:38:56 -0500
From: Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
Subject: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <040b01c40f41$7a7c64c0$689a9418@DBMG0B41>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I am so glad to have the opportunity to ask these questions!

First off, how would you suggest preparing a 4 year old before the test.
(not practicing, of course). I'm talking more along the lines of what to
tell the child, what's good to do the morning of, etc. (on a funny note, my
parents told me some people wanted to test me for the gifted program. I was
4 and kept waiting for my presents to show up).

Secondly, are there any tests that you would specifically recommend to
parents of very verbal and creative young children? I guess what I really
want to know is what test would give me the most vivid picture of abilities
in these areas?

Thirdly, what signs (if there are any) would you look for in a young child
to determine if she is ready to handle testing?

I greatly appreciate any guidence you can give.

-Mary-

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:46:44 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC82F8E2.C429%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162700004_158499_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162700004_158499_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Leese wrote, regarding using out-of-level group tests:

<<<In our state we just have to test annually with one of quite a long list
of standardized tests. We don't have to produce the results to anyone.
Thank goodness for that!

In our local area the most accessible tests are the ITBS, SAT, CAT5 and the
MAT. I'll pay the extra amount to have an individual test given periodically

but am hoping to try to work within what we "have" to do. Right now I feel
like we are just going through the motions of having the child take the
test. Can any of these tests actually be useful for kids like this?>>>>

Well, the Stanford Achievement Test is probably the "toughest" of the group
achievement tests on the market, and also the oldest (designed originally by
Lewis Terman and others prominent in the early twentieth century testing
movement, and having been revised and renormed continually over the last
century; the most recent edition is very new). It also provides a great deal
of information, some that the other group tests do not. The Iowa Test of
Basic Skills is also well-known, well-respected, and an excellent test. But
any of the tests you have mentioned above are good, solid group achievement
tests. There are a couple of reasons related to homeschooling that you might
prefer either the Iowa or the Stanford, however.

None of the group achievement tests, to my knowledge, have yet deliberately
included homeschooled students in their standardization samples, or provide
"homeschool norms" (the way they routinely provide schools with an option to
include the "private school norms" in your child's score profile, as well
as national norms, if your child attends a private school; some group
achievement tests also provide optional "suburban norms" and "Catholic
school norms")

But perhaps more important in your case, both the Iowa Test of Basic Skills
(and its high school level version, which goes by another name) and the
Stanford Achievement Test have a bit of an interesting track record with
homeschool populations.

The Iowa Test of Basic Skills was used in the largest study of homeschoolers
to date (20,000+), conducted by Lawrence Rudner of the ERIC Clearinghouse on
Asssessment. (the complete study, published in an online refereed journal,
may be found here: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n8/). However flawed the

selection process might have been for this study -- most students in it were
those homeschooling primarily for religious reasons -- it remains the
largest sample of homeschooled students ever studied, and the study used the
Iowa test as one basic piece of data for all 20,000+ students.
Interestingly, this study found in a larger sample what many smaller studies
by state departments of education, individuals, organizations, and masters
theses and doctoral dissertations had found in smaller studies of (more
diverse groups of) homeschoolers -- that homeschoolers as a group in these
samples tend to have a mean score around the 80th percentile on nationally
normed group achievement tests.

The Stanford Achievement Test publisher actually asked a few representatives
of homeschooling organizations to take part in the bias review process
(which is when a test company, after writing and selecting items for
inclusion on a test, asks individuals from a wide variety of ethnic,

geographic, religious, and other groups to review the test questions for
possible bias with those groups). I personally know one individual who was
asked to participate in the bias review process of the previous edition of
the Stanford Achievement Test, as a representative of homeschoolers. So I
know that there has been this kind of input on the Stanford; I'm not certain
about the other major tests.

Finally, if you have a very reflective gifted child, the new Stanford 10
group achievement test allows extra time for all students. This may be a
real consideration if you have a very reflective child who does not do well
under time pressure during a test, and might be enough to tip the decision
in favor of the Stanford 10. You can read the test publisher's rationale for
making the new Stanford 10 essentially untimed here:
http://marketplace.psychcorp.com/PsychCorp/Images/pdf/assessmentReports/ItsA
boutTime_UntimedTestingConditionsQandA_Rev1.pdf

By the way, a historical note: in the very earliest studies of the
achievement of gifted children in the first 40 years of the 20th century,
the Stanford Achievement Test was the test of choice. But what would you
expect -- Lewis Terman was conducting many of those studies! Leta
Hollingworth also used the Stanford from time to time in her studies, as
well as some other achievement tests that have long ago bit the dust.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162700004_158499_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT: Which test/grade to use?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Leese wrote, regarding using out-of-level group tests:<BR>
<BR>
<<<<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><FONT FACE=3D"Comic Sans MS">In our state w=
e just have to test annually with one of quite a long list of standardized t=
ests. We don't have to produce the results to anyone.  Thank goodness f=
or that! <BR>
</FONT></FONT> <BR>

<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><FONT FACE=3D"Comic Sans MS">In our local area the most=
accessible tests are the ITBS, SAT, CAT5 and the MAT. I'll pay the extra am=
ount to have an individual test given periodically but am hoping to try to w=
ork within what we "have" to do. Right now I feel like we are just=
going through the motions of having the child take the test. Can any of the=
se tests actually be useful for kids like this?</FONT></FONT>>>>&gt=
;<BR>
<BR>
Well, the Stanford Achievement Test is probably the "toughest" of=
the group achievement tests on the market, and also the oldest (designed or=
iginally by Lewis Terman and others prominent in the early twentieth century=
testing movement, and having been revised and renormed continually over the=
last century; the most recent edition is very new). It also provides a grea=
t deal of information, some that the other group tests do not. The Iowa Test=

of Basic Skills is also well-known, well-respected, and an excellent test. =
But any of the tests you have mentioned above are good, solid group achievem=
ent tests. There are a couple of reasons related to homeschooling that you m=
ight prefer either the Iowa or the Stanford, however.<BR>
<BR>
None of the group achievement tests, to my knowledge, have yet deliberately=
included homeschooled students in their standardization samples, or provide=
<BR>
"homeschool norms" (the way they routinely provide schools with a=
n option to include the "private school norms"  in your child=
's score profile, as well as national norms, if your child attends a private=
school; some group achievement tests also provide optional "suburban n=
orms" and "Catholic school norms")<BR>
<BR>
But perhaps more important in your case, both the Iowa Test of Basic Skills=
(and its high school level version, which goes by another name) and the Sta=

nford Achievement Test have a bit of an interesting track record with homesc=
hool populations.<BR>
<BR>
The Iowa Test of Basic Skills was used in the largest study of homeschooler=
s to date (20,000+), conducted by Lawrence Rudner of the ERIC Clearinghouse =
on Asssessment. (the complete study, published in an online refereed journal=
, may be found here: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n8/). However flawed the sel=
ection process might have been for this study -- most students in it were th=
ose homeschooling primarily for religious reasons -- it remains the largest =
sample of homeschooled students ever studied, and the study used the Iowa te=
st as one basic piece of data for all 20,000+ students. Interestingly, this =
study found in a larger sample what many smaller studies by state department=
s of education, individuals, organizations, and masters theses and doctoral =
dissertations had found in smaller studies of (more diverse groups of) homes=

choolers -- that homeschoolers as a group in these samples tend to have a me=
an score around the 80th percentile on nationally normed group achievement t=
ests. <BR>
<BR>
The Stanford Achievement Test publisher actually asked a few representative=
s of homeschooling organizations to take part in the bias review process (wh=
ich is when a test company, after writing and selecting items for inclusion =
on a test, asks individuals from a wide variety of ethnic, geographic, relig=
ious, and other groups to review the test questions for possible bias with t=
hose groups). I personally know one individual who was asked to participate =
in the bias review process of the previous edition of the Stanford Achieveme=
nt Test, as a representative of homeschoolers. So I know that there has been=
this kind of input on the Stanford; I'm not certain about the other major t=
ests.<BR>
<BR>
Finally, if you have a very reflective gifted child, the new Stanford 10 gr=

oup achievement test allows extra time for all students. This may be a real =
consideration if you have a very reflective child who does not do well under=
time pressure during a test, and might be enough to tip the decision in fav=
or of the Stanford 10. You can read the test publisher's rationale for makin=
g the new Stanford 10 essentially untimed here: http://marketplace.psychcorp=
.com/PsychCorp/Images/pdf/assessmentReports/ItsAboutTime_UntimedTestingCondi=
tionsQandA_Rev1.pdf<BR>
<BR>
By the way, a historical note: in the very earliest studies of the achievem=
ent of gifted children in the first 40 years of the 20th century, the Stanfo=
rd Achievement Test was the test of choice. But what would you expect -- Lew=
is Terman was conducting  many of those studies! Leta Hollingworth also=
used the Stanford from time to time in her studies, as well as some other a=
chievement tests that have long ago bit the dust.  <BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162700004_158499_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:43:39 -0600
From: Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <00d101c40f42$22bce740$dc1c6e44@CPQ50832916483>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

What I fail to understand is why these "norms" have been adjusted but the
cutoff for gifted programs (generally 130) has not. Is this being done to
exclude children from gifted programs? If a person is trained to give one of
these tests, shouldn't they also be able to explain the meaning of the
scores to the parents? My son scored 7 pts lower on the SB5 than he did on
the WISC-IV and the psycholgoist that tested him didn't seem to think
anything of the drop in scores. I came away very confused.

donna

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 04:59:57 -0800 (PST)
From: dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: from Malaysia
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321125957.26354.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I forgot to mention that my husband and I are both
Dutch speaking and our son's first language was Dutch,
but he had almost completely lost it when we returned
to Belgium.

Dominique

--- dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com> wrote:
> We have the same problem with our son.
> He is 9, was born in the USA, lived in Mexico from 6
> months to 4 1/2, then in Canada for 2 years and now
> in
> Belgium for 2 1/2 years. He went to school in
> Spanish
> (preschool), English and Dutch.
> He was tested 8 months after moving to Belgium, on
> the
> Dutch version of the WISCIII.
> He scored PIQ 141, VIQ 128, TIQ 140.
> Two weeks after the test an hearing loss of 20-40 %
> was discovered, due to blocked Eustachian canals,
> one

> month later he was found to be quite nearsighted.
> I have always thought that the fact he bearly spoke
> Dutch 8 months before the test compressed his verbal
> score. After all, this is an extremely verbal child
> who reads books at a very high level in both Dutch
> and
> English.
> His extreme personality and other issues makes me
> wonder if he isn't more gifted than was measured.
> My question is : how do you measure giftedness in
> children who have been educated in different
> languages
> ? Aren't they virtally untestable in tests that are
> normed on a population who's fluent in only language
> ?
>
>
> Dominique
>
> --- Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net> wrote:
> > Anthony wrote:
> >
> > <<<<No, English is not her first language but she
> > only converse in English
> > both at home and in school. Though she
> understands
> > tamil and Malay
> > language, she still chooses to speak in English.
> > >>>>
> >
> > Then it's quite likely that her bilingualism

> > affected her test performance
> > -- if the WISC-III was given in English.
> >
> >
>
>
> =====
> Dominiquetvp
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on
> time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>

=====
Dominiquetvp

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:19:30 +0000
From: Sally_L@comcast.net
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN - The Second Day has Started
To: Ourgifted-l@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032120041319.12573.1d77@comcast.net>

Hi List Members,
The second day of this conference has started. If you did NOT receive any
messages yesterday you can access all of the posts at

http://www.neiu.edu/~ourgift/pages/Conference.htm

They are in digest format - just scroll to the bottom of the page and click on
the two digest links. Happy reading.

Please check the capacity of your email accounts - I am getting messages about
list member's accounts exceeding their capacity. Obviously those list members
would really really need to read this reminder/message won't get to read this
message. Therefore, just stating this so it doesn't happen to you:)

Also as usual trim and cut your reply posts to the list.

Again Welcome to all to the Second day of the ASAT conference with our guest
experts - Kathi Kearney and Barbara J. Gilman.

Kind regards,
Sally_L
Conference Coordinator

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:16:05 -0500
From: Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405D9595.9090703@verizon.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------030501010200020000060801

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030501010200020000060801
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> I think almost everyone who administers these instruments or who
> uses the results of testing as part of decision-making about
> placement and interventions has some unanswered questions at this
> point, whether they are working with gifted children or children
> with disabilities.
>

So, is the best approach to recommend testing with more than one test?
Perhaps starting with one of the earlier revisions? As a parent who
paid for private testing (more than once<g>), I know if my child had

taken the SB5 first, we would not have continued with other
assessments. The lowered scores would have given the school the
opportunity to say 'she's not that gifted afterall'.

Can you also comment on test 'outliers' and how to identify them?

Thanks,
Tonya
tonya.andersen@verizon.net

--------------030501010200020000060801
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="midBC8273C7.C3CF%25kkearney@ttlc.net">
<blockquote><font size="2"><font face="Arial"> 
</font></font>I think almost everyone who administers these
instruments or who uses the results of testing as part of
decision-making about placement and interventions has some unanswered

questions at this point, whether they are working with gifted children
or children with disabilities.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
So, is the best approach to recommend testing with more than one test? 
Perhaps starting with one of the earlier revisions?  As a parent who
paid for private testing (more than once<g>),  I know if my child
had taken the SB5 first, we would not have continued with other
assessments.    The lowered scores would have given the school
the
opportunity  to say 'she's not that gifted afterall'.   <br>
<br>
Can you also comment on test 'outliers' and how to identify them?  
<br>
<br>
Thanks, <br>
Tonya<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:tonya.andersen@verizon.net">tonya.andersen@verizon.net</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------030501010200020000060801--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:28:40 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Testing teens w/IQ tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC82FB2D.C433%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Susan wrote:

> I am wondering if you can tell us whether or not it
> would be wise to test an older child (15/16 yo) to
> determine how gifted that student is? Are there any
> situations that arise later in a person's life where you
> would find yourself saying "I really should have had an
> SB-LM (or some other version) score for my child/young
> adult"?
>
> Our child ceiling'ed many sub-tests of the WISC-III and
> WIAT when tested at age 12...and those are the only tests
> she has done, besides SATs and OLSATs group achievement
> tests.
>
> We know she's gifted but we don't know whether she's
> HG/EG/PG....and the actual IQ score doesn't matter to us

> now, but we don't know if somewhere down the line we/she
> will wish that we had had her do an SB-LM.>>>>

If your child hit the ceiling on "many" of the WISC-III subtests at the age
of 12, it's extremely likely that she would have gotten some items correct
at the last adult level available on the Stanford-Binet LM at the same age,
and it certainly wouldn't make sense to give her that test now, at 16.

You have a few other options, though. The SB5 was designed to be used with
individuals from ages 2 through adult, and has some very challenging items
at the upper levels of the test. Or, you could wait until she is just old
enough to have the WAIS-III (the adult Wechsler scale) administered.

However, it doesn't sound like you have a good reason for testing right now,
other than just wondering what the score might be. And both the SB5 and the
WAIS-III can be used through adulthood, so it doesn't make sense to test
when you don't really need the information for anything in particular.

The SAT-I college entrance exam might be a better choice for her right now
(at least, if she takes it *before* the "new" SAT comes out, which is going
to be more of an achievement test than a math and verbal reasoning test. .
.but that's another post. . .it's my understanding, after talking with
representatives from several of the university talent searches for gifted
children at NAGC last fall, that even the talent searches aren't sure what
they are going to do regarding the "new" SAT-I.)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:28:34 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: assessments for pace? (was Re: ASAT: - Opening Statement
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8302B0.C434%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

RJ wrote:

> Kathi, thank you for the example of how to calibrate pace in math. it
> seems that something similar would have to be done in every subject,
> especially for those for whom math is not (currently) their strong subject.
>
> I guess I was hoping for a simpler way to *start* compaction, really an
> assessment or test that would be an aid in requesting it - to show that
> a faster pace was needed or to suggest an appropriate pace. I can see
> some teachers and administrators not making an intuitive leap that
> compaction may be needed just b/c the child was bright and asking for
> more work, and/or b/c they had mastered extra information on their own
> already. >>>>

Certainly the school could use any of the curriculum-based assessments they
are using throughout the school in such a way, no matter what the subject
is. One study done through the National Research Center on the Gifted &
Talented at the University of Connecticut showed that gifted intermediate
school children often knew half the year's curriculum *before* they opened
their textbooks in September or received any formal instruction at all! This
study is often used to "make a case" for curriculum compaction with the
gifted. The abstract of the study and recommendations, entitled "Why Not Let
High Ability Students Start School in January? The Curriculum Compacting
Study" is located here:

http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/reiswest.html

You can order a copy of the full research study for $10 from the Center.

Curriculum compacting really, *really* isn't rocket science. You either
pre-test the child to discover how much of the current curriculum and/or

lesson they already know, then either let them accelerate or provide
alternate, challenging enrichment activities, *or*, absent a pre-test,
assess their current knowledge in another way. If they already know the
material, they move on. One-room schoolteachers did this (and still do it)
all the time. So do public and private school multi-age classroom teachers,
if they are truly running a multi-age class and not just teaching two grades
in one room. So do most homeschoolers and preschool teachers, as a matter of
course.

RJ continued:

<<<<<> I guess I was hoping for a simpler way to *start* compaction, really
an
> assessment or test that would be an aid in requesting it - to show that
> a faster pace was needed or to suggest an appropriate pace.>>>>>

Well, you could always ask to have the end-of-year or end-of-book test in a
specific subject -- the tests currently used by your child's school --
administered. This kind of assessment of the child's knowledge of the

curriculum *before* it is taught can be very valuable. If the child achieves
a score of 85% or higher, then perhaps they do not need that particular
curriculum, at all.

This process is used at the college and university level when students who
are entering college at other than the usual age of 18 sometimes take CLEP
tests to show what they have learned in other settings and may receive
credit for, and/or be excused from, certain required courses.

There is one other option for an elementary or secondary student you might
want to consider.

At the elementary and secondary levels, the state of Texas has had several
universities design grade level (for elementary) and subject level (for
middle school and high school) tests, which, if passed, allow a student to
skip that grade or subject (and, apparently, upon passing, require Texas
schools to *let* them skip -- though schools themselves determine the
passing score for their school or district). Texas Tech University, among

others, offers these tests. They are NOT limited to Texas students; any
student anywhere can pay the (reasonable) fee and take these tests (though a
public or private school in a state other than Texas might or might not
accept the results; that would have to be negotiated on a case-by-case
basis). Information about this "credit by examination" program is available
here:

http://www.dce.ttu.edu/CBE/

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:34:02 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which
test/grade to use?)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83BACA.1A825%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

on 21/3/04 10:46 PM, Kathi Kearney at kkearney@ttlc.net wrote:

> By the way, a historical note: in the very earliest studies of the achievement
> of gifted children in the first 40 years of the 20th century, the Stanford
> Achievement Test was the test of choice. But what would you expect -- Lewis
> Terman was conducting many of those studies! Leta Hollingworth also used the
> Stanford from time to time in her studies, as well as some other achievement
> tests that have long ago bit the dust.

I just get the feeling that the reason for testing, and the outcomes of
testing, have become skewed. Whereas it used to be a quantitative assessment

of ability measured against age norms, it has now become a tool of so many
interest groups -- the market, schools, politicians, researchers etc such
that it has lost its intrinsic meaning.

Now we make the tests to fit the theory of distribution of intelligence, the
Flynn effect theory and any number of other assumptions, rather than testing
being a reflection of the real world, with real aptitude as a basis rather
than assumptions predicating outcomes.

I was reading some of the material on the SB5 on the Riverside site, as
provided in a link earlier and I just felt betrayed, both for myself and for
my son. It has all become so political. It doesn't reflect my reality, or my
son's reality, as extremely gifted people at all.

Where are the Termans and Hollingworths who can combat this insidious
creeping of mediocrity in test construction? I know that Kathi and Bobbi,
Ellen Fiedler, Linda Silverman and a few others are working hard against the

waves of marketeering, but is the wave of mediocrity going to dump us all in
its wake?

I feel so. The time of good quality assessment of extremely gifted children
appears to me to be coming to an end, simply because if you are unable to
access someone truly expert who can properly interpret the results, the
scores are fairly meaningless. How many children are now going to be
excluded from appropriate educational programming because educators don't
think they are gifted due to changing norms and test outcomes, even though
they are no less gifted now than when they took an earlier test? It is as if
even the concept of being gifted is changing to suit current conditions,
rather than being a measure of high intellectual ability, abstract reasoning
and capacity to learn, which is lifelong and intrinsic to the gifted
individual.

I am thankful that my son had the opportunity to take the SB-LM. At least we
know, even if the score is questioned, denigrated, undermined, or diminished

because of a misunderstanding of Flynn's hypothesis. The SB-LM is reflected
in DS' achievement (until he dropped out) and is the closest approximation
of his intellectual potential we have. Isn't that what testing is all about?
Not fitting the child into a preconceived notion of how many gifted people
there should be in a population!

Intelligence and its manifestation is simply another casualty of market
fundamentalism.

all the best
Tracy
Pemberton, Western Australia
tracy@cycloneco.com.au
----------------------
"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
‹Eleanor Roosevelt, American First Lady, Civil Rights Activist

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:37:08 +1100
From: Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com>
Subject: RE: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <200403211337.i2LDb7Cr029929@mail1.tpgi.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Mary,

My DD is 3.4 and I recently did a "test run" wither her using the K-Seals
test (we are in Oz, don't know it you have that one over there). It is
basically an achievement test but the most important thing was that I saw
her sit through a testing procedure and respond well. I wanted to make sure
if we went ahead with IQ testing that we would not be wasting our money and
get an inaccurate picture. In addition I got some uselful information from
the test which may allow us to delay testing a little longer - we are doing
it for early entry to kindergarten and the results we got may be enough to
start the ball rolling at least.

I will be interested to read what answers you get to your other questions :)

Glenda in Oz.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu] On
Behalf Of Mary Kimrey
Sent: Sunday, 21 March 2004 11:39 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: More "testing the young child" questions

I am so glad to have the opportunity to ask these questions!

Thirdly, what signs (if there are any) would you look for in a young child
to determine if she is ready to handle testing?

I greatly appreciate any guidence you can give.

-Mary-

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:37:21 -0500
From: Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary and preschool
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405D9A91.1000705@verizon.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------020101010007070807070202

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020101010007070807070202
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> In general "off days" for testing are vastly more likely to happen
> with preschool children -- even gifted ones -- than with older
> school-age children. So you might want to wait til the child is 6
> or 7 to minimize some of this.
>

Or later<g>!! I haven't read any posts that talk about the younger age
set and the difficulty in testing a child who is determined to hide
their giftedness.

Our youngest is a master at hiding. At 5 she managed to frustrate all

of us by terminating the SB-LM early. She discovered the number of
wrong answers required and in the hallway, she simply announced, "A
wanted me to answer __ but I answered __ so I could be DONE! " We had
some retesting done at 8 and she was only slightly more cooperative.

At least we know the test scores we do have on her are floors and not
ceilings<g>!

Tonya
tonya.andersen@verizon.net

--------------020101010007070807070202
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="midBC827DBA.C3EB%25kkearney@ttlc.net">
<blockquote>In general "off days" for testing are vastly more likely
to happen with preschool children -- even gifted ones -- than with

older school-age children. So you might want to wait til the child is 6
or 7 to minimize some of this.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
Or later<g>!!   I haven't read any posts that talk about the
younger age set and the difficulty in testing a child who is determined
to hide their giftedness. <br>
<br>
Our youngest is a master at hiding.   At  5 she managed to
frustrate
all of us by terminating the SB-LM early.   She discovered the number
of wrong answers required and in the hallway, she simply  announced, "A
wanted me to answer __ but I answered __  so I could be DONE! "  We
had
some retesting done at 8 and she was only slightly more cooperative.  
<br>
<br>
At least we know the test scores we do have on her are floors and not
ceilings<g>! <br>
<br>
Tonya<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:tonya.andersen@verizon.net">tonya.andersen@verizon.net</a><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------020101010007070807070202--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 06:44:53 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405D9C55.5080301@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I'm sorry I do not know of similar books. We have been carrying that
book at the Gifted Development Center because others had difficulty
getting it quickly. You may want to check there (I'll be happy to ask
tomorrow).

Luc Kumps wrote:

>> The book *Developing Your Child for Success* by Dr. Kenneth
>> Lane also describes these issues and offers vision exercises (helpful if
>> you don't have a behavioral optometrist nearby).
>
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, Bobbie.
> Do you know of any other books or websites, because this book appears to be
> out of print, and therefore it's hard to get?
>
> Luc K (Felix jun98)
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:28:05 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DA675.20109@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Dear Mary,
Thanks for your comment, which woke me up laughing.

("my
parents told me some people wanted to test me for the gifted program. I was
4 and kept waiting for my presents to show up," )

I tell children I am testing that my purpose is to find out more about them and
suggest ways to make their education more successful and fun for them
(vocabulary varies somewhat with this explanation, but not too far from what I
would tell any adult!). I work for them. The tests give me the information I
need to make suggestions.

I explain that we are going to do a number of activities, some "verbal" (I will
be asking questions), some involving things they do with their hands (puzzles,
looking at designs or pictures, etc.). I would say something like this to
prepare a child, as well as ensuring a good night's sleep, and bringing snacks
to have at breaks on test day.

One little boy I tested told me the following. He said, "My mom says everyone
has gifts; I've come to see what mine are" (although this might have resulted in
the misunderstanding about what the presents are!) :)

For a highly verbal child and creative 4-year-old, I would start with a
WPPSI-III and then consider a Stanford-Binet L-M if a higher-ceilinged test is
needed. Creativity tests have not been as useful to us, as we've seen
creativity so linked to the child's interests that it can be difficult to
"document" (keeping creative "productions"--or pictures of them--is a better
idea). Both of the above tests have very strong verbal abstract reasoning
components.

I would say your daughter is ready when she can sit and work for a reasonable
amount of time, and follow instructions. Generally, this is a fun situation for
gifted children and they respond accordingly.

Bobbie Gilman

Mary Kimrey wrote:

> I am so glad to have the opportunity to ask these questions!
>
> First off, how would you suggest preparing a 4 year old before the test.
> (not practicing, of course). I'm talking more along the lines of what to
> tell the child, what's good to do the morning of, etc. (on a funny note, my
> parents told me some people wanted to test me for the gifted program. I was
> 4 and kept waiting for my presents to show up).
>
> Secondly, are there any tests that you would specifically recommend to
> parents of very verbal and creative young children? I guess what I really
> want to know is what test would give me the most vivid picture of abilities
> in these areas?
>
> Thirdly, what signs (if there are any) would you look for in a young child
> to determine if she is ready to handle testing?
>
> I greatly appreciate any guidence you can give.
>
> -Mary-
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 05:49:37 +0000 (GMT)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Anthony=20Xavier?= <antshe2021@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: from Malaysia/more ideas
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321054937.23790.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-436594787-1079848177=:23309"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

--0-436594787-1079848177=:23309
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi Barbara,
I understand that usually the child scores high in the Verbal scale and lower in
the Performance scale.
However, our daughter's IQ scores was on the reverse meaning :
Verbal comprehension 86, Perceptual Org 128; Freedom from distractibility 119
and performance speed 130.

And the examiner's report indicated that our daughter has very high functioning
fluid intelligence and demonstrated advanced cognitive ability and among other
has very quick mental processing speed.

Would appreciate if you could let us know on the reverse scores by our child.
This will be useful for us to explain to the school.

kind regards,
Anthony & Sheila

"Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net> wrote:
Sheila and Anthony,
When a child scores high on an individual IQ test we must believe that
she has the ability each correct question reflects. However, there are
many reasons why a child may score poorly. She may be uncomfortable and
not express answers she knows. She may not wish to guess if at all
uncertain. Parents may realize she is ill the evening following the
test and that she must not have been at her best.

The best evidence of her abilities is the progress you are seeing. It
may be necessary to retest her in the future with a tester experienced
with gifted children, who can spend time with her and ensure her comfort
before beginning.

If the testing was privately done, were the scores shared with her
school? If they seem unreflective of her abilities, it would be best
not to share them. Individual achievement testing may be helpful with
the acceleration issue to document her need for higher level work.
However, this should only be done with a tester your daughter trusts.

If acceleration is considered, consider one year at a time, and only if
your daughter concurs with the placement. Under these circumstances,
children usually fare very well and like their new placements. Bobbie
Gilman

Anthony Xavier wrote:

> My seven year old daughter was recently identified as "highly gifted"
> by and an experience Education Consultant. We were advised to take
> her for a BM-LM test or the 5th edition. We searched but could not
> find one single pscychologists with this test. Not to mention in
> Malaysia we've got only 5 PhD holders for child pyschologists. Most
> psychologists we checked with had no experience in gifted issues but

> we had no choice. She was administered the WISC III and her scores
> were VIQ=86 - 93, whereas PIQ = 109-125 and Perfomance speed 130.
> These score were total shock to us as she is now doing grade 3-4 maths
> problem solving and refusing to do anything on "+" and "-". Finished
> her first year science book over a period of 10 days. She goes in
> extreme speed and once done, she dont want to touch it again. She
> wants something new and different. She speaks very well but we just
> cant seems to understand where it went wrong. Before the test she was
> extremely shy with the doctor and just refused to look at him but
> settled down slowly once the test beginned.
>
>
>
> The discrepancy between these score were 33 points. What is the
> significant here? The report speaks quite highly of a fluid
> intelligence but the scores dont show it. Is this 33 points
> difference is normal? What does it really show?
>
>
>

> We live in country where most are not familiar with the term
> "gifted". Even the school principal has never heard of such thing.
> The principal has seen my daughter's work and is convinced that she
> should not spend a whole year in grade 1 and that she should get a
> grade jump to third level. But we're afraid now if the test score
> will jeopodise this. We're are also not comfortable with a grade jump
> to 3rd grade, we afraid she will have socializing problem which she
> already begins to exhibit. Same problem with her 13 year old brother.
>
>
>
> Please and please share your views with us.
>
>
>
> Worried parents
>
> Sheila & Anthony
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger
>
> - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download
> Messenger Now
>

---------------------------------

Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download
Messenger Now
--0-436594787-1079848177=:23309
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<DIV>Hi Barbara,</DIV>
<DIV>I understand that usually the child scores high in the Verbal scale and
lower in the Performance scale.</DIV>
<DIV>However, our daughter's IQ scores was on the reverse meaning :</DIV>
<DIV>Verbal comprehension 86, Perceptual Org 128; Freedom from distractibility
119 and performance speed 130.<BR></DIV>
<DIV>And the examiner's report indicated that our daughter has very high
functioning fluid intelligence and demonstrated advanced cognitive ability and
among other has very quick mental processing speed.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Would appreciate if you could let us know on the reverse scores by our
child. This will be useful for us to explain to the
school.  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>kind regards,</DIV>
<DIV>Anthony & Sheila</DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>"Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Sheila and Anthony,<BR>When a child scores high
on an individual IQ test we must believe that <BR>she has the ability each
correct question reflects. However, there are <BR>many reasons why a child may
score poorly. She may be uncomfortable and <BR>not express answers she knows.
She may not wish to guess if at all <BR>uncertain. Parents may realize she is
ill the evening following the <BR>test and that she must not have been at her
best. <BR><BR>The best evidence of her abilities is the progress you are seeing.
It <BR>may be necessary to retest her in the future with a tester experienced
<BR>with gifted children, who can spend time with her and ensure her comfort
<BR>before beginning. <BR><BR>If the testing was privately done, were the scores
shared with her <BR>school? If they seem unreflective of her abilities, it would
be best <BR>not to share them. Individual achievement t
esting
may be helpful with <BR>the acceleration issue to document her need for higher
level work. <BR>However, this should only be done with a tester your daughter
trusts. <BR><BR>If acceleration is considered, consider one year at a time, and
only if <BR>your daughter concurs with the placement. Under these circumstances,
<BR>children usually fare very well and like their new placements. Bobbie
<BR>Gilman<BR><BR><BR>Anthony Xavier wrote:<BR><BR>> My seven year old
daughter was recently identified as "highly gifted" <BR>> by and an
experience Education Consultant. We were advised to take <BR>> her for a
BM-LM test or the 5th edition. We searched but could not <BR>> find one
single pscychologists with this test. Not to mention in <BR>> Malaysia we've
got only 5 PhD holders for child pyschologists. Most <BR>> psychologists we
checked with had no experience in gifted issues but <BR>> we had no choice.
She was administered the WISC III and her scores <BR>> were
VIQ=86 -
93, whereas PIQ = 109-125 and Perfomance speed 130. <BR>> These score were
total shock to us as she is now doing grade 3-4 maths <BR>> problem solving
and refusing to do anything on "+" and "-". Finished <BR>> her first year
science book over a period of 10 days. She goes in <BR>> extreme speed and
once done, she dont want to touch it again. She <BR>> wants something new and
different. She speaks very well but we just <BR>> cant seems to understand
where it went wrong. Before the test she was <BR>> extremely shy with the
doctor and just refused to look at him but <BR>> settled down slowly once the
test beginned.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> The discrepancy between these
score were 33 points. What is the <BR>> significant here? The report speaks
quite highly of a fluid <BR>> intelligence but the scores dont show it. Is
this 33 points <BR>> difference is normal? What does it really show?<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> We live in count
ry where
most are not familiar with the term <BR>> "gifted". Even the school
principal has never heard of such thing. <BR>> The principal has seen my
daughter's work and is convinced that she <BR>> should not spend a whole year
in grade 1 and that she should get a <BR>> grade jump to third level. But
we're afraid now if the test score <BR>> will jeopodise this. We're are also
not comfortable with a grade jump <BR>> to 3rd grade, we afraid she will have
socializing problem which she <BR>> already begins to exhibit. Same problem
with her 13 year old brother.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Please and
please share your views with us.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Worried
parents<BR>> <BR>> Sheila & Anthony<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
Yahoo! Messenger <BR>> <HTTP: mail uk.messenger.yahoo.com *http:
tagline_messenger uk.rd.yahoo.com><BR>> - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download <BR>> Messenger Now <BR>> <HTTP: mail
uk.messenger.yahoo.com *http: tagline_messenger uk.rd.yahoo.com index.html
download><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><p>
<hr size=1><font face="Arial" size="2"> <a
href="http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_messenger/*http://uk.messenger.yahoo.c
om"><b>
Yahoo! Messenger</b></a> - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends
today! <a
href="http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline_messenger/*http://uk.messenger.yahoo.c
om/download/index.html"><strong>Download Messenger Now</strong></a></font>
--0-436594787-1079848177=:23309--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:39:02 -0500
From: mblochfamily1@comcast.net
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <000b01c40f52$4112e9f0$020ba8c0@Blochfamily>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Can you elaborate on the types of things that you learn that you could not
by testing with the SB-LM only or the SB-V only?

Carol
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kathi Kearney" <kkearney@ttlc.net>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 1:22 AM
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?

> Susan wrote:
>
> > Where will all the new assessment tools and trends place the SB-LM in
the
> > near future? I understand that many of the new assessment tools
> > (particularly the SB-V) attempted to capture the strengths of the SB-LM
and
> > other tests, but it appears that what was set out to be achieved, has,
in
> > many respects, fallen short of the mark. Has any thought been given to

> > keeping the SB-LM basically as is, but modernising the questions and
perhaps
> > incorporating more visual-spatial components? Maybe this is what the
SB-V
> > has attempted to do.
> >
> > Are we going to lose access to the SB-LM and be left with nothing that
can
> > really distinguish the levels of giftedness at the extreme end of
> > giftedness?>>>>
>
> I'm actually finding the SB5/SBLM combination of tests to be very, very
> helpful. Each version of the Stanford-Binet has strengths that the other
> version does not.
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:47:11 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: ASAT: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83151D.C452%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Just a note to the list: I am taking a break this morning to attend church
and to do a couple of errands; I should be back online with this conference
by early afternoon, eastern standard time!

Also -- I have bookmarked a number of posts to think about in the interim,
before answering.

But please do not be alarmed if Bobbie or I do not answer your posts right
away! We may not have gotten your posts yet! My ISP has been exceptionally
slow to receive some posts, and all posts are being moderated by Sally. This
takes time.

The other thing for you to be aware of is that Bobbie and I may decide to
combine concerns from several posts and from several posters, if the issues

are related, into one answer. So please do not feel that your posts are
being ignored! We may not have received them yet, or we may have decided to
combine comments on similar concerns.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:03:00 -0800
From: Urmi Ashar <urmiashar@hotmail.com>
Subject: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BAY1-DAV47IdEKj3tDf00002201@hotmail.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> to be more of an achievement test than a math and verbal reasoning test. .
> .. .it's my understanding, after talking with
> representatives from several of the university talent searches for gifted
> children at NAGC last fall, that even the talent searches aren't sure what
> they are going to do regarding the "new" SAT-I.)
>

Kathi,
Could you throw more light on this issue ... what might happen or what would
be the logical way to go about this new conundrum that ETS has presented the
gifted world.

Urmi

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:16:35 +0100
From: Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <007001c40f57$800ccb30$8a7ba8c0@spc2>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> Welcome and good morning for those just waking up in the UK and
> Europe. You get to have fun and read all the posts that were
> posted during your night and certainly when you post I will
> process them in about 6 to 7 hours. LOL

Perhaps you could send one of the two guest experts to Belgium during the
next conference, so the discussion could go on withoput interruption 24/24?
We can provide them with a fast Internet connection, a good bed and decent
food! As a bonus: the chocolate factory is next door, so we can also
maintain a permanent flow of Belgian chocolate in its various appearances
;-)
I would also like to mention the presence of a few artisanal breweries in

the neighbourhood, so -if necessary- we can provide a continuous beer flow
as well!
(fair warning: the expert should be able to concentrate in the presence of
an 'active' gifted boy - before, during and after consumption of the
mentioned food flows)

Luc K (Felix jun98)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:20:43 -0500
From: "Carolyn & Mark K." <carolyn@thehoagies.com>
Subject: RE: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <002701c40f58$13a47460$6400a8c0@coatsv01.pa.comcast.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

>> to be more of an achievement test than a math and verbal reasoning test.
.
>> .. .it's my understanding, after talking with
>> representatives from several of the university talent searches for gifted
>> children at NAGC last fall, that even the talent searches aren't sure
what
>> they are going to do regarding the "new" SAT-I.)

>Kathi,
>Could you throw more light on this issue ... what might happen or what
would
>be the logical way to go about this new conundrum that ETS has presented
the
>gifted world.

I've heard that a shift to the ACT might be a solution. Does this sound
reasonable?

Carolyn K. carolyn{at}thehoagies.com

Hoagies' Kids and Teens Page http://www.hoagieskids.org
Hoagies' Gifted Education Page http://www.hoagiesgifted.org

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:25:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321152535.98025.qmail@web20205.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1347464113-1079882735=:97900"

--0-1347464113-1079882735=:97900
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Bobbie,
Why are the fluency tests not needed? If a child needs accommodations on the
college boards, processing speed can be one of the major reasons. Wouldn't the
fluency tests document the slow processing speed in academic terms? - Laurie

"Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net> wrote:
The "fluency" tests are less helpful for gifted children and
need not be given.

Regarding accommodations for college board exams, talking with your
tester is a good idea. If the need for accommodations is there,
document it and keep records of how you have made like accommodations in
his home program. These may be needed for college board consideration
of accommodations. Completing a preparation course for SATs (through
Princeton Review, Kaplan, etc.) can also be helpful to help with pacing
and see if he can finish the test sections in time.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1347464113-1079882735=:97900
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Hi Bobbie,</DIV>
<DIV>  Why are the fluency tests not needed?  If a child needs
accommodations on the college boards, processing speed can be one of the major
reasons.  Wouldn't the fluency tests document the slow processing speed in
academic terms?  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>"Barbara J. Gilman"
<bobbie@h2net.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">The "fluency" tests are less helpful for gifted
children and <BR>need not be given.<BR><BR>Regarding accommodations for college
board exams, talking with your <BR>tester is a good idea. If the need for
accommodations is there, <BR>document it and keep records of how you have made
like accommodations in <BR>his home program. These may be needed for college
board consideration <BR>of accommodations. Completing a preparation course for
SATs (through <BR>Princeton Review, Kaplan, etc.) can also be helpful to help
with pacing <BR>and see if he can finish the test sections in
time.<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1347464113-1079882735=:97900--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:35:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321153551.21556.qmail@web20210.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1124549593-1079883351=:20657"

--0-1124549593-1079883351=:20657
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Incidentally, the British Ability Scales (BAS), developed by Colin Elliott, is
the precursor of the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) by the same author! -
Laurie

Bernadette Keeffe <bkeeffeuk@balex.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:Hello all and Kathi
and Bobbie,

I am meeting with his clinical psychologist to discuss where to go, but she
is unfamiliar with the SB in any form and doesn't really think testing more
is the answer, but I do!

Biggest headache is that the school don't accelerate and also don't really
acknowledge his ability.

Hope these questions aren't too personal for the list.

Bernadette
London, uK

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1124549593-1079883351=:20657
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Incidentally, the British Ability Scales (BAS), developed by Colin Elliott,
is the precursor of the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) by the same
author!  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>Bernadette Keeffe
<bkeeffeuk@balex.freeserve.co.uk></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Hello all and Kathi and Bobbie,<BR><BR>We live
in the UK, but I think the tests are the same. I have a son aged 7<BR>(ASD,
atypical, socially interested, CAPD) who was tested at 5 using<BR>WPPSI-R
achieving a PIQ of 141 and a verbal of 81. It was double checked as<BR>the gap
was so huge and unusual. Other non-IQ tests have also revealed
this<BR>discrepency (eg the British Ability Scales).<BR><BR>I recently tested
him using a non-verbal reasoning test in which he scored<BR>the equivalent of an
11 year old, but his verbal scores are still way down.<BR>He is receiving a
little therapy for his verbal handicap.<BR><BR>I am meeting with his clinical
psychologist to discuss where to go, but she<BR>is unfamiliar with the SB in any
form and doesn't really think testing more<BR>is the answer, but I do!<BR><BR>I
am really keen to suggest tests which can break down areas of strength
for<BR>visual/spacial people and weakness for the verbally challenged so that I
may<BR>get a more accurate picture of how to deal with this.<BR><BR>Biggest
headache is that the school don't accelerate and also don't
really<BR>acknowledge his ability.<BR><BR>Hope these questions aren't too
personal for the list.<BR><BR>Bernadette<BR>London,
uK<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1124549593-1079883351=:20657--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:43:35 -0800 (PST)
From: dominiquetvp <dominiquetvp@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321154335.34016.qmail@web41011.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

What would you do in a country where no other test
than the WPPSI/WISC is available ? The Stanford Binet
L-M has not been translated in Dutch.

Dominique

--- "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net> wrote:
> Dear Mary,
> Thanks for your comment, which woke me up laughing.
>
> ("my
> parents told me some people wanted to test me for
> the gifted program. I was
> 4 and kept waiting for my presents to show up," )
>
> I tell children I am testing that my purpose is to
> find out more about them and suggest ways to make
> their education more successful and fun for them
> (vocabulary varies somewhat with this explanation,
> but not too far from what I would tell any adult!).

> I work for them. The tests give me the information
> I need to make suggestions.
>
> I explain that we are going to do a number of
> activities, some "verbal" (I will be asking
> questions), some involving things they do with their
> hands (puzzles, looking at designs or pictures,
> etc.). I would say something like this to prepare a
> child, as well as ensuring a good night's sleep, and
> bringing snacks to have at breaks on test day.
>
> One little boy I tested told me the following. He
> said, "My mom says everyone has gifts; I've come to
> see what mine are" (although this might have
> resulted in the misunderstanding about what the
> presents are!) :)
>
> For a highly verbal child and creative 4-year-old, I
> would start with a WPPSI-III and then consider a
> Stanford-Binet L-M if a higher-ceilinged test is
> needed. Creativity tests have not been as useful to
> us, as we've seen creativity so linked to the
> child's interests that it can be difficult to

> "document" (keeping creative "productions"--or
> pictures of them--is a better idea). Both of the
> above tests have very strong verbal abstract
> reasoning components.
>
> I would say your daughter is ready when she can sit
> and work for a reasonable amount of time, and follow
> instructions. Generally, this is a fun situation for
> gifted children and they respond accordingly.
>
> Bobbie Gilman
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mary Kimrey wrote:
>
> > I am so glad to have the opportunity to ask these
> questions!
> >
> > First off, how would you suggest preparing a 4
> year old before the test.
> > (not practicing, of course). I'm talking more
> along the lines of what to
> > tell the child, what's good to do the morning of,
> etc. (on a funny note, my
> > parents told me some people wanted to test me for
> the gifted program. I was
> > 4 and kept waiting for my presents to show up).
> >
> > Secondly, are there any tests that you would
> specifically recommend to

> > parents of very verbal and creative young
> children? I guess what I really
> > want to know is what test would give me the most
> vivid picture of abilities
> > in these areas?
> >
> > Thirdly, what signs (if there are any) would you
> look for in a young child
> > to determine if she is ready to handle testing?
> >
> > I greatly appreciate any guidence you can give.
> >
> > -Mary-
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

=====
Dominiquetvp

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:05:16 -0500
From: Rebecca Cunningham <slypigs@tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <003b01c40f5e$4d481a90$4f02a8c0@Cunningham>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Sorry if this is a repeat, I scanned through and didn't see it...glad the
techinical difficulties have been resolved, I can't wait to read and
learn...thanks to everyone, I have learned so much from your experience and
expertise...you have made parenting a gifted child much easier and less
lonely :)

Hi Kathi and Bobbie,
My daughter is 5years, 11 months and was tested last week using the SB5...I
specifically asked the tester about her subtest scores and ceilings and the
accuracy of the numbers...her responses were: all of her subtests are above
average (ranging from an 11 to 18's in fluid reasoning and working memory)

so she has no weak areas (her verbal/non verbal split was 19 points), she
said a ceiling is the highest score a child receives (? quite different from
what I've read) and that when a new test is released, everyone's scores drop
because the test is made to fit the bell curve...(which really doesn't make
any sense...I don't see how the number of people scoring 2 or 3 sd's above
will ever equal the number of people scoring 2 or 3 sd's below. If it is
agreed that IQ is hereditary, then natural selection will lead to more
people born of parents with higher IQ's than lower (are there a lot of
births to those with IQ's below 70? below 55? Common sense says more people
of higher IQ's (over 145, over 160) will have children than those below 70
thereby increasing the number of people over 130 while the number of people
below 70 will remain constant (brain injury, chromosomal imbalance, etc).
This may be totally off base...I am new to all of this, just learning and

only an idea :)...My daughter also took the Woodcock Johnson III achievement
test. She scored much higher (5 99.9's, a 99.8, a 99, a 98 and a 97%ile)
My questions...Is the SB5 score accurate (she qualifies for gifted services
because her verbal is above 130...her non verbal is well below)? or the WJ
III? She is scheduled for an OT evaluation next month to address visual
motor perception issues-are those delays considered "non verbal"? Can a
child be "delayed" if they score at age in one area and all others are 2 1/2
to 4 years ahead? Where should we go from here in terms of school? They
are willing to accelerate her 2 grades but won't put it in writing (her
report cards says "kindergarten" even though she is in a 1-2 class doing 2nd
grade curriculum). Could her placement in a 1-2 class since November have
inflated her achievement scores because she had been exposed to more than
most kindergarteners academically(her age equivalents were all 8.6 +)? Is a

2 grade skip appropriate (she is thrilled about it) with her scores? How
important is it to get accommodations in writing from the school? Thanks
for you insights, I truly appreciate it. Rebecca

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:06:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321160628.75489.qmail@web20208.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1554835670-1079885188=:74656"

--0-1554835670-1079885188=:74656
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Glenda,
I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest from the SB:IV for
gifted purposes. I have primarily used it in the evaluation of learning
disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, they reached the
ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as six items. It's hard
to make any suggestions based on so few items! Sorry. I hope Bobbie or Kathi
will be able to answer your questions. - Laurie

Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com> wrote:
Laurie,

So if you get a high score on the quantitative subtest is likely to be an over
or under estimation?

Glenda

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1554835670-1079885188=:74656
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Hi Glenda,</DIV>
<DIV>  I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest from the
SB:IV for gifted purposes.  I have primarily used it in the evaluation of
learning disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, they reached
the ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as six items. 
It's hard to make any suggestions based on so few items!  Sorry.  I
hope Bobbie or Kathi will be able to answer your questions.  -
Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=486275004-21032004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Laurie,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=486275004-21032004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=486275004-21032004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>So if you get a high score on the quantitative subtest is
likely to be an over or under estimation?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=486275004-21032004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=486275004-21032004><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Glenda</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><font
face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1554835670-1079885188=:74656--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:15:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321161502.56449.qmail@web20209.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1691285902-1079885702=:56160"

--0-1691285902-1079885702=:56160
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

If a child is bilingual, he should be assessed to see if he has attained
proficiency (CALP) in the dominant language (that should be assessed, too,
before any testing is done). I've not been involved with bilingual assessment
(my state doesn't have much racial diversity), but you can look at Ron
Anderson's website, http://home.earthlink.net/~psychron/homepage.htm for more
information. He doesn't deal directly with gifted evaluations, but this might
provide some help.

If I were evaluating a child who was not proficient in the language of the test,
I would omit the verbal IQ from the report. Or, I would use a nonverbal IQ
test, such as the UNIT or Leiter International.

Laurie

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1691285902-1079885702=:56160
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<P>If a child is bilingual, he should be assessed to see if he has
attained proficiency (CALP) in the dominant language (that should be
assessed, too, before any testing is done).  I've not been involved
with bilingual assessment (my state doesn't have much racial diversity), but you
can look at Ron Anderson's website, <A
href="http://home.earthlink.net/~psychron/homepage.htm">http://home.earthlink.ne
t/~psychron/homepage.htm</A> for more information.  He doesn't deal
directly with gifted evaluations, but this might provide some help.</P>
<P>If I were evaluating a child who was not proficient in the language of the
test, I would omit the verbal IQ from the report.  Or, I would use a
nonverbal IQ test, such as the UNIT or Leiter International.</P>
<P>Laurie </P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you
Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1691285902-1079885702=:56160--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 08:23:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321162303.91346.qmail@web20211.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2124033882-1079886183=:91299"

--0-2124033882-1079886183=:91299
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi R.J. - Your report should have included subtest scores, either in the body or
in a table at the end. If this was done in the school system, they (or the
evaluator) must hold onto the original protocols, and they will be able to
provide you with the individual scores. - Laurie

"R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net> wrote:Barbara J. Gilman wrote:

> Discrepancies between Verbal and Performance IQ scores on Wechsler
> tests are diagnostically important.

but not on theWISC III? is that b/c people are supposed to have
subscores? We did not get hers after the test but I have requested them
and do not know whether they are still available.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
--0-2124033882-1079886183=:91299
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Hi R.J. - Your report should have included subtest scores, either in the
body or in a table at the end.  If this was done in the school system, they
(or the evaluator) must hold onto the original protocols, and they will be able
to provide you with the individual scores.  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>"R.J.
Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Barbara J. Gilman wrote:<BR><BR>>
Discrepancies between Verbal and Performance IQ scores on Wechsler <BR>>
tests are diagnostically important.<BR><BR>but not on theWISC III? is that b/c
people are supposed to have <BR>subscores? We did not get hers after the test
but I have requested them <BR>and do not know whether they are still available.
</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree">Protect your identity with
Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard</a>
--0-2124033882-1079886183=:91299--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:52:04 -0700
From: Barbara Hutton <blmh@rms.org>
Subject: RE: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <FOELIDPDHFCOHMFEHJJBGEFDCFAA.blmh@rms.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C40F2A.2A350F60"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C40F2A.2A350F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greetings,

The issue of the "number" at which giftedness appears on IQ testing has
broad ramifications for schools designed for gifted kids. Talking with
parents about testing, determining minimum entrance requirements have become
confusing for everyone. Even schools and programs that take a broader view
and incorporate sub test analysis, interviews, parent nominations, teacher
recommendations, extended classroom visits, etc still are struggling. What

should be our new entrance criteria? "It depends on the test?" Try
running that by a group of parents sitting in a school orientation....

Barbara Mitchell Hutton, MBA
Executive Director
Rocky Mountain School for the Gifted and Creative
303-545-9230 (phone) 303-447-9338 (fax)
www.rms.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu]On
Behalf Of Julie Knapp
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 10:24 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V

LWalshETAL@aol.com wrote:
>>...I am concerned about the immediate effect of the new lower scores on
acceptance into established gifted programs... With the new, lower
scores, far fewer children will qualify for the program... I am afraid
that districts will say, in effect, see, there isn't any more need for
gifted programming - those other scores
were inflated and, anyway, we can't afford it any more...<<

The "Estimated Equating" table which compares SB-V and SB-LM scores (as
shown on page 10 of Deborah Ruf's "Use of the SB5 in the Assessment of High
Abilities paper -
http://www.riverpub.com/products/clinical/sbis5/SB5_ASB_3.pdf ) Shows that,
not only does the SB-V seem to "supress" the scores on the upper end... it
seems to do the same on the lower end, as well.

Call me suspicious... but it leads me to wonder if this was an unfortunate
out-come of the test... or the intention of the test... (?) With just the
right "spin", maybe we can show that there really isn't as much IQ varience
in the population as we thought... and not as much need for differentiation
on either end of the scale...

If tests lower the ceiling and install an elevator in the basement.. then
there no longer *are* levels of intelligence for the schools to deal with.

just my 2cents worth
-julie

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C40F2A.2A350F60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="US-ASCII"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D133513916-21032004><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Greetings,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D133513916-21032004><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D133513916-21032004><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>The=20
issue of the "number" at which giftedness appears on IQ testing has =
broad=20
ramifications for schools designed for gifted kids.  Talking with =
parents=20
about testing, determining minimum entrance requirements have become =
confusing=20
for everyone.  Even schools and programs that take a broader view =
and=20
incorporate sub test analysis, interviews, parent nominations, teacher=20

recommendations, extended classroom visits, etc still are=20
struggling.  What should be our new entrance criteria?  =
"It=20
depends on the test?"   Try running that by a group of parents =
sitting=20
in a school orientation....</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Barbara Mitchell Hutton, =
MBA</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Executive Director</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rocky Mountain School for the Gifted =
and=20
Creative</FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=3Dleft><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>303-545-9230 (phone)  =
303-447-9338=20
(fax)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.rms.org/">www.rms.org</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu=20

[mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Julie=20
Knapp<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 20, 2004 10:24 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> ASAT Re: What can you learn =
from the=20
SB-V<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><B><I><A =
href=3D"mailto:LWalshETAL@aol.com">LWalshETAL@aol.com</A></I></B>=20
wrote:<FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT face=3DGeneva color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>>>...I am concerned about the immediate =
effect of=20
the new lower scores on<BR>acceptance into established gifted=20
programs...     With the new, lower<BR>scores, far =
fewer=20
children will qualify for the program...   I am afraid that=20
districts will say, in effect, see, there isn't any more need for =
gifted=20
programming - those other scores<BR>were inflated and, anyway, we =
can't afford=20
it any more...<<</FONT></FONT><FONT =
face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT></DIV>

<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>The "Estimated Equating" table which =
compares=20
SB-V and SB-LM scores (as shown on page 10 of Deborah Ruf's =
"Use of=20
the SB5 in the Assessment of High Abilities paper -  <A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.riverpub.com/products/clinical/sbis5/SB5_ASB_3.pdf">ht=
tp://www.riverpub.com/products/clinical/sbis5/SB5_ASB_3.pdf</A> )=20
Shows that, not only does the SB-V seem to "supress" the scores on the =
upper=20
end... it seems to do the same on the lower end, as well.  =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>Call me suspicious... but it leads =
me to=20
wonder if this was an unfortunate out-come of the test... or the =
intention of=20
the test... (?)   With just the right "spin", =
maybe we can=20

show that there really isn't as much IQ varience in the population as =
we=20
thought... and not as much need for differentiation on either end of =
the=20
scale...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>If tests lower the ceiling and =
install an=20
elevator in the basement.. then there no longer *are* levels of=20
intelligence for the schools to deal with.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>just my 2cents worth</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT=20
face=3Darial,helvetica>-julie </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTM=
L>

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C40F2A.2A350F60--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:17:07 -0600
From: Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <003c01c40f68$5665e3f0$dc1c6e44@CPQ50832916483>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

my own 2E son will not be taking the SAT. He's going to take the ACT because
it doesn't have the essay component of the new SAT.

donna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carolyn & Mark K." <carolyn@thehoagies.com>
>
> I've heard that a shift to the ACT might be a solution. Does this sound
> reasonable?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:23:04 +0000
From: Sally_L@comcast.net
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN - I will be away from approving messaging for the next 4
hours
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032120041723.1139.6bf8@comcast.net>

Hi List Members,

Please continue posting from what you have been reading. I will approve all when
I get back in about 4 hours. Off to church and family activities.

Thanks for your understanding,
Sally_L
Conference Coordinator
List Manager

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:40:20 -0500
From: Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <194101c40f6b$96a0bb90$6400a8c0@MEREDITH>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Thank you so much Kathi and Bobby for doing this conference!

From: "Kathi Kearney" <kkearney@ttlc.net>
>
> In general "off days" for testing are vastly more likely to happen with
> preschool children -- even gifted ones -- than with older school-age
> children. So you might want to wait til the child is 6 or 7 to minimize some
> of this.

One thing I've seen in some gifted/special needs kids (including my son) is that
they may tire more easily in testing and many not have the mental stamina to do
two consecutive days. If your child is being tested locally, he or she may do
better if you arrange one testing session/week rather than two days in a row.

BTW, this can be very useful info - each time my son's been tested, the testers
have commented that he tired more quickly than most kids. Certainly explained
why he was exhausted at the end of a day of school, and has been helpful info
for pacing our homeschooling.

--
Meredith Warshaw, M.S.S., M.A., mailto:mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org
Special Needs Educational Advisor, http://uniquelygifted.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you
did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. ~ Maya Angelou

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:42:37 -0600
From: Sylvia Zinser <szinser@zinser.no-ip.info>
Subject: Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DD40D.70504@zinser.no-ip.info>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

dominiquetvp wrote:
> What would you do in a country where no other test
> than the WPPSI/WISC is available ? The Stanford Binet
> L-M has not been translated in Dutch.
>
> Dominique
>

Neither into German - and I consider this to be highly
inconvenient.
Well, our way: teach the kids some English, go for two years into the States
have them at an American gifted school and test with SBLM (that is what we did
;-)
Now, I don't think this is the way everybody should/can go and am desperately
waiting for these tests (SB5,SBLM to be translated.

I have no clue about the Netherlands, but in Germany the notion of
'highly/exc./profoundly gifted seems to be quite unknown.
Google for the translation of these words gave one link to be constructed.
(Try this in Dutch ;-)

I am sorry not to tell you anything more practicable... I don't know anything
else.
Well, some testers in Germany test using Kaufman ABC into higher levels. But
also this only hints and does not give 'scores'. (And according to experiences
from a German Gifted mailing list, K-ABC continuously scores low (anybody here
to confirm this?)

Greetings from Sylvia

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:08:38 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DDA26.8080706@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Tracy, let me ascend the soapbox so you won't be alone. :)

Several years ago the GDC hosted a gifted testing Summit attended by
several test developers and experts in testing gifted children. As new
tests were being developed, the conversation focused on gifted testing
needs. While the test developers were planning a host of measures of
processing skills (working memory, processing speed, auditory
processing, etc.) to augment reasoning items, all of the testers
emphasized the need for tests that assess abstract reasoning ability
(verbal, mathematical, visual-spatial) with processing skills assessed

separately. Reasoning tests best identify gifted children.

*Perhaps* (and I'm not convinced of this) the inclusion of more
processing skills measures is appropriate for lower functioning
children. If the child's processing speed on paper-and-pencil tasks is
so slow that he or she cannot complete work in a reasonable amount of
time in the classroom, processing speed may be such a limiting factor
that it should be included in IQ scores. Likewise, if short-term
auditory memory is so poor that the teacher's instructions can't be
retained at all, this is a significant problem. However, gifted children
rarely perform extremely poorly in these areas on an absolute scale. It
makes much more sense to identify them as gifted based on assessments
emphasizing reasoning, provide them gifted learning experiences, and add
any accommodations based on relative weaknesses to the gifted
accommodations. A Full Scale IQ score that "averages" gifted reasoning

and average processing skills fails to identify either the giftedness or
the relative weaknesses.

One test author at our Summit was surprised to learn gifted children
weren't especially fast processors. It had just been "assumed" that
gifted children would be the fastest processors. We explained some were
very quick; others were reflective or perfectionistic, slowing their
speed. We also discusssed the gifted child's preference for meaningful
test materials, and the problem of short-term memory tests or other
tasks that utilize non-meaningful material. Gifted children usually
perform so much better with meaningful material that their scores with
non-meaningful material are difficult to interpret. Our concern was that
whenever a strand is added to an IQ test that identifies a different
group as scoring the highest, than was identified by the other strands,
there will be a "confounding" of the Full Scale IQ score.

Now that we have some newly revised and renormed tests, we do have
confounding in the Full Scale scores (Note the fact that the gifted
group in the WISC-IV normative sample scored a 124.7 on Verbal
Comprehension and a 120.4 on Perceptual Reasoning, but only earned a
112.5 in Working Memory and a 110.6 in Processing Speed, according to
the WISC-IV Technical Manual p. 77). The only real way to continue to
identify the gifted children who need accommodations in school for their
advanced reasoning and efficent learning will be to carefully assess the
instruments we have, and choose the ones--or parts of them--that can be
useful in identification. Experts in gifted testing will need to share
the best approaches, and some different ways of using tests in schools
will need to be established.

We do have some excellent resources. I like the new WISC-IV's increased
ceiling; the test offers additional harder questions at the upper ends

of a number of subtests. The Verbal Comprehension and Perceptual
Reasoning Composites are very good indicators of giftedness (Working
Memory and Processing Speed are not), that do an admirable job of
assessing verbal abstract reasoning and provide very useful tests of
visual reasoning with less timing emphasis. I like the Dumont-Willis
Indices (do a Google search) to evaluate WISC-IV scores when Verbal
Comprehension and Perceptual Reasoning Composite scores are higher than
Working Memory and Processing Speed (the WISC-IV technical manual
suggests this will usually be the case). A DWI-1 score can be computed
for the combination of Verbal Comprehension and Perceptual Reasoning,
while a DWI-2 score can be computed for the combination of Working
Memory and Processing Speed. These computations, based on the Tellegen
and Briggs formula, could be helpful to schools. The DWI-1 score would
be an excellent identifier of gifted children for school programs, and

only six subtests of the WISC-IV are needed to produce it.

The WPPSI-III offers improvements over its predecessor for gifted
children. It appears to us to be a better diagnostic test and it
emphasizes abstract reasoning quite well.

The SB5 has wonderfully advanced mathematical reasoning and spatial
reasoning items. Gale Roid, the test's author, has shown flexibility in
considering alternate ways to score this test when young children
perform at a level far above age expectations. And, he has condoned the
use of portions of it for gifted identification (e.g., omitting the
Working Memory portion). The SB5 has continued the Binet tradition of
being largely untimed. The SBL-M remains probably our strongest test of
verbal abstract reasoning and has established its usefulness over many
years. Revising and renorming this instrument as a test of giftedness
would be appropriate. The SBL-M and SB5 show real strengths used
together because their content varies significantly.

I hope this helps, Tracy. We share your concern and want to address this
need.

Bobbie Gilman

Tracy Chaloner wrote:

> on 21/3/04 10:46 PM, Kathi Kearney at kkearney@ttlc.net wrote:
>
>> By the way, a historical note: in the very earliest studies of the
achievement
>> of gifted children in the first 40 years of the 20th century, the Stanford
>> Achievement Test was the test of choice. But what would you expect -- Lewis
>> Terman was conducting many of those studies! Leta Hollingworth also used the
>> Stanford from time to time in her studies, as well as some other achievement
>> tests that have long ago bit the dust.
>
>
> I just get the feeling that the reason for testing, and the outcomes of
> testing, have become skewed. Whereas it used to be a quantitative assessment
> of ability measured against age norms, it has now become a tool of so many
> interest groups -- the market, schools, politicians, researchers etc such
> that it has lost its intrinsic meaning.
>
> Now we make the tests to fit the theory of distribution of intelligence, the
> Flynn effect theory and any number of other assumptions, rather than testing
> being a reflection of the real world, with real aptitude as a basis rather
> than assumptions predicating outcomes.
>
> I was reading some of the material on the SB5 on the Riverside site, as
> provided in a link earlier and I just felt betrayed, both for myself and for
> my son. It has all become so political. It doesn't reflect my reality, or my
> son's reality, as extremely gifted people at all.
>
> Where are the Termans and Hollingworths who can combat this insidious
> creeping of mediocrity in test construction? I know that Kathi and Bobbi,
> Ellen Fiedler, Linda Silverman and a few others are working hard against the
> waves of marketeering, but is the wave of mediocrity going to dump us all in
> its wake?
>
> I feel so. The time of good quality assessment of extremely gifted children

> appears to me to be coming to an end, simply because if you are unable to
> access someone truly expert who can properly interpret the results, the
> scores are fairly meaningless. How many children are now going to be
> excluded from appropriate educational programming because educators don't
> think they are gifted due to changing norms and test outcomes, even though
> they are no less gifted now than when they took an earlier test? It is as if
> even the concept of being gifted is changing to suit current conditions,
> rather than being a measure of high intellectual ability, abstract reasoning
> and capacity to learn, which is lifelong and intrinsic to the gifted
> individual.
>
> I am thankful that my son had the opportunity to take the SB-LM. At least we
> know, even if the score is questioned, denigrated, undermined, or diminished
> because of a misunderstanding of Flynn's hypothesis. The SB-LM is reflected
> in DS' achievement (until he dropped out) and is the closest approximation

> of his intellectual potential we have. Isn't that what testing is all about?
> Not fitting the child into a preconceived notion of how many gifted people
> there should be in a population!
>
> Intelligence and its manifestation is simply another casualty of market
> fundamentalism.
>
> <descending soapbox>
>
> all the best
> Tracy
> Pemberton, Western Australia
> tracy@cycloneco.com.au
> ----------------------
> "The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
>
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:17:33 -0500
From: Kay Hall <kay@printerideas.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC834426.2BC97%kay@printerideas.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> Hello -
> I was wondering if you could provide any correlation
> studies that look at student's SAT scores at various ages
> and "guesstimate" IQ based on those scores?
>
> For example, if a 12 yo scores a 1340 on the SAT, can you
> say that child is porbably/possibly/likely HG? EG? PG?
>
> If a 14 yo scores a perfect 1600, what does that tell
> you?
>
> If there is any research in this particular area, I
> would love to see it!
>
> Thank you,
> Susan
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
>

Susan,

I chased down this question a year or so ago and was directed to the link
below:
http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/depts/psych_and_hd/smpy/Top1in10000.pdf
On the second page of this paper regarding mathematically talented kids in
Johns Hopkins programs are some formulas that let you at least roughly
convert a 12 year olds SATs to IQ at the high end. Hope this helps some.
Kay

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:37:55 -0500
From: Shannon <shannon@childbrain.org>
Subject: ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <013e01c40f73$a3bacac0$0200a8c0@toshiba>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hello,

Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?

I already know that my children are gifted.

Please elaborate on how my children could benefit from testing (especially
if there is something more I should be doing)?

Thank You,
Shannon

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:48:41 -0600
From: "Logue, Theodosia Nowell (UMC-Student)" <tnltg2@mizzou.edu>
Subject: RE: ASAT: questions on the ranges of 'gifted'
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <E04CBC981EC8E6488947205B3698A9E6054FE9@UM-EMAIL05.um.umsystem.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C40F75.6E985D38"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40F75.6E985D38
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

So one question would be, 'at what IQ level should we now acknowledge a
child to be 'gifted'?'=20
----------

I'm wondering, with these new tests, how anyone will have an intelligent =
conversation about levels of giftedness if we have to adjust our =
conversation depending upon what tests were used. Won't these tests =
change the "language" of talking about giftedness?

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40F75.6E985D38
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef;
name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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AA8AAABUcmFjeSBDaGFsb25lcgAAAgFeAAEAAABDAAAAAAAAAIErH6S+oxAZnW4A3QEPVAIAAAAA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5S0kVxz6aEknbR6hbgSBC4Bn0x8wA/B0aCLQaAeQIPF3B9EOsB5Qcx8wIIAhMW72eR3iA/BsAyAT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ABlAAAAAAAMAGkAAAAAAAwAdQAAAAAADAB5AAAAAAB4AMEABAAAAFwAAAFRoZW9kb3NpYSBOb3dl
bGwgTG9ndWUAAB4AMUABAAAAFwAAAFRoZW9kb3NpYSBOb3dlbGwgTG9ndWUAAB4AMkABAAAAGwAA
AG93bmVyLU9VUkdJRlRFRC1MQG5laXUuZWR1AAAeADNAAQAAABcAAAB0cmFjeUBjeWNsb25lY28u
Y29tLmF1AAAeADhAAQAAABcAAABUaGVvZG9zaWEgTm93ZWxsIExvZ3VlAAAeADlAAQAAAAIAAAAu
AAAAAwB2QP////8LACkAAAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAGELIupp0DAAcQKQEAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAA
AAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABTT09ORVFVRVNUSU9OV09VTERCRSxBVFdIQVRJUUxFVkVMU0hPVUxEV0VO
T1dBQ0tOT1dMRURHRUFDSElMRFRPQkVHSUZURUQ/LS0tLS0tLS0tLUlNV09OREVSSU5HLFdJVEhU
AAAAAAIBfwABAAAARAAAADxFMDRDQkM5ODFFQzhFNjQ4ODk0NzIwNUIzNjk4QTlFNjA1NEZFOUBV
TS1FTUFJTDA1LnVtLnVtc3lzdGVtLmVkdT4A4y0=

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40F75.6E985D38--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:18:29 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5 Results
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DEA85.BAEF6439@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I've read with interest the information about the SB-V and am left with more
questions than answers. Can a child have the same full scale score but
different "change-sensitive scores and age equivalents". What I'm trying to
ask is, is a 140 the same for all kids the same age? Will the Rasch-ratio
number be the same for all 8 yr 5 month kids who score a 140?

I'm trying to figure out if only a fraction of children will actually get a
140 on the SBV (kids who used to get 160s on the IV) or whether a 140
doesn't mean the same thing to different children, ie kids who got 140's on
the IV will still get 140's, but kids who got 160's on the IV will also get
140s, but still answer more questions correctly, or reach higher ceilings by

actually answering more questions at higher levels.

Cathy

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:10:49 -0600
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <009d01c40f78$390c0e00$bfaae144@nngco.mehcpipelines.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

FYI - Bookfinder.com has one copy available for $40, if someone here has'nt
already snatched it up.
Lisa C.
>
> >> The book *Developing Your Child for Success* by Dr. Kenneth
> >> Lane also describes these issues and offers vision exercises (helpful
if
> >> you don't have a behavioral optometrist nearby).
> >

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:34:27 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DEE43.49F7C168@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------BDD346C386FF7DCA9C53233B

--------------BDD346C386FF7DCA9C53233B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Could her placement in a 1-2 class since November have
> inflated her achievement scores because she had been exposed to more than
> most kindergarteners academically(her age equivalents were all 8.6 +)?
>
I would think that effectively skipping grades and working on curriculum
above what is "expected" at a given age would definitely "inflate"
achievement scores. If it didn't they wouldn't be learning the appropriate
grade based material. If my child had skipped two grades I would expect him
to achieve at least at that level or the skip wouldn't have been

appropriate.

But, that begs a question I have had for a long time. How accurate are early
IQ tests on children who have been "homeschooled" (I mean seriously taught)
such things as mazes, puzzles, writing, reading etc. Wouldn't these kids
pretty much automatically score higher than kids who have never been exposed
to such things? I'm guessing most 4 year olds have not done a lot of mazes,
puzzles, reading and writing and the tests were written and normed with such
assumptions. However, I see so many kids whose parents focus on these things
starting by the age of two that I wonder if testing these children provides
accurate results since the testers presumed kids had not been exposed to
these things in an "educational" format.

I'm not saying that all kids who score high at early ages do so because of
coaching, I'm just wondering if it might impact the accuracy of the testing.

Cathy

--------------BDD346C386FF7DCA9C53233B
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre>Could her placement in a 1-2 class since November have
inflated her achievement scores because she had been exposed to more than
most kindergarteners academically(her age equivalents were all 8.6 +)?</pre>
</blockquote>
I would think that effectively skipping grades and working on curriculum
above what is "expected" at a given age would definitely "inflate" achievement
scores. If it didn't they wouldn't be learning the appropriate grade based
material. If my child had skipped two grades I would expect him to achieve
at least at that level or the skip wouldn't have been appropriate.
<p>But, that begs a question I have had for a long time. How accurate are
early IQ tests on children who have been "homeschooled" (I mean seriously
taught) such things as mazes, puzzles, writing, reading etc. Wouldn't these

kids pretty much automatically score higher than kids who have never been
exposed to such things? I'm guessing most 4 year olds have not done a lot
of mazes, puzzles, reading and writing and the tests were written and normed
with such assumptions. However, I see so many kids whose parents focus
on these things starting by the age of two that I wonder if testing these
children provides accurate results since the testers presumed kids had
not been exposed to these things in an "educational" format.
<p>I'm not saying that all kids who score high at early ages do so because
of coaching, I'm just wondering if it might impact the accuracy of the
testing.
<p>Cathy
<br> </html>

--------------BDD346C386FF7DCA9C53233B--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:21:14 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DEB2A.5050206@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Oops, Laurie, my fatigue was showing. You are absolutely correct and I
thank you for the opportunity to clarify this. We generally use the
WJ-III fluency tests *only* to document deficits when accommodations are
needed for slow speed. We don't use them to document general reading,
math, or writing levels that are high and require the accommodations of
advanced work. We often see the pattern, for example, of gifted
children scoring very high on Passage (reading) Comprehension and
Applied Problems (math reasoning), a little lower on Letter-Word
Identification (reading decoding) and Calculation (completing written
calculations), and lowest on Reading Fluency and Math Fluency (timed

tests of simple reading and math facts). This makes sense; they score
highest where reasoning is central to their work and lower where rote
learning is involved. If all three tests are given in Reading and in
Math, Broad Reading and Broad Math scores are calculated. These are
lowered by speed and, in turn, are less convincing to teachers of the
need for advanced work. Usually the gifted child's speed on these
simple fluency tasks (which are irrelevant to the work they need to be
doing) is high average or higher, so their slower-than-gifted speed is
not keeping them from doing the advanced work they need. We feel the
Broad Scores are less helpful when asking for more advanced work.

But, regarding accommodations, we usually pull any speeded measures we
can to document a true problem that requires accommodation. There are
interesting philosophical issues here. If we know gifted children are
typically not so quick, at what point do we signal a need for

accommodations? Recalling one of my son's experiences preparing for AP
tests with good teachers, I know that practice with similar tasks can
help pacing, and can eliminate some of the "freezing up" sensitive,
gifted students may feel when first presented with a novel problem.
(Practice also helps the gifted student's typical difficulty of reading
more into multiple-choice items than the test author intended.) So, I
think practice is a good first step. If the student still finds that
pacing is a real problem, it's time to document those weaknesses and any
accommodations the school is willing to make. Increasingly, a history
of accommodations at school is being sought, in addition to a
psychologist's report, before accommodations are granted for college
board exams.

One other thought about speed. Stephen Hawking notes that the
development of more complex thought will be at the cost of speed,
because more complexity necessarily involves more neuronal activity. So

why are we asking our most gifted students to be the fastest? The
teacher of one girl with an over-200 IQ noted that she routinely gave
this student more time for written responses because "she has more to
say." It takes more time to process a complex array of thoughts than a
few simple ideas.

Thanks again for the opportunity to clarify.
Bobbie Gilman

Laurie Jensen wrote:

> Hi Bobbie,
>
> Why are the fluency tests not needed? If a child needs
> accommodations on the college boards, processing speed can be one of
> the major reasons. Wouldn't the fluency tests document the slow
> processing speed in academic terms? - Laurie
>
> "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net> wrote:
>
> The "fluency" tests are less helpful for gifted children and
> need not be given.
>
> Regarding accommodations for college board exams, talking with your
> tester is a good idea. If the need for accommodations is there,

> document it and keep records of how you have made like
> accommodations in
> his home program. These may be needed for college board consideration
> of accommodations. Completing a preparation course for SATs (through
> Princeton Review, Kaplan, etc.) can also be helpful to help with
> pacing
> and see if he can finish the test sections in time.
>
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center <http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html> - File
> online. File on time.
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:25:50 -0600
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
Subject: Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <00a301c40f7a$51d7f230$bfaae144@nngco.mehcpipelines.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Regarding what to tell children:
>From some comments I've heard about testing young children, I would think it
would be good to tell children that it's OK to guess. Some kids don't want
to venture an answer until they are 100% certain - and many kids really do
know the answer way before they reach that certainty level.
For my Ds when he was first tested at 4y10m, I just told him to cooperate.
The local tester started with the 'fun' subtest - which ds thought was dumb.
The test results were wild - all over the place. Definitely an example of a
tester who had no idea what to do with ds. <sigh> Our GDC testing two
years later was much more successful.

Lisa C.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:26:15 +0000
From: meg5000@att.net
Subject: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032120041926.10198.2684@att.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

Hello Kathi and Bobbi,

Thank you for spending your time on this conference! I originally had my dd
tested two years ago when she was 7 on the WISC III and WJ. If I could find
another test that did not have the same “speed” requirements as the WISC (she
hates being timed and blew part of the test due to that issue) and higher
ceilings (she scored in the ceiling range of 6 out of 10 subtests), I would test
her again to get rid of the nagging feeling I have that her WISC score was an
under estimate. The same year she took the WISC and WJ tests there had also
been a death in the family which may have affected her more than I realized at
the time.

Based on what I’m reading it seems that on the SB 5 there isn’t a speed
requirement (is there?), but the ceiling is very low and therefore it wouldn’t
give me any more information about the extent of her abilities that I aleady
have.

Yet when I look at the Davidson Institute entrance criteria, they want SB 5
scores at the 99.9 percentile Full scale and / or Verbal or Non-verbal for
qualification, which is the same percentile as their WISC III entrance
requirements. So at least to them it seems that the percentile scores on the
different tests mean similar things.

If a score of 145 is needed on the WISC III to be in the 99.9th percentile, what
score on the SB 5 is needed to be in the 99.9th percentile? If the score
requirement on the SB 5 is lower for the 99.9th percentile, would that mean the
opposite of a low ceiling-- that there is more room on the SB 5 than the WISC
III for higher numerical scores and percentiles but you only get that room by
compressing most scores into a smaller range (in other words, by making the
higher scores and percentiles harder to get?) Wouldn’t that make it tricky to
accurately differentiate between the newly compressed segments of the population
because they’ve squashed the scale of scores down so that one question right or
wrong could make a lot of difference to the final score?

I'm not understanding the logic behind the SB 5 right now at all. If you can
help me a little, that would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

best regards,
MEG H

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:44:20 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DF094.7060807@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Barb,
Your problem is understood and "well stated." I know Kathi, Linda
Silverman, Betty Maxwell, and I will be doing what we can in the next
year to further research the use of these new tests with gifted
children, and advise testers and program administrators accordingly
through presentations and articles. My comments to Tracy (Feeling
Betrayed by the New Tests) may be helpful. It is a very confusing time.

Barbara Hutton wrote:

> Greetings,
>
>
>
> The issue of the "number" at which giftedness appears on IQ testing
> has broad ramifications for schools designed for gifted kids. Talking

> with parents about testing, determining minimum entrance requirements
> have become confusing for everyone. Even schools and programs that
> take a broader view and incorporate sub test analysis, interviews,
> parent nominations, teacher recommendations, extended classroom
> visits, etc still are struggling. What should be our new entrance
> criteria? "It depends on the test?" Try running that by a group of
> parents sitting in a school orientation....
>
>
>
> Barbara Mitchell Hutton, MBA
>
> Executive Director
>
> Rocky Mountain School for the Gifted and Creative
>
> 303-545-9230 (phone) 303-447-9338 (fax)
>
> www.rms.org <http://www.rms.org/>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
> [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu]On Behalf Of Julie Knapp
> Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 10:24 PM
> To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
> Subject: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
>

> LWalshETAL@aol.com <mailto:LWalshETAL@aol.com> wrote:
> >>...I am concerned about the immediate effect of the new lower
> scores on
> acceptance into established gifted programs... With the new, lower
> scores, far fewer children will qualify for the program... I am
> afraid that districts will say, in effect, see, there isn't any
> more need for gifted programming - those other scores
> were inflated and, anyway, we can't afford it any more...<<
>
>
>
>
>
> The "Estimated Equating" table which compares SB-V and SB-LM
> scores (as shown on page 10 of Deborah Ruf's "Use of the SB5 in
> the Assessment of High Abilities paper -
> http://www.riverpub.com/products/clinical/sbis5/SB5_ASB_3.pdf )
> Shows that, not only does the SB-V seem to "supress" the scores on
> the upper end... it seems to do the same on the lower end, as well.
>
>
>

> Call me suspicious... but it leads me to wonder if this was an
> unfortunate out-come of the test... or the intention of the
> test... (?) With just the right "spin", maybe we can show that
> there really isn't as much IQ varience in the population as we
> thought... and not as much need for differentiation on either end
> of the scale...
>
>
>
> If tests lower the ceiling and install an elevator in the
> basement.. then there no longer *are* levels of intelligence for
> the schools to deal with.
>
>
>
> just my 2cents worth
>
> -julie
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:56:26 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Tests that dig deeper
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC835D98.C470%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Speaking of tests that dig deeper. . .

One of the most fascinating classes I ever took was a doctoral level course
on Feuerstein's dynamic assessment, using the Learning Potential Assessment
Device. Dynamic assessment as Feuerstein originally conceived of it is used
mostly with developmentally delayed children, and is based on Vygotsky's
theory.

And one of the most fascinating assessments I've ever conducted was for an
assignment for that course -- using the LPAD with a profoundly
intellectually gifted child who was also a child prodigy in a specific area.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:57:44 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC835DE8.C471%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Luc wrote:

> Perhaps you could send one of the two guest experts to Belgium during the
> next conference, so the discussion could go on withoput interruption 24/24?
> We can provide them with a fast Internet connection, a good bed and decent
> food! As a bonus: the chocolate factory is next door, so we can also
> maintain a permanent flow of Belgian chocolate in its various appearances
> ;-)
> I would also like to mention the presence of a few artisanal breweries in
> the neighbourhood, so -if necessary- we can provide a continuous beer flow
> as well!>>>>

Kathi volunteers for the trip to Belgium, and the chocolate, but not the
beer! :-)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:56:39 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: ADMIN- First day , etc (off topic)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DF377.2030302@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hello Luc,

Luc Kumps wrote:

My 24-year-old son likes your offer so much that he is prepared to

accompany me to Belgium.... to provide 24/24 conference coverage, of
course. :) Bobbie Gilman

>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:21:12 -0600
From: Elan Long <elong@springsmart.com>
Subject: impact of SI, Vision on WISC
To: "OURGIFTED-L (E-mail)" <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Message-id: <006a01c40f82$0ef79c10$6500a8c0@elong>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hello and thanks to you all for this very helpful conference.

I am trying to figure out whether and how to get a full or more holistic
evaluation done of my DS, 10. We recently (last fall) discovered that he
had a vision (convergence and tracking) problem and sensory integration
dysfunction (low sensory). He has been doing OT and vision therapy with
remarkable results.

He was tested at 6y4m with WISC-III and scored VI = 122, PI=126, FSIQ 126.
There were ceiling scores and a very low score on coding & arithmetic. The
pyschologist notes a very high distractibility (ACID?) component and warned
us to stay away from interpreting it as AD/HD becuase she thought it more

likely related to IQ.

DS was slow reading and had writingg problems which led to a full assessment
at the public school district this sept at 9y7m. A different psychologist
(who was pushing ADHD very hard) did the WISC III again and this time got
VIQ 128, PIQ 99, FSIQ 116. She did not know anything about the vision and
SI issues because that assessment was being done for the same IEP meeting.

My sense is that these scores underestimate DS because there was no
recognition of the disabilities. The label was Nonverbal learning disorder
which got services for writing and OT.

Is there a way to assess these kids that more acccurately reflects both the
strengths and weaknesses? Is there a way to determine if once the vision is
resolved (apparently it is completely fix-able) and the SI "catches up"
whether there is still a NLD--or if processing speed, etc. are strictly
related to those issues?

I just want to get a realistic view of where we are and what we need to be

thinking about. I don't want to kid myself that DS is more capable than he
is--but he is extremely creative, sensitive and a pretty remarkable guy so I
ALSO don't want to underestimate him or let schools, etc. do it to him
either.

Any thoughts on how valid this testing is and what we ought to be thinking
about?

Thanks very, very much.

Elan

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:07:15 -0500
From: Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
Subject: Re: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <19df01c40f6f$5862c130$6400a8c0@MEREDITH>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

From: "Luc Kumps" <luc.kumps@pandora.be>

> A lot of 'issues' are sometimes linked to a V/P gap: ADHD, visual learning
> style, autism, asperger, NLD, ... You name it!...
> But when we read scientific studies such a one-to-one relationship never
> surfaces!...
> Are there really ANY conclusions one can draw from such a 'gap'?
> Are there any studies of the incidence, magnitude and the meaning of a V/P
> gap among the gifted population?

Kathi and Bobby - I hope it's ok for me to comment here.

The WISC and other IQ tests aren't meant to be diagnostic for special needs.
There are many possible reasons for large VIQ/PIQ gaps - as you say, there is no

"one-to-one" relationship. In my experience, seeing a gap (whether between
VIQ/PIQ or between individual subtests) is best seen as an suggestion that
"something" is going on and further investigation is called for.

Bobby pointed out some important things that should be checked, such as hearing
and vision. When PIQ is much lower, it can also be helpful to have an OT
evaluation if there are signs that a child has problems with fine motor skills
(since that can cause the child to lose speed bonuses on the PIQ in the
WISC-III).

I would be very wary of any tester who makes (or rules out) a diagnosis of NLD,
Asperger Syndrome, etc. based on an IQ test. It is very important to do
follow-up tests that examine particular areas before making a diagnosis.

--
Meredith Warshaw, M.S.S., M.A., mailto:mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org
Special Needs Educational Advisor, http://uniquelygifted.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you
did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. ~ Maya Angelou

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:20:12 -0800
From: Corin Goodwin <corin@thegoodwins.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: retesting necessary?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DF8FC.9020403@thegoodwins.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Barbara J. Gilman wrote:

> Hi Becca,
> If the WISC-III and SBLM went well and documented his abilities
> appropriately, another IQ test is probably not needed.

It might not be necessary, but if you uncover learning difficulties
through testing, would it not make sense to test again after various
therapies? We had dd7 tested last summer, and we're planning to retest,
on Linda Silverman's advice, after ~18 months to 2 years. What I'm
hoping to get is some sense of whether our mitigation strategies (OT,
VT, etc) are working, and whether there might be more we can do. Sort of
like peeling back the layers of an onion, iykwim. We want to know if

we're on the right path, and we found the guidance provided by the first
round of testing quite useful to that end.

Corin

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:33:58 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DFC36.50508@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Carol,
The SBL-M is wonderful for assessing verbal abstract reasoning--the kind
that often defines gifted classrooms where students discuss concepts at
advanced levels, compare and contrast ideas, make inferences, debate
points of view, and write at depth about issues. This kind of reasoning
is primarily assessed in only 1 of the 10 subtests of the SB5: Verbal
Fluid Reasoning. Although the SB5 is composed of 5 "Verbal" and 5
"Nonverbal" subtests, this refers to the way the items are
administered. Other Verbal subtests include "Verbal Quantitative
Reasoning," "Verbal Visual-Spatial Reasoning," "Verbal Working Memory,"

and "Verbal Knowledge" (vocabulary). So, of 10 subtests, only 2--Verbal
Fluid Reasoning and Verbal Knowledge (vocabulary), assess the most
important elements of verbal reasoning in the typical sense.

However, because the Nonverbal portion of the SB5 includes Nonverbal
Fluid Reasoning (matrices), Nonverbal Knowledge (visual reasoning),
Nonverbal Quantitative Reasoning, Nonverbal Visual-Spatial Processing,
and Nonverbal Working Memory, you can see the SB5 is a strong assessment
of visual reasoning, visual-spatial reasoning (presented both verbally
and visually) and mathematical reasoning (both verbal and visual). It
emphasizes areas the SBL-M also has, but has less of. The SBL-M is a
wonderful test of verbal abstract reasoning, which also has some
excellent mathematical and visual-spatial items, while the SB5
emphasizes mathematical and spatial reasoning. The tests complement
each other.

It is unlikely the SBL-M will be significantly redesigned to include

more visual-spatial items because producing an entirely new IQ test like
the SB5 is very costly. However, Riverside would be wise to continue
supporting the SBL-M because its content exists nowhere else and it is a
proven test of giftedness. Just slightly revising it and renorming it
as solely a test for the gifted would be a great idea. I would propose
calling it the SB-GT.

Bobbie Gilman

mblochfamily1@comcast.net wrote:

> Can you elaborate on the types of things that you learn that you could not
> by testing with the SB-LM only or the SB-V only?
>
> Carol
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kathi Kearney" <kkearney@ttlc.net>
> To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 1:22 AM
> Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
>
>
>> Susan wrote:
>>
>>> Where will all the new assessment tools and trends place the SB-LM in
>>
> the
>
>>> near future? I understand that many of the new assessment tools

>>> (particularly the SB-V) attempted to capture the strengths of the SB-LM
>>
> and
>
>>> other tests, but it appears that what was set out to be achieved, has,
>>
> in
>
>>> many respects, fallen short of the mark. Has any thought been given to
>>> keeping the SB-LM basically as is, but modernising the questions and
>>
> perhaps
>
>>> incorporating more visual-spatial components? Maybe this is what the
>>
> SB-V
>
>>> has attempted to do.
>>>
>>> Are we going to lose access to the SB-LM and be left with nothing that
>>
> can
>
>>> really distinguish the levels of giftedness at the extreme end of
>>> giftedness?>>>>
>>
>> I'm actually finding the SB5/SBLM combination of tests to be very, very
>> helpful. Each version of the Stanford-Binet has strengths that the other
>> version does not.
>>
>>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:42 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83603D.C472%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I wrote, re: the SAT-I used as an out-of-level test with the talent
searches:

>>> to be more of an achievement test than a math and verbal reasoning test.
> .
>>> .. .it's my understanding, after talking with
>>> representatives from several of the university talent searches for gifted
>>> children at NAGC last fall, that even the talent searches aren't sure
> what
>>> they are going to do regarding the "new" SAT-I.)

then Carolyn answered:
>
>> Kathi,
>> Could you throw more light on this issue ... what might happen or what
> would
>> be the logical way to go about this new conundrum that ETS has presented
> the
>> gifted world.
>

> I've heard that a shift to the ACT might be a solution. Does this sound
> reasonable?>>>>>

Well, it not only sounds very reasonable, since there are years of data on
the performance of young gifted students on the ACT as an out-of-level test,
but it is probably the direction the Belin-Blank Center will go in since
they already use the ACT (they just started offering the SAT-I as a talent
search option in the past year).

I don't think anyone knows how young gifted students at the ages of 12 and
13 will perform on the "new" SAT-I (since the new SAT-I isn't even out yet).
Doing well on the new SAT-I will depend on having some knowledge of Algebra
II. It will also require essay drafting and writing under time pressure
using handwriting, not a computer. And the verbal abstract reasoning items,
such as the analogies, will be replaced by a critical reading section, as I
understand it.

Almost 30 years of data has been collected using the old SAT. It has proven

to be, as Julian Stanley would say, a powerful tool for finding young people
who "reason extremely well" mathematically or verbally.

We just don't know how these students will perform on a revamped SAT-I that
focuses more on achievement and curriculum exposure. We will have to wait
and see. And so will the talent searches.

In the meantime, if you want your gifted child to take the old SAT-I, I
recommend that you do it before the new one takes its place, even if you
have the child take it at a slightly younger age than they normally would
for the talent searches.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:43 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8363D2.C473%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Carol asked:

> Can you elaborate on the types of things that you learn that you could not
> by testing with the SB-LM only or the SB-V only?>>>>>

Sure.

The SBLM still is one of the best instruments, with a high ceiling, for
observing very high level verbal abstract reasoning in gifted children
between the ages of 4 and 10. The item types and challenge level are
uniquely suited to observing this.

On the other hand, the SB5 has one of the best visual-spatial reasoning
sections I've seen in any instrument anywhere, and it seems particularly
effective and very efficient in locating gifted visual-spatial learners. The
SB5's quantitative reasoning section is also very, very strong. The SBLM is

much weaker in these areas.

But the two tests used together seem to give a very well-rounded picture of
a gifted child's pattern of abilities -- a picture that either test, alone,
does not quite give. You can also compare the SBLM's mental age and the
SB5's full scale IQ age equivalent -- which I am observing to be similar, in
most of the cases which I have seen where both scores were available, and
when the child is between the chronological ages of 4 and 10. (The two cases
which have been way off included a child who was not native to the U. S.,
thus precipitating some cultural differences that probably affected test
scores, and one "outlier" score where every other test score the child had
was within the gifted range --there were at least five different ability
test scores available --, but the SB5 was not in the gifted range, for some
unknown reason)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:43 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83643A.C474%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Dominique asked:

> What would you do in a country where no other test
> than the WPPSI/WISC is available ? The Stanford Binet
> L-M has not been translated in Dutch.>>>>

Dominique, I am very curious. Have the WPPSI/WISC tests not only been
translated into Dutch, but also have the two tests been normed on Dutch
children? Or are they using American norms?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:43 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8364CA.C475%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162728450_212037_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728450_212037_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Laurie wrote:

<<<If I were evaluating a child who was not proficient in the language of
the test, I would omit the verbal IQ from the report. Or, I would use a
nonverbal IQ test, such as the UNIT or Leiter International. >>>>

Excellent advice, Laurie. And two very good tests to use in this situation.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728450_212037_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>

<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE>Laurie wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<<If I were evaluating a child who was not proficient in the lang=
uage of the test, I would omit the verbal IQ from the report.  Or, I wo=
uld use a nonverbal IQ test, such as the UNIT or Leiter International. >&=
gt;>><BR>
<BR>
Excellent advice, Laurie. And two very good tests to use in this situation.=
</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728450_212037_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:43 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8366FA.C478%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I wrote:

>> to be more of an achievement test than a math and verbal reasoning test. .
>> .. .it's my understanding, after talking with
>> representatives from several of the university talent searches for gifted
>> children at NAGC last fall, that even the talent searches aren't sure what
>> they are going to do regarding the "new" SAT-I.)
>

Then Urmi asked:

> Could you throw more light on this issue ... what might happen or what would
> be the logical way to go about this new conundrum that ETS has presented the
> gifted world.>>>>

The only "light" I can shed on this, Urmi, is that I was told by CTY that
they "don't know yet" what they are going to do and "all options are on the
table."

The Belin-Blank Center remains firm about using the ACT.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:40:43 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC836659.C476%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162728452_212152_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728452_212152_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Barb Hutton wrote:

<<<<The issue of the "number" at which giftedness appears on IQ testing has
broad ramifications for schools designed for gifted kids. Talking with
parents about testing, determining minimum entrance requirements have become
confusing for everyone. Even schools and programs that take a broader view
and incorporate sub test analysis, interviews, parent nominations, teacher

recommendations, extended classroom visits, etc still are struggling. What
should be our new entrance criteria? "It depends on the test?" Try
running that by a group of parents sitting in a school orientation....>>>>>>

I'd recommend Full Scale IQ of 120 on the SB5, simply because that is within
the standard error of measurement of where the (rather large, for a
validation study) gifted samples scored during the standardization of the
instrument. Many of these individuals in the validation study samples (there
were several) had already been identified as gifted using earlier versions
of the Stanford-Binet or the WISC-III and/or were enrolled (and presumably
performing successfully) in programs for gifted students.

This also seems to be the threshold on this particular test at which many
students do need the kind of challenge that gifted programs can successfully
and efficiently offer.

Keep in mind that you can also look at the Nonverbal IQ and Verbal IQ on the
SB5 separately.

I will let Bobbie offer an opinion on this question regarding the WISC-IV,
since she has been working with it a lot at the Gifted Development Center as
one of the required tests that the many schools and programs for the gifted
in the greater Denver area are using.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728452_212152_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT Re: What can you learn from the SB-V</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Barb Hutton wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<<<<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT
FACE=3D"Arial">The=
issue of the "number" at which giftedness appears on IQ testing h=
as broad ramifications for schools designed for gifted kids.  Talking w=
ith parents about testing, determining minimum entrance requirements have be=
come confusing for everyone.  Even schools and programs that take a bro=
ader view and incorporate sub test analysis, interviews, parent nominations,=
teacher recommendations, extended classroom visits, etc still are strugglin=
g.  What should be our new entrance criteria?  "It depends on=
the test?"   Try running that by a group of parents sitting =
in a school orientation....>>>>>><BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>I'd recommend Full Scale IQ of 120 on the SB5, simply because =
that is within the standard error of measurement of where the (rather large,=
for a validation study) gifted samples scored during the standardization of=
the instrument. Many of these individuals in the validation study samples (=
there were several) had already been identified as gifted using earlier vers=
ions of the Stanford-Binet or the WISC-III and/or were enrolled (and presuma=
bly performing successfully) in programs for gifted students.<BR>
<BR>

This also seems to be the threshold on this particular test at which many s=
tudents do need the kind of challenge that gifted programs can successfully =
and efficiently offer.<BR>
<BR>
Keep in mind that you can also look at the Nonverbal IQ and Verbal IQ on th=
e SB5 separately. <BR>
<BR>
I will let Bobbie offer an opinion on this question regarding the WISC-IV, =
since she has been working with it a lot at the Gifted Development Center as=
one of the required tests that the many schools and programs for the gifted=
in the greater Denver area are using.<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162728452_212152_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:49:26 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB5: generalizes to homeschoolers; role of knowledge in
scores.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Cc: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu, owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OF7E3FEF47.2990C71D-ON86256E5E.0070B222-86256E5E.00726337@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Sorry I'm responding so long after the question was asked.

I think this question relates to 2 issues:

1) can the results of the recent SB5 standardization (total N = 4800 Norm
study, and an additional nearly 3,000 in special studies) generalize to
home-schooled children, and

2) will the SB5's content result in lower scores for those whose education
included a different set of knowledge/information due to, perhaps, a
different set of values that drove the curriculum (and other aspects of
cultural exposure).

FYI, as I write this, I am at home in Wheaton, Illinois, which may have

among the highest percentage of homeschooled children in the country, at
over 3%, and I've heard it may be up to 5%.

For question 1, I don't recall the exact percentage of homeschooled kids in
our sample. I believe it is about what you would see nationally, but can
try to confirm next week in case anyone's interested (you could contact me
direclty). However, because we did not have much opportunity to collect our
sample in regular school hours, there was no incentive from a data
collection perspective to include only the traditional school-based
students. At any rate, I believe the sample should generalize to
homeschoolers, but some interpretive cautions may be warranted, which I'll
discuss next.

The interpretive cautions arise from the implications of scores on the
knowledge factor index scores, or the two subtest scores that contribute to
it (Nonverbal Knowledge and Verbal Knowledge). As you might know, there are
five SB5 factor indexes (fluid reasoning, knowledge, quantitative

reasoning, visual-spatial skills, and working memory). The SB5 does not
have information questions along the lines of the Wechsler tests, but the
two knowledge subtests do tap general background knowledge that the
individual has accrued over time. The manual states that one can have
somewhat (relatively) lower scores if you are, say, an immigrant, and
therefore have a different cultural experience from the majority culture.
My experience working with gifted kids suggests that their knowledge scores
tend to be well higher than average, and even gifted home schoolers will
tend to have high knowledge scores, at or above their other scores. So
actually, I don't think there's a problem for typical homeschooled gifted
kids in terms of the knowledge scores on the SB5.

However, let's say (hypothetically speaking) that you have a child who's
raised in an isolated enclave with no exposure to any aspects of modern
culture, but the child is provided a rich and highly literate (but

selective) education. My guess is that child might score relatively higher
on verbal knowledge than on nonverbal knowledge. Verbal knowledge is a
vocabulary test. Nonverbal knowledge is a more hodge-podge assessment of
the sort of generic 'background knowledge' that anyone growing up in the
culture would be likely to learn.

If for some reason you believe that a child has been raised in such
isolation from society that composite IQ scores that include knowledge
might not provide a good indicator of general ability, the assessment
professional could determine what the composite score would be without one
or both of the knowledge subtests. The rationale for this choice would need
to be noted in a report. However, this would be highly unusual, and any
homeschooler who needed this might have some other issues arising from
their relative isolation from the culture.

I hope this answers your question...

Regards,
Drew Carson

Andrew D. Carson, Ph.D.
Senior Project Director

The Riverside Publishing Company
425 Spring Lake Drive
Itasca, Illinois 60143-2079
phone (630) 467-6036 or 1-800-767-8420 (extension 6036)
fax (630) 467-6150
email Andrew_Carson@hmco.com

Kathi Kearney
<kkearney@ttlc.ne To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
t> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: ASAT: Opening
Statement by Kathi Kearney &
owner-OURGIFTED-L Bobbie Gilman
@neiu.edu

03/20/2004 09:01
PM
Please respond to
OURGIFTED-L

Corin asked:

> I'm asking... Some of the questions on the WISC III that my dd took

> seemed so arbitrary, or at least the values attached to them did. As a
> homeschooling family, I couldn't help but think that some of the general
> knowledge information was poorly correlated with expected level of
> ability or intelligence. I can get more specific upon request...>>>>>

No need to get more specific, Corin.

I think that this probably would come under the category of some of the
issues that come up in testing so-called "culturally different" children.
Homeschooled students, as far as I know, were not specifically included in
the norming sample for the WISC-III, even though at the time the WISC-III
was normed, they comprised about 1 and 1/2 percent of the U. S. schoolage
population.

Some of the things we know about homeschooled students is that they do, as
a
group, tend to have less exposure to some elements of modern popular
culture
(such as television) than their conventionally schooled peers, as a group,

have. (They also tend to read much more -- but we are becoming a much less
verbal and a much more visual society than we were 100 years ago, and, in
my
opinion, our newer tests reflect this).

This illustrates some of the cross-cultural issues involved with testing,
by
the way.

Homeschooled students now comprise about 3% of the U. S. school-age
population. I know for sure that some homeschooled students *were* included
in the standardization samples and validation studies for the SB5, but I am
not sure of the percentage -- Drew Carson from Riverside is on this list --
Drew, do you happen to know offhand how many homeschooled students were
part
of the SB5 standardization and validation studies? I know that you
collected
that information.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:09:33 -0500
From: "Kathryn M. Finn" <kitfinn@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405DBE3D.10243.F9A4323@localhost>

Kristina,

Sounds to me like you already know what needs doing. The
question is just what will it take to make you do it.

Kit

> > My dilemma is this: I suspect that if we go ahead and have a
> full
> > evaluation done, we'll find out that he may even be "more" than
> > HG and his needs can't be met in our SD. We are not in a
> > position to homeschool or to pay $7,000+/year for tuition at
> the
> > only gifted school in this part of the state (although I am
> going
> > to a parent open-house there next week).
> >
> > So, my question is: would the benefits of going through
> > additional evaluation outweigh the nagging doubt I have about
> > actually being able to implement the recommendations in his

> > current school setting? I realize that's a very subjective
> > question. I guess what it comes down to is that I fear that if
> > we had a complete evaluation done we might have to seriously
> > reconsider our position on homeschooling or gifted schooling.
> > Maybe a better question would be, how beneficial would the
> > results of a full evaluation be in a situation of radical grade
> > acceleration?
> >
> > Wondering, pondering, and mulling subjectively,
> > -Kristina
> >
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:21:38 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OF734F6071.0B2D4D8C-ON86256E5E.00742E2D-86256E5E.007555C5@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Julie, with all respect, I believe Deborah Ruf's bulletin is pretty clear
on why SB5 and SB Form L-M scores differ. They differ because they are on
different metrics. The L-M is based on a scoring metric that incorporates a
ratio IQ. Because of this, scores tend to get much larger (at the high end)
the greater the degree of discrepancy between mental age (or
age-equivalent) and chronological age. The SB5's metric is the same as
you'll find in other standard ability/IQ tests (including the Wechsler
tests, and the SB: IV). The scores are apples (on the L-M side) and oranges
(with the other tests).

The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect

distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There was
no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe we
succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.

If there is IQ variance that's unusual, it's based on reliance of ratio
IQs. Reliance on ratio IQs, such as you essentially get with the Form L-M,
appears to result in a distribution of IQ scores that is different from the
Gaussian normal curve.

In an earlier post, it was noted that one might begin considering gifted
classification with SB5 scores in the 120s. That's actually reasonable,
because apparently that's what gifted programs are doing anyway, at least
in most of the country. The average SB5 score for students enrolled in
gifted programs was around 123. This is not atypical for what you see with
other ability tests. It would appear that programs are selecting kids for

gifted programs on criteria that include but are not limited to measured
intelligence.

This all being said, it is relatively easy to obtain distribution and
differentiation at high levels of ability using the SB5. Again, I'd refer
you to Ruf's fine bulletin on that, but use of the change-senstive scores
can be helpful in this effort.\

Regards,
Drew

You can obtain L-M like scores on the SB5 by dividing age-equivalent scores
by chronological age, by the way.

Andrew D. Carson, Ph.D.
Senior Project Director
The Riverside Publishing Company
425 Spring Lake Drive
Itasca, Illinois 60143-2079
phone (630) 467-6036 or 1-800-767-8420 (extension 6036)
fax (630) 467-6150
email Andrew_Carson@hmco.com

Julie Knapp

<littleredhenschool To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
@yahoo.com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: ASAT Re: What can you
learn from the SB-V
owner-OURGIFTED-L@n
eiu.edu

03/20/2004 11:23 PM
Please respond to
OURGIFTED-L

not only does the SB-V seem to "supress" the scores on the upper end... it
seems to do the same on the lower end, as well.

If tests lower the ceiling and install an elevator in the basement.. then
there no longer *are* levels of intelligence for the schools to deal with.

just my 2cents worth
-julie

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:26:19 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OFB46CA5CD.3E8CB7E0-ON86256E5E.00757F24-86256E5E.0075C3AB@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Donna,

Was the SB5 administered after the Wechsler test? One thing that you'll
tend to see is that if a student scores highly on an IQ test, and then
they're administered an additional IQ test, that the score drops on the 2nd
test relative to the first test. Testing and measurement people call this
"regression to the mean", but it doesn't mean that the student has lost
ability; rather, it's typically a function of measurement error that will
be part of any test.

Drew Carson

Donna Langlois
White To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
<donna2143@cox.ne cc:
t> Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5
Sent by:
owner-OURGIFTED-L
@neiu.edu

03/21/2004 06:43
AM
Please respond to
OURGIFTED-L

these tests, shouldn't they also be able to explain the meaning of the
scores to the parents? My son scored 7 pts lower on the SB5 than he did on
the WISC-IV and the psycholgoist that tested him didn't seem to think
anything of the drop in scores. I came away very confused.

donna

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:39:14 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E1992.8030705@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Excellent point, Meredith. There is a lot of compensation going on in
gifted children with deficits and it can be physically exhausting for
them. There are always ways around a strict schedule. :) Bobbie

Meredith Warshaw wrote:

>
> One thing I've seen in some gifted/special needs kids (including my son) is
that
> they may tire more easily in testing and many not have the mental stamina to
do
> two consecutive days. If your child is being tested locally, he or she may do
> better if you arrange one testing session/week rather than two days in a row.
>
> BTW, this can be very useful info - each time my son's been tested, the
testers
> have commented that he tired more quickly than most kids. Certainly explained
> why he was exhausted at the end of a day of school, and has been helpful info
> for pacing our homeschooling.
>
> M
>

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 09:37:33 +1100
From: "main.family" <main.family@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <AIENIABCBHHEMHDLJPFIKEIPCCAA.main.family@optusnet.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C40FF1.4D84CBA0"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C40FF1.4D84CBA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Laurie (and Glenda)

On the SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give? Is it
mostly age-dependant? Given that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear
to be useful in providing meaningful information re a gifted child's
mathematical abilities, do you think it appropriate for the parent to ask
that this subtest not be given? I noticed that the assessor has 15 subtests
to choose from, but that only 10 are administered.

I know of several people who have had their child assessed using the SB 4,
the children have all "ceilinged" on this subtest (amongst others), and
decisions/recommendations made about their educational needs in the
mathematical area based on this subtest result. Is it possible for all
three mathematical subtests to be administered in the assessment so that a
more accurate picture can be obtained?

With thanks.

Susan

Hi Glenda,
I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest from the SB:IV
for gifted purposes. I have primarily used it in the evaluation of learning
disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, they reached the
ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as six items. It's
hard to make any suggestions based on so few items! Sorry. I hope Bobbie
or Kathi will be able to answer your questions. - Laurie

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.637 / Virus Database: 408 - Release Date: 20/03/2004

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C40FF1.4D84CBA0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D520502622-21032004>Hi=20
Laurie (and Glenda)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D520502622-21032004>On the=20
SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give?  Is =
it mostly=20
age-dependant?  Given that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear =
to be=20

useful in providing meaningful information re a gifted child's =
mathematical=20
abilities, do you think it appropriate for the parent to ask that this =
subtest=20
not be given?  I noticed that the assessor has 15 subtests to =
choose from,=20
but that only 10 are administered.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D520502622-21032004>I know=20
of several people who have had their child assessed using the SB 4, the =
children=20
have all "ceilinged" on this subtest (amongst others), and=20
decisions/recommendations made about their educational needs in the =
mathematical=20
area based on this subtest result.  Is it possible for all =
three=20
mathematical subtests to be administered in the assessment so that a =
more=20
accurate picture can be obtained?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>

<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D520502622-21032004>With=20
thanks.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004>Susan </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Hi Glenda,</DIV>
<DIV>  I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest =
from the=20
SB:IV for gifted purposes.  I have primarily used it in the =
evaluation of=20

learning disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, =
they=20
reached the ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as =
six=20
items.  It's hard to make any suggestions based on so few =
items! =20
Sorry.  I hope Bobbie or Kathi will be able to answer your=20
questions.  - Laurie<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C40FF1.4D84CBA0--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:50:38 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E1C3E.1020409@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Shannon,
I do like the idea of documenting abilities, so that if programs or
other opportunities you like present themselves, you can meet entrance
requirements. You have a somewhat small window of opportunity to do this
most effectively. I found test reports, supplemented by occasional
individual achievement tests, to be helpful. Bobbie Gilman

Shannon wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
>
> I already know that my children are gifted.
>
> Please elaborate on how my children could benefit from testing (especially
> if there is something more I should be doing)?
>
> Thank You,
> Shannon
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:49:45 -0500
From: "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
Subject: ASAT: Re: from Malaysia/more ideas
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E1BEA.F48624DD@chartermi.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; x-mac-creator=4D4F5353; x-mac-type=54455854;
charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Anthony & Sheila,

I'm a parent, not a psychologist, but I have personal experience of this
with my child. Our daughter had scores of a similar spread with her
performance score on the WISC-III being 32 points higher than her verbal
scores.

When a child is bilingual, it can be difficult to interpret the meaning
of scores such as these. If a child has been developing bilingually
since a young age, even if the two languages appear to be fairly well
balanced, the child may not have the fund of knowledge- vocabulary and
higher level structures- of either language individually that a
monolingual child of the same age and ability will have. This is

especially true in the elementary grades when children are learning new
vocabulary for academic subjects on a daily basis. The verbal portion
of an IQ test, if given must be interpreted with this in mind.

My soon-to-be 16yo dd was tested at age nine. At the time she was a
balanced English-Japanese bilingual, attending Japanese public school
and speaking English at home and at church. Our tester chose to have a
colleague give the WISC-III verbal in Japanese. He then gave the SB-IV
verbal in English and the WISC-III Performance American version. Based
on those results, he recommended further language testing (typical of
what a speech pathologist would use) in English, which gave us further
information about dd's language use.

Our dd had some idiosyncratic patterns in her use of language which
tipped us off that she had more issues than just being bilingual. If
your daughter doesn't seem to have difficulty in daily life, her
depressed verbal score may well be related to being bilingual.

Marie H.
parent of an 18yo HG dd, 15yo 2E dd, and 9yo ? ds

Anthony Xavier wrote:

> Hi Barbara,I understand that usually the child scores high in the
> Verbal scale and lower in the Performance scale.However, our
> daughter's IQ scores was on the reverse meaning :Verbal comprehension
> 86, Perceptual Org 128; Freedom from distractibility 119 and
> performance speed 130.And the examiner's report indicated that our
> daughter has very high functioning fluid intelligence and demonstrated
> advanced cognitive ability and among other has very quick mental
> processing speed. Would appreciate if you could let us know on the
> reverse scores by our child. This will be useful for us to explain to
> the school. kind regards,Anthony & Sheila

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:21:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Lawver@aol.com
Subject: ASAT : IQ & the Bell Curve
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <163.2d2ee6cd.2d8f6f55@aol.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=-----------------------------1079907669

-------------------------------1079907669
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kathi & Bobbie -

As far as you know, is anyone doing any research on whether or not IQ fits
the normal curve?

It seems to me that by making sure that kids that tested pg on other measures
were included in the norming sample of the SB-V, the scores had to drop as
those kids had to fit the normal distribution for that test. If IQ is
distributed "normally" all is well, but if it isn't, then the test doesn't
reflect the
true abilities of those on the ends. Research into how IQ is distributed
would help - Joni (lawver@aol.com)

-------------------------------1079907669
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUS-ASCII http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; cha=
rset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>Kathi & Bobbie -</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As far as you know, is anyone doing any research on whether or not IQ f=
its the normal curve?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It seems to me that by making sure that kids that tested pg on other me=
asures were included in the norming sample of the SB-V, the scores had to dr=
op as those kids had to fit the normal distribution for that test. &nbs=
p;If IQ is distributed "normally" all is well, but if it isn't, then the tes=
t doesn't reflect the true abilities of those on the ends.  Research in=
to how IQ is distributed would help - Joni (<A href=3D"mailto:lawver@aol.com=

">lawver@aol.com</A>)</DIV></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1079907669--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:06:48 -0500
From: Aimee Yermish <ayermish@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: RE: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <033f01c40f90$d1305750$6601a8c0@TESLA>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Carolyn K. <carolyn{at}thehoagies.com> writes:
> I've heard that a shift to the ACT might be a solution. Does
> this sound reasonable?

None of the three tests you're talking about (old SAT, new SAT, existing
ACT) are "reasoning" tests in any meaningful way. They're *all*
achievement tests, plain and simple. Talent searches are going on the
assumption that kids of average intelligence can't achieve to the same
level as gifted kids, which is probably a reasonable assumption
(especially given the technical problems others have noted with aptitude
tests for older kids), but I don't see how that makes an achievement
test into an ability test.

Old SAT I: Reading comprehension, fill-in-the-blank, analogies, ordinary
math problems and quantitative comparisons. The analogies might
arguably be testing verbal reasoning (and a certain amount of fluid
reasoning in general), but they load vocabulary so heavily that they
mainly function as a test of, "Do you know what all of these words
mean?" -- the analogous relationships themselves are usually pretty
straightforward when you know the definitions (most SAT prep books will
give you a list of about 10 different common types (synonym, antonym,
part-whole, etc), and virtually every analogy falls into one of those
types. Raven's Progressive Matrices it ain't). Reading comprehension
will typically have one question per passage that requires one to find
the main idea, one that asks for an inference, and maybe one that asks
about style or intent, but none of these is all that cognitively complex
-- again, mainly the issue is whether you can understand the vocabulary

and the passage at all and follow the directions in the questions.
Quantitative comparisons look like they might be assessing math
reasoning, but in fact, they're really just a different kind of ordinary
problem (most require regular calculation or routine simplification
rather than actual reasoning, and even the ones that look like they load
reasoning are completely beatable -- as long as you remember to check 0,
1, some negative number, and some fraction between 0 and 1, you're
pretty well home free.

New SAT I: Reading comprehension (long and short passages (not sure what
the point of the short ones is), grammar and usage (taking over much of
the realm of the fill-in-the-blank questions (remember that usage often
translates directly to vocabulary)), writing samples, ordinary math
problems, only with more of high school math included. Yes, the areas
that seemed the most "reasoning"-based (analogies and quantitative
comparisons) have been eliminated, but as I said above, they really

weren't as reasoning-based as one might assume.

ACT: Sentence corrections about mechanics, sentence corrections about
style (this group *does* load verbal reasoning, and neither group loads
vocabulary all that heavily). Regular math problems (covering a similar
level of high school math as the new SAT will, as far as I can tell on a
quick scan). Reading comprehension, the usual. Science -- this one
*is* actually a test of reasoning (to the best of my recollection from
having helped a student study for it a number of years ago). No factual
knowledge is required -- all of the needed information is contained on
the test. About 40% of the questions are on things like reading graphs
(not a reasoning task), but the rest actually do involve thinking.
However, having a large fund of background knowledge would be a
significant advantage, as it is in virtually all reading comprehension
tasks, and this has the effect of creating a pretty heavy achievement

load that would confound a lot of the potential information about
aptitude. They're adding an essay in 2005, just like the SAT, but it
will be optional (it sounds like they're waiting to see whether the
colleges will require it). Overall, I think it's a better achievement
test than the SAT (science being near and dear to my heart), but it's
still mostly an achievement test.

So my general feeling is that one shouldn't get too worried about any of
them, because none of them does what you really want anyhow. For the
talent searches, the main point is to create a rough sort between kids
who can do well on these out-of-level achievement tests and kids who
can't, even if they study. (And I don't believe it's immoral for a kid
to study for a talent search test, by the way -- if you're able to learn
the material, who cares whether you learned it because your teachers
taught you, your parents taught you, a vocabulary book taught you, or an

SAT prep book taught you? This *isn't* an aptitude test, even if it was
originally designed to be so back in the Stone Age.)

-- Aimee Yermish (who remembers the Test of Standard Written English
adjunct to the SAT, the one that was so easy that no talent search kid
would admit to having gotten less than a perfect score)
da Vinci Learning Center
aimee@davincilearning.org

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:10:27 +0100
From: Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
Subject: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <00a101c40f99$b2aa61a0$8a7ba8c0@spc2>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

> Bobby pointed out some important things that should be checked,
> such as hearing
> and vision. When PIQ is much lower, it can also be helpful to have an OT
> evaluation if there are signs that a child has problems with fine
> motor skills
> (since that can cause the child to lose speed bonuses on the PIQ in the
> WISC-III).

Thanks for the info.
We encountered many, many parents of gifted kids reporting huge V/P gaps on
a WPPSI-R. And we also keep reading stories of children retested with a WISC
later on, where the gap mysteriously disappeared. After a consultant (of a
local 'gifted development center') told us not to worry about it, we didn't
investigate this any further.

Now your and Bobbies comments make us doubt again...

Luc K (Felix jun98)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:11:22 -0500
From: "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E20F6.8E5D2712@chartermi.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------492EB7A5FC53F703A052F5E2

--------------492EB7A5FC53F703A052F5E2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kathi,

I wrote about my almost 16yo dd in a response to Anthony & Sheila in
Malaysia. I really wished our tester had chosen to use the Ravens or the
Leiter as additional tests; I only learned about testing in the couple
of years after she was tested, so didn't know to ask at the time she was
tested. Our tester did choose to give a verbal IQ in Japanese (WISC-III)
and a different verbal IQ in English (SB-IV), which I thought gave us
valuable information.

A couple of questions:

1) I've always taken her WISC-III performance score (North American
version) as being the best indicator of her ability but I've wondered
this: are there items, particularly in the picture arrangement and
picture completion subtests, that are culturally loaded enough to
depress those scores for children growing up in a non-western country?

2) She is now almost 16yo. For the last 3 1/2 years she has been
functioning solely in English in the USA. I know her English vocabulary
has exploded (she scored in the 98th %ile last year in reading comp. on
the CAT-5) but she still has a few idiosynchracies (sp?) in her
language use, as well as some continuing influence of APD. We are
starting to think about college but I'm worried that she may need some
accommodations to function well in the large classroom (we now
homeschool). What instruments might be useful at this age to help us in
planning for college?

Thanks,

Marie H.

Kathi Kearney wrote:

>
>
> Laurie wrote:
>

> <<<If I were evaluating a child who was not
> proficient in the language of the test, I would
> omit the verbal IQ from the report. Or, I would
> use a nonverbal IQ test, such as the UNIT or
> Leiter International. >>>>
>
> Excellent advice, Laurie. And two very good tests
> to use in this situation.
>

--------------492EB7A5FC53F703A052F5E2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Kathi,
<p>I wrote about my almost 16yo dd in a response to Anthony & Sheila
in Malaysia. I really wished our tester had chosen to use the Ravens or
the Leiter as additional tests; I only learned about testing in the couple
of years after she was tested, so didn't know to ask at the time she was
tested. Our tester did choose to give a verbal IQ in Japanese (WISC-III)

and a different verbal IQ in English (SB-IV), which I thought gave us valuable
information.
<p>A couple of questions:
<p>1) I've always taken her WISC-III performance score (North American
version) as being the best indicator of her ability but I've wondered this:
are there items, particularly in the picture arrangement and picture completion
subtests, that are culturally loaded enough to depress those scores for
children growing up in a non-western country?
<p>2) She is now almost 16yo. For the last 3 1/2 years she has been functioning
solely in English in the USA. I know her English vocabulary has exploded
(she scored in the 98th %ile last year in reading comp. on the CAT-5) 
but she still has a few idiosynchracies (sp?) in her language use, as well
as some continuing influence of APD. We are starting to think about college
but I'm worried that she may need some accommodations to function well
in the large classroom (we now homeschool). What instruments might be useful

at this age to help us in planning for college?
<p>Thanks,
<p>Marie H.
<p>Kathi Kearney wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE> 
<blockquote>
<blockquote>Laurie wrote:
<p><<<If I were evaluating a child who was not proficient in the
language of the test, I would omit the verbal IQ from the report. 
Or, I would use a nonverbal IQ test, such as the UNIT or Leiter International.
>>>>
<p>Excellent advice, Laurie. And two very good tests to use in this
situation.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</html>

--------------492EB7A5FC53F703A052F5E2--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:16:24 -0800
From: adagio <adagiolet@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Estimating IQ from SAT scores
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <006f01c40f9a$88da13b0$02fea8c0@LINDA>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006C_01C40F57.791335D0"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_006C_01C40F57.791335D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Kay wrote:

Susan,
I chased down this question a year or so ago and was directed to the =
link
below:
http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/depts/psych_and_hd/smpy/Top1in10000.pdf
On the second page of this paper regarding mathematically talented kids =
in
Johns Hopkins programs are some formulas that let you at least roughly
convert a 12 year olds SATs to IQ at the high end. Hope this helps some.
Kay

It should be noted that if someone wishes to use the formula they used =
in

this paper, then first one needs to convert any current SAT scores =
(taken after=20
1994) to the equivalent scores for pre-1995 tests (so called original =
scores). This=20
is because the College Board "re-centered" SAT scoring in 1995. The SMPY =

paper above calculated data on students tested in 1980-83, before =
re-centering.=20
A 690 V score today would be equivalent to the 630 V criteria they used, =
for=20
example. The conversion table can be found at:

http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/equiv/rt019019.html
------=_NextPart_000_006C_01C40F57.791335D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>Kay wrote:<BR></FONT><BR>Susan,<BR>I chased =

down this=20
question a year or so ago and was directed to the link<BR>below:<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/depts/psych_and_hd/smpy/Top1in10000=
.pdf">http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/depts/psych_and_hd/smpy/Top1in10000.p=
df</A><BR>On=20
the second page of this paper regarding mathematically talented kids =
in<BR>Johns=20
Hopkins programs are some formulas that let you at least =
roughly<BR>convert a 12=20
year olds SATs to IQ at the high end. Hope this helps =
some.<BR>Kay<BR><BR>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>It should be noted that if someone wishes to =
use the=20
formula they used in</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>this paper, then first one needs to =
convert any=20
current SAT scores (taken after </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>1994) to </FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>the =
equivalent=20
scores for pre-1995 tests (so called original scores). This =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>is because the College </FONT><FONT =

color=3D#800000>Board=20
"re-centered" SAT scoring in 1995. </FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>The SMPY =

</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>paper above </FONT><FONT =
color=3D#800000>calculated=20
data on students tested in 1980-83, before =
re-centering. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>A </FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>690 V score =
today would be=20
equivalent to the 630 V criteria they used</FONT><FONT =
color=3D#800000>,=20
</FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>for </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000>example. </FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>The =
</FONT><FONT=20
color=3D#800000>conversion table can </FONT><FONT color=3D#800000>be =
found=20
at:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#800000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/equiv/rt019019.html">htt=
p://www.collegeboard.com/sat/cbsenior/equiv/rt019019.html</A></DIV></DIV>=
</BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_006C_01C40F57.791335D0--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:18:29 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: taking a short break, and comments regarding specific posts
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E22C5.106@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Cathy,
I wanted to respond to this because I note that for any child tested,
there are things that are known and "familiar"-- and things that are
unfamiliar. IQ tests all have novel items children have never
experienced. We do know that some activities show particular practice
effects. For example, mazes are better completed by children familiar
with them. However, we also see children from "puzzle-completing
families" who don't complete puzzles well at all. Sometimes parents
will complain, when we are discussing a child's performance, that their
child couldn't possibly have done an item because he or she has never

seen a "teapot" or whatever. Every child comes from a family with
certain habits of experience. The trick for test makers is to try to
find a range of items that all groups in the normative sample can answer
about equally. Items that are always missed by a particular group are
removed--or at least that is the intent.

Regarding achievement, children do require access to advanced material
to score at higher levels on achievement tests. Most young gifted
children test well in reading because most parents read to them early
and they have opportunities to learn. Access to formal math concepts
very early is less likely. Unless the child requests the information,
most parents don't provide it. However, we do make the assumption that a
child must be capable enough to learn the advanced material, or he or
she will not learn it successfully. Likewise, the child capable enough
to accelerate, needs to do so to maintain motivation to learn. Hope
that clarifies.

Bobbie Gilman

Cathy S wrote:

> But, that begs a question I have had for a long time. How accurate are
> early IQ tests on children who have been "homeschooled" (I mean
> seriously taught) such things as mazes, puzzles, writing, reading etc.
> Wouldn't these kids pretty much automatically score higher than kids
> who have never been exposed to such things?
>
>

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:22:54 +0100
From: Luc Kumps <luc.kumps@pandora.be>
Subject: ASAT : IQ & the Bell Curve
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <00a301c40f9b$6fe40ae0$8a7ba8c0@spc2>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I may be wrong, but I think I know the answer to this: "It's the wrong
question!" ;-)
Let me explain what I understood, then Kathi & Bobbie can correct me (which
no doubt will be necessary)!

As far as I know, "IQ" is only a number which comes out of an IQ test. It is
not an 'absolute' piece of data like "temperature" or "volume", for which
only one standard exists.
When people are tested, a 'raw score' comes out of the test.
This 'raw score' is converted into an IQ score.
This conversion uses a table.
This table is the result of the norming process.
And here's the funny part: this table is CONSTRUCTED in such a way that the
result is a bell curve!!!

So, the norming process includes a part which makes sure that the resulting
distribution is gaussian (i.e. fit the theory).

At least, within certain lower and upper bounds it does this. Outside these
bounds, the table isn't capable of forcing everybody into the theoretical
shape (I guess because the lack of enough samples?) and testers detect
'anomalies'...

Luc K (Felix jun98)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu]On
Behalf Of Lawver@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 11:21 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: ASAT : IQ & the Bell Curve

Kathi & Bobbie -

As far as you know, is anyone doing any research on whether or not IQ fits
the normal curve?

is distributed "normally" all is well, but if it isn't, then the test
doesn't reflect the true abilities of those on the ends. Research into how
IQ is distributed would help - Joni (lawver@aol.com)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:21:32 -0500
From: Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <1add01c40f9b$40896470$6400a8c0@MEREDITH>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

From: <Andrew_Carson@hmco.com>
>
> Julie, with all respect, I believe Deborah Ruf's bulletin is pretty clear
> on why SB5 and SB Form L-M scores differ. They differ because they are on
> different metrics. ...
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.

But then why does one highly respected tester tell me that she's seeing scores

on the SB5 that are generally 20 points lower than on the SB4 (not the SB-LM)?
And kids who were scoring highly gifted on the SB4 and the WISC are now scoring
average?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:24:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321232455.57705.qmail@web20205.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_uCkRsAS6k71/4beV3aTljg)"

--Boundary_(ID_uCkRsAS6k71/4beV3aTljg)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

Shouldn't percentiles be the same for all tests with a mean of 100 and SD of 15?
The 99.9th percentile on the DAS and SB:5 is 145 and up. The 99.9th percentile
on the WISC-IV is 160 and up. A noted test author on another listserv noted
that they are all the same!

Also, the DAS has no time requirements on the 6 Core subtests (one has a time
limit but has an alternate, untimed scoring table as well).

meg5000@att.net wrote:

I'm not understanding the logic behind the SB 5 right now at all. If you can
help me a little, that would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

best regards,
MEG H

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

--Boundary_(ID_uCkRsAS6k71/4beV3aTljg)
Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

<DIV>Shouldn't percentiles be the same for all tests with a mean of 100 and SD
of 15?  The 99.9th percentile on the DAS and SB:5 is 145 and up.  The
99.9th percentile on the WISC-IV is 160 and up.  A noted test author on
another listserv noted that they are all the same!  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Also, the DAS has no time requirements on the 6 Core subtests (one has a
time limit but has an alternate, untimed scoring table as well).</DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>meg5000@att.net</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><BR><BR>Based on what I’m reading it seems that
on the SB 5 there isn’t a speed requirement (is there?), but the ceiling is very
low and therefore it wouldn’t give me any more information about the extent of
her abilities that I aleady have. <BR><BR>Yet when I look at the Davidson
Institute entrance criteria, they want SB 5 scores at the 99.9 percentile Full
scale and / or Verbal or Non-verbal for qualification, which is the same
percentile as their WISC III entrance requirements. So at least to them it seems
that the percentile scores on the different tests mean similar things.
<BR><BR>If a score of 145 is needed on the WISC III to be in the 99.9th
percentile, what score on the SB 5 is needed to be in the 99.9th percentile? If
the score requirement on the SB 5 is lower for the 99.9th percentile, would that
mean the opposite of a low ceiling-- that there is more room on the SB
5 than
the WISC III for higher numerical scores and percentiles but you only get that
room by compressing most scores into a smaller range (in other words, by making
the higher scores and percentiles harder to get?) Wouldn’t that make it tricky
to accurately differentiate between the newly compressed segments of the
population because they’ve squashed the scale of scores down so that one
question right or wrong could make a lot of difference to the final score?
<BR><BR>I'm not understanding the logic behind the SB 5 right now at all. If you
can help me a little, that would be greatly appreciated. <BR><BR>Thanks in
advance.<BR><BR>best regards,<BR>MEG H<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><font face=arial
size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.

--Boundary_(ID_uCkRsAS6k71/4beV3aTljg)--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:28:36 +0000
From: KF Old Account <kathryn.friedlander@BTInternet.com>
Subject: ASAT Necessity for retest?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <003f01c40f9c$51a502e0$ae8ffea9@pcoldcomp>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002E_01C40F9C.3B8C9400"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C40F9C.3B8C9400
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello from England

I was wondering if you could advise me on the following dilemma: what to =
do when testing may have gone awry.....?

My daughter has always been considered a very bright child, but with =
significant 'overexcitability' problems within the school setting. We =
were asked by the school to refer her to a paediatrician, in order to =
discover the reasons for her impulsiveness and oversensitivity. So we =

then embarked upon a long journey of testing - OT, Sensory, Speech & =
Lang etc. Nothing conclusive was determined, except that she was =
exceptionally bright, and firing on more cylinders than she knew how to =
cope with at such a young age (4yrs old).

For example, a general test, using the Griffiths Performance Indicator, =
gave a performance score of 72 months+ when she was 53 months at the =
time. The paediatrician said that she had been very conservative even in =
this score, and advised us to join NAGC here in England.=20

As a final check, the paediatrician asked us to have her tested using =
the WIPPSI (Revised) assessment, when she was just over 5 years old.=20

The day of the test was a disaster. She was tired, moody and =
uncooperative. It was the end of term, and she was extremely run down =
and disillusioned with school. Furthermore, she was fed up with testing =
and with the long recitals of her problems and faults which always =

*preceded* the testing <sigh - do they really think this is =
helpful???!!>. I wasn't allowed in the test room, but my daughter =
confided in me afterwards that the tester had told her off for =
fidgeting, and so she decided not to try at all. :-(

Not surprisingly, the results were significantly down on what we (and =
the school) would have been expecting; and as far as this goes I would =
be happy to shrug the whole thing off and forget it. Her behaviour has =
improved considerably, she is showing her true ability at school and is =
being extended properly and imaginatively in the classroom.

However, the results have been written up, and one mark in particular =
(for block design - where her score was in the 90s!) was highlighted. We =
and the school have been told that, because of this mark, my daughter =
would be unable to develop higher functioning skills, and that her =
apparent early school ability is founded simply upon good general memory =

skills and exceptional visual storage ability.
=20
And this is now on her file....which they closed because they believe =
this disparity of scores solves the 'problem': she was 'acting up' =
because she was struggling with the work once it became less routine.

I am curious to find out what you think we should do at this point. =
Neither we nor the school believe that this is a true picture of my =
daughter: they emphatically believe that she is gifted, and so do we. =
And the WIPPSI does not change who she is, nor how the school is =
treating her. Furthermore, even a year further on, I am reluctant to =
start up the whole testing cycle again, and fearful of the effect this =
might have on my daughter's morale.

But it still bugs me: what if she *IS* worse in the block design area? =
I do not know what the testing itself comprises, or what the full scope =
of the analysis is, so I find it difficult to form my own assessment of =

whether this is likely. Is it possible for a 5 year old who can (for =
example) follow detailed Lego assembly instructions intended for 8+, or =
sew cross stitch samplers from a grid pattern, or do the Adult version =
of the 'Rush Hour' game, to be so far below the mean? Or am I hopelessly =
off-beam with my assumptions of what areas this section is supposed to =
consider?

I do realise that this is skirting perilously close to infringing the =
ground rules, so please forgive me if I have asked anything you feel =
would compromise your professional integrity. Any thoughts you have =
would be more than welcome.

Kathryn Friedlander

------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C40F9C.3B8C9400
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>

<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hello from England</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was wondering if you could advise me =
on the=20
following dilemma: what to do when testing may have gone =
awry.....?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My daughter has always been considered =
a very=20
bright child, but with significant 'overexcitability' problems within =
the school=20
setting. We were asked by the school to refer her to a paediatrician, in =
order=20
to discover the reasons for her impulsiveness and oversensitivity. So we =
then=20
embarked upon a long journey of testing - OT, Sensory, Speech & Lang =
etc.=20
Nothing conclusive was determined, except that she was exceptionally =
bright, and=20
firing on more cylinders than she knew how to cope with at such a young =
age=20
(4yrs old).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>

<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> For example, a general test, =
using the=20
Griffiths Performance Indicator, gave a performance score of 72 months+ =
when she=20
was 53 months at the time. The paediatrician said that she had been very =

conservative even in this score, and advised us to join NAGC here =
in=20
England. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As a final check, the paediatrician =
asked us to=20
have her tested using the WIPPSI (Revised) assessment, when she was just =
over 5=20
years old. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The day of the test was a disaster. She =
was tired,=20
moody and uncooperative. It was the end of term, and she was extremely =
run down=20
and disillusioned with school. Furthermore, she was fed up with testing =
and with=20
the long recitals of her problems and faults which always *preceded* the =
testing=20
<sigh - do they really think this is helpful???!!>. I wasn't =

allowed in=20
the test room, but my daughter confided in me afterwards that the =
tester=20
had told her off for fidgeting, and so she decided not to try at =
all. =20
:-(</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not surprisingly, the results were =
significantly=20
down on what we (and the school) would have been expecting; and as far =
as this=20
goes I would be happy to shrug the whole thing off and forget it. Her =
behaviour=20
has improved considerably, she is showing her true ability at school and =
is=20
being extended properly and imaginatively in the classroom.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>However, the results have been written =
up, and one=20
mark in particular (for block design - where her score was in the 90s!) =
was=20
highlighted. We and the school have been told that, because of this =
mark, my=20
daughter would be unable to develop higher functioning skills, and that =
her=20

apparent early school ability is founded simply upon good general memory =
skills=20
and exceptional visual storage ability.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>And this is now on her file....which =
they closed=20
because they believe this disparity of scores solves the 'problem': she =
was=20
'acting up' because she was struggling with the work once it became less =

routine.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am curious to find out what you think =
we should=20
do at this point. Neither we nor the school believe that this is a true =
picture=20
of my daughter: they emphatically believe that she is gifted, and so do =
we. And=20
the WIPPSI does not change who she is, nor how the school is treating =
her.=20
Furthermore, even a year further on, I am reluctant to start up the =
whole=20
testing cycle again, and fearful of the effect this might have on my =
daughter's=20
morale.</FONT></DIV>

<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But it still bugs me: what if she *IS* =
worse in the=20
block design area?  I do not know what the testing itself =
comprises, or=20
what the full scope of the analysis is, so I find it difficult to =
form my=20
own assessment of whether this is likely. Is it possible for a 5 =
year old=20
who can (for example) follow detailed Lego assembly instructions =
intended for=20
8+, or sew cross stitch samplers from a grid pattern, or do the Adult =
version of=20
the 'Rush Hour' game, to be so far below the mean? Or am I hopelessly =
off-beam=20
with my assumptions of what areas this section is supposed to=20
consider?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I do realise that this is skirting =
perilously close=20
to infringing the ground rules, so please forgive me if I have asked =
anything=20
you feel would compromise your professional integrity. Any thoughts you =
have=20

would be more than welcome.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Kathryn =
Friedlander</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_002E_01C40F9C.3B8C9400--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:33:15 -0500
From: Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com>
Subject: ASAT-RE: Full evaluation, 2E children, basis for acceleration
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <200403212335.i2LNZJVS020213@ms-smtp-03.nyroc.rr.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Sometimes, Kristina, what you don't know *can* hurt...a lot. Your instincts
are obviously telling you something. If you have information that indicates
that negotiation in public school (or private) will be more than you and
your child can bear, working out the 'impossibles' gets a lot easier.

Only 7K for private school??? Wow!

Lorri in Maine
kanga@maine.rr.com

>>>Kristina wrote:
>
> I have considered full evaluation so that we could get a better
> picture of his strengths and weaknesses and, then, try to
create
> something approximating a reasonable educational program for
him.
>>>>>>>
>
> My dilemma is this: I suspect that if we go ahead and have a

full
> evaluation done, we'll find out that he may even be "more" than
> HG and his needs can't be met in our SD. We are not in a
> position to homeschool or to pay $7,000+/year for tuition at
the > only gifted school in this part of the state (although I am
going > to a parent open-house there next week).>
> So, my question is: would the benefits of going through
> additional evaluation outweigh the nagging doubt I have about
> actually being able to implement the recommendations in his
> current school setting?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:45:10 -0600
From: Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <002401c40f9e$8c280960$dc1c6e44@CPQ50832916483>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

so what does it mean if the verbal reasoning is at the 98- 99% and non
verbal is at the 25%? The school psychologist doesn't to think this is a
problem but it must mean something.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 07:43:39 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8449AB.1A879%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Is Riverside still supporting the use of the SB-LM now that the SB5 is out?

I note that Kathi said there is much to be gleaned from doing both tests, so
perhaps lobbying Riverside to support the continuing use of the SB-LM in
specific populations could be an interim compromise.

The SB-GT sounds like a great idea.

all the best
Tracy
Pemberton, Western Australia
tracy@cycloneco.com.au
--
"Not all who wander are lost." --J.R.R. Tolkien

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:50:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040321235037.35330.qmail@web20212.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-250498520-1079913037=:34973"

--0-250498520-1079913037=:34973
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I haven't used the SB:IV for gifted testing. At this time, I'd use the SB5 (or
DAS). There are tests I like on the IV for other reasons. I love the Bead
Memory test when assessing short-term memory. This is one of my favorite tests!
And I like the Absurdities when I suspect an Asperger-like child. I also like
the other math tests, but they are often for older chidren. - Laurie

"main.family" <main.family@optusnet.com.au> wrote:Hi Laurie (and Glenda)

On the SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give? Is it
mostly age-dependant? Given that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear to be
useful in providing meaningful information re a gifted child's mathematical
abilities, do you think it appropriate for the parent to ask that this subtest
not be given? I noticed that the assessor has 15 subtests to choose from, but
that only 10 are administered.

I know of several people who have had their child assessed using the SB 4, the
children have all "ceilinged" on this subtest (amongst others), and
decisions/recommendations made about their educational needs in the mathematical
area based on this subtest result. Is it possible for all three mathematical
subtests to be administered in the assessment so that a more accurate picture
can be obtained?

With thanks.

Susan

Hi Glenda,
I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest from the SB:IV for
gifted purposes. I have primarily used it in the evaluation of learning
disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, they reached the
ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as six items. It's hard
to make any suggestions based on so few items! Sorry. I hope Bobbie or Kathi
will be able to answer your questions. - Laurie

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
--0-250498520-1079913037=:34973
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>I haven't used the SB:IV for gifted testing.  At this time, I'd use
the SB5 (or DAS).  There are tests I like on the IV for other
reasons.  I love the Bead Memory test when assessing short-term
memory.  This is one of my favorite tests!  And I like the Absurdities
when I suspect an Asperger-like child.  I also like the other math tests,
but they are often for older chidren.  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>"main.family"
<main.family@optusnet.com.au></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=520502622-21032004>Hi
Laurie (and Glenda)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=520502622-21032004>On the
SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give?  Is it mostly
age-dependant?  Given that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear to be
useful in providing meaningful information re a gifted child's mathematical
abilities, do you think it appropriate for the parent to ask that this subtest
not be given?  I noticed that the assessor has 15 subtests to choose from,
but that only 10 are administered.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=520502622-21032004>I know
of several people who have had their child assessed using the SB 4, the children
have all "ceilinged" on this subtest (amongst others), and
decisions/recommendations made about their educational needs in the mathematical
area based on this subtest result.  Is it possible for all three
mathematical subtests to be administered in the assessment so that a more
accurate picture can be obtained?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=520502622-21032004>With
thanks.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004>Susan </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=520502622-21032004></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Hi Glenda,</DIV>
<DIV>  I cannot comment on the use of the Quantitative subtest from the
SB:IV for gifted purposes.  I have primarily used it in the evaluation of
learning disabilities, but even with mathematically able children, they reached
the ceiling so early that the score was based on as little as six items. 
It's hard to make any suggestions based on so few items!  Sorry.  I
hope Bobbie or Kathi will be able to answer your questions.  -
Laurie<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree">Protect your identity with
Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard</a>
--0-250498520-1079913037=:34973--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:53:20 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E2AF0.5030304@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

No, the WISC-IV manual in my lap confirms the score of 145 is at the
99.9th percentile on that test, as well.
Bobbie

Laurie Jensen wrote:

> Shouldn't percentiles be the same for all tests with a mean of 100 and
> SD of 15? The 99.9th percentile on the DAS and SB:5 is 145 and up.
> The 99.9th percentile on the WISC-IV is 160 and up.
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:11:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5 vs Wisc III percentiles
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322001125.64163.qmail@web20205.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1831763483-1079914285=:64136"

--0-1831763483-1079914285=:64136
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

You're right - I was looking at 145 "Sum of Scaled Scores" instead of 145 FSIQ.
Glad you looked it up! Thanks - I feel a lot better now, I think... - Laurie

"Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net> wrote:No, the WISC-IV manual in my lap
confirms the score of 145 is at the
99.9th percentile on that test, as well.
Bobbie

Laurie Jensen wrote:

> Shouldn't percentiles be the same for all tests with a mean of 100 and
> SD of 15? The 99.9th percentile on the DAS and SB:5 is 145 and up.
> The 99.9th percentile on the WISC-IV is 160 and up.
>

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1831763483-1079914285=:64136
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>You're right - I was looking at 145 "Sum of Scaled Scores" instead of 145
FSIQ.  Glad you looked it up!  Thanks - I feel a lot better now, I
think... - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>"Barbara J. Gilman"
<bobbie@h2net.net></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">No, the WISC-IV manual in my lap confirms the
score of 145 is at the <BR>99.9th percentile on that test, as well.
<BR>Bobbie<BR><BR>Laurie Jensen wrote:<BR><BR>> Shouldn't percentiles be the
same for all tests with a mean of 100 and <BR>> SD of 15? The 99.9th
percentile on the DAS and SB:5 is 145 and up. <BR>> The 99.9th percentile on
the WISC-IV is 160 and up. <BR>> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><font face=arial
size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1831763483-1079914285=:64136--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:22:36 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Necessity for retest?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E31CC.6010709@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Kathryn,
When your daughter is ready, re-testing would be a good idea, in the
hope of countering damaging test information. But, you need a
supportive tester your daughter likes and a reasonable interpretation of
the meaning of her scores in the report. Do consider a vision
evaluation with a behavioral optometrist to rule out visual perception
problems (see www.covd.org for a referral). If problems are found,
undertake vision therapy. I cannot be more specific in this conference,
but the interpretation of her lower Block Design score and her other
higher scores bears no relation to test interpretation as I know it. :)
Bobbie Gilman

KF Old Account wrote:

> Hello from England
>
>
>
> I was wondering if you could advise me on the following dilemma: what
> to do when testing may have gone awry.....?
>
>
>
> My daughter has always been considered a very bright child, but with
> significant 'overexcitability' problems within the school setting. We
> were asked by the school to refer her to a paediatrician, in order to
> discover the reasons for her impulsiveness and oversensitivity. So we
> then embarked upon a long journey of testing - OT, Sensory, Speech &
> Lang etc. Nothing conclusive was determined, except that she was
> exceptionally bright, and firing on more cylinders than she knew how
> to cope with at such a young age (4yrs old).
>
>
>
> For example, a general test, using the Griffiths Performance
> Indicator, gave a performance score of 72 months+ when she was 53
> months at the time. The paediatrician said that she had been very
> conservative even in this score, and advised us to join NAGC here in

> England.
>
>
>
> As a final check, the paediatrician asked us to have her tested using
> the WIPPSI (Revised) assessment, when she was just over 5 years old.
>
>
>
> The day of the test was a disaster. She was tired, moody and
> uncooperative. It was the end of term, and she was extremely run down
> and disillusioned with school. Furthermore, she was fed up with
> testing and with the long recitals of her problems and faults which
> always *preceded* the testing <sigh - do they really think this is
> helpful???!!>. I wasn't allowed in the test room, but my daughter
> confided in me afterwards that the tester had told her off for
> fidgeting, and so she decided not to try at all. :-(
>
>
>
> Not surprisingly, the results were significantly down on what we (and
> the school) would have been expecting; and as far as this goes I would
> be happy to shrug the whole thing off and forget it. Her behaviour has

> improved considerably, she is showing her true ability at school and
> is being extended properly and imaginatively in the classroom.
>
>
>
> However, the results have been written up, and one mark in particular
> (for block design - where her score was in the 90s!) was highlighted.
> We and the school have been told that, because of this mark, my
> daughter would be unable to develop higher functioning skills, and
> that her apparent early school ability is founded simply upon good
> general memory skills and exceptional visual storage ability.
>
>
>
> And this is now on her file....which they closed because they believe
> this disparity of scores solves the 'problem': she was 'acting up'
> because she was struggling with the work once it became less routine.
>
>
>
> I am curious to find out what you think we should do at this point.
> Neither we nor the school believe that this is a true picture of my

> daughter: they emphatically believe that she is gifted, and so do we.
> And the WIPPSI does not change who she is, nor how the school is
> treating her. Furthermore, even a year further on, I am reluctant to
> start up the whole testing cycle again, and fearful of the effect this
> might have on my daughter's morale.
>
>
>
> But it still bugs me: what if she *IS* worse in the block design
> area? I do not know what the testing itself comprises, or what the
> full scope of the analysis is, so I find it difficult to form my own
> assessment of whether this is likely. Is it possible for a 5 year old
> who can (for example) follow detailed Lego assembly instructions
> intended for 8+, or sew cross stitch samplers from a grid pattern, or
> do the Adult version of the 'Rush Hour' game, to be so far below the
> mean? Or am I hopelessly off-beam with my assumptions of what areas
> this section is supposed to consider?
>
>
>

> I do realise that this is skirting perilously close to infringing the
> ground rules, so please forgive me if I have asked anything you feel
> would compromise your professional integrity. Any thoughts you have
> would be more than welcome.
>
>
>
> Kathryn Friedlander
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:05:07 -0600
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <00cb01c40fa3$f0a29810$bfaae144@nngco.mehcpipelines.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Kathi -
>
> But the two tests used together seem to give a very well-rounded picture
of
> a gifted child's pattern of abilities -- a picture that either test,
alone,
> does not quite give. You can also compare the SBLM's mental age and the
> SB5's full scale IQ age equivalent -- which I am observing to be similar,
in
> most of the cases which I have seen where both scores were available, and
> when the child is between the chronological ages of 4 and 10.

When Ds11 was given the SBLM (age 6), he was given scores like "Superior
Adult II" for the subtests, and only one resultant mental age. This doesn't
give much to compare to other tests. Is this because his IQ had to be

calculated with the Revised Deviation IQ formula? Honestly, if he hadn't
had a serious of IQ/achievement tests (all indicating ceiling affects) done
prior to the SBLM, I would have a hard time believing his final IQ score -
which was a jaw-dropping experience as it was.

Lisa C.

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:33:05 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: ASAT Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No. [Yes]
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC845540.1A889%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

on 22/3/04 5:21 AM, Andrew_Carson@hmco.com at Andrew_Carson@hmco.com wrote:

> The L-M is based on a scoring metric that incorporates a
> ratio IQ. Because of this, scores tend to get much larger (at the high end)
> the greater the degree of discrepancy between mental age (or
> age-equivalent) and chronological age. The SB5's metric is the same as
> you'll find in other standard ability/IQ tests (including the Wechsler
> tests, and the SB: IV). The scores are apples (on the L-M side) and oranges
> (with the other tests).

Then should those who test as profoundly gifted 'apples' also test as
profoundly gifted 'oranges' (I would argue that they should, since the

innate ability has not changed)? And if so, shouldn't the ranges used to
describe MG, HG, EG and PG also need to be revised under a new metric, and
published with the test? If not, then the SB5 scores ARE lower since both
sets of scores are being used to describe similar attributes as we all
commonly understand them.

I find it somewhat difficult to accept the way in which an Intelligence
Quotient has been hijacked to describe something quite different. I think
that this is where a lot of confusion is arising. Perhaps the numbers
produced by new testing instruments should now be called the Standardised
Measure of Intelligence (SMI) so as not to confuse it with the historical
development and significance of the Intelligence Quotient.

In my view, any measure of intelligence must be firmly based in reality
rather than some presumptive notion of the distribution of intelligence.
Time and again this model has been shown to be flawed -- the online lists

are evidence of this, with many more PG children, who are so obviously PG
from their ability and achievements, being identified than would ever be
predicted on the new testing instruments.

Also flawed is the insistence of using the Flynn effect when even Flynn
himself said that the data was not reliable at the extremes. In fact, from
recollection, he didn't even have any IQ scores over about 130 in his sample
data. There has also been discussion that the trend even within the
mid-ranges is slowing down.

"Finally, an increase in mean scores does not necessarily mean that the
whole distribution of scores has shifted upwards, retaining the same
Œshape¹. Unfortunately the literature on the Flynn Effect tends not to say
much about distributions. The studies by Teasdale and Owen are an
exception. T & O [1] shows a marked change in the distribution. There is a
reduction in the number of low scores and an increase in the number of

moderately high scores, **but no marked increase in very high scores**. The
distribution changes from symmetrical to negatively skewed, with a Œpile-up¹
of moderately high scores. T & O consider, but reject, the possibility that
this is an artificial Œceiling¹ effect. If this pattern is representative
of the changing pattern of IQ scores generally, it might explain why we do
not seem to be living in a golden age of genius." [my emphasis]
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001502.html

The implications for our children are significant, especially with respect
to education, which has a large impact on the child's well-being and future.
While the academics and researchers argue the semantics, education
authorities cling to any notion that will enable them to do less for our
children, or have fewer children to do it for. The current testing
instruments pretty much allow this to happen with their comparatively
deflated scores, deflated at a much greater rate than any so-called 'Flynn

effect'. In addition, I would argue that the test construction is
fundamentally flawed, as the model of distribution of intelligence in the
population and the effect of rising IQs -- both assumptions being used in
test construction -- is highly questionable.

The problems and confusion will continue to occur unless, at the same time
as a new metric is developed, the language is changed to reflect the
fundamental changes in measurement, and new intelligence ranges developed
that more accurately reflect a child's comparative and absolute
intelligence.

After all, isn't this all about gaining information about a person that will
help with catering to their individual needs and potential, not just an
exercise in creating a set of meaningless numbers that fit some assumptive
theory or other? I often wonder who these tests are really designed for.

all the best
Tracy
Pemberton, Western Australia
tracy@cycloneco.com.au
----------------------

"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
‹Eleanor Roosevelt, American First Lady, Civil Rights Activist

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:40:40 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: ASAT: International testing
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC839FA1.C4BA%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Sylvia wrote:

<<<<am desperately
> waiting for these tests (SB5,SBLM to be translated.>>>>>

I'm going to ask a question of Drew Carson, from Riverside Publishing, who
is attending this online conference, since we have so many non-Americans and
parents of bilingual children on this list.

Drew, do you know if there are any plans to translate the new SB5 into other
languages and/or to norm the test in other countries?

And what about the other tests that Riverside publishes? What is their
current status as far as any plans for translation and non-U. S. norms?
(WJ-III, UNIT, etc.)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:40:38 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC839604.C4B8%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162742840_179359_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162742840_179359_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Susan wrote:

<<<<On the SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give? Is
it mostly age-dependant? >>>>>

The determination of which subtests to give on the SB-IV is based on the
age of the child.

That said, I have occasionally seen an extremely mathematically talented
child who had been administered the two quantitative reasoning subtests they

ordinarily wouldn't be given for their (young) age, as a sort of "testing
the limits", *after* the standard set of subtests for the child's age had
been administered in the usual way and in the standardized order (in other
words, after the SB-IV test had been completed in its entirety).

In this case, of course, the child's IQ score would be calculated based
*only* on those subtests that comprise the standard administration
appropriate for the child's age (and the Quantitative area score calculated
*only* on the subtest appropriate for the child's age), but the examiner
could also report how the child scored on the additional out-of-level
subtests, as additional clinical information. However, the only norms that
would be available for subtests administered out-of-level in this manner
are those for older children, so the youngest available norms for that
subtest are the only ones available to be used in this situation (even

though they could be for children several years older than the child being
tested).

Susan continued:

<<<<Given that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear to be useful in
providing meaningful information re a gifted child's mathematical abilities,
do you think it appropriate for the parent to ask that this subtest not be
given?>>>>

NO. It is NOT appropriate for the parent to ask for that. The Quantitative
subtest on the SB-IV is part of the standard administration of the SB-IV,
and crucial to obtaining the Quantitative Area Score and the Composite Score
(IQ) on the SB-IV. Because the test was standardized using a particular set
of subtests administered in a particular order to children of a particular
age, it would not be appropriate to tamper with that.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162742840_179359_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT: SB 4 sub-test question on mathematical ability</TITLE>
</HEAD>

<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Susan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<<<<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">On
=
the SB 4, how does an assessor determine which sub-tests to give?  Is i=
t mostly age-dependant?  >>>>><BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
The  determination of which subtests to give on the SB-IV is based on =
the age of the child.<BR>
<BR>
That said, I have occasionally seen an extremely mathematically talented ch=
ild who had been administered the two quantitative reasoning subtests they o=
rdinarily wouldn't be given for their (young) age, as a sort of "testin=
g the limits", *after* the standard set of subtests for the child's age=
had been administered in the usual way and in the standardized order (in ot=
her words, after the SB-IV test had been completed in its entirety).<BR>
<BR>
In this case, of course, the child's IQ score would be calculated based *on=
ly* on those subtests that comprise the standard administration appropriate =
for the child's age (and the Quantitative area score calculated *only* on th=
e subtest appropriate for the child's age), but the examiner could also repo=
rt how the child scored on the additional out-of-level subtests, as addition=
al clinical information. However, the only norms that would  be availab=
le for subtests administered out-of-level in this manner are those for older=
children, so the youngest available norms for that subtest are the only one=
s available to be used in this situation (even though they could be for chil=
dren several years older than the child being tested).<BR>
<BR>
Susan continued:<BR>
<BR>
<<<<<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF"><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT
FACE=3D"Arial">Giv=
en that the quantitative sub-test doesn't appear to be useful in providing m=
eaningful information re a gifted child's mathematical abilities, do you thi=
nk it appropriate for the parent to ask that this subtest not be given?>&=
gt;>><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></FONT></FONT>NO. It is NOT appropriate for the parent to ask for th=
at. The Quantitative subtest on the SB-IV is part of the standard administra=
tion of the SB-IV, and crucial to obtaining the Quantitative Area Score and =
the Composite Score (IQ) on the SB-IV. Because the test was standardized usi=
ng a particular set of subtests administered in a particular order to childr=
en of a particular age, it would not be appropriate to tamper with that.</BL=
OCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162742840_179359_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:38:32 -0600
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <011201c40fa6$01580530$bfaae144@nngco.mehcpipelines.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Drew wrote:>
> This all being said, it is relatively easy to obtain distribution and
> differentiation at high levels of ability using the SB5. Again, I'd refer
> you to Ruf's fine bulletin on that, but use of the change-senstive scores
> can be helpful in this effort.\
>
> You can obtain L-M like scores on the SB5 by dividing age-equivalent
scores
> by chronological age, by the way.
>
I read Ruf's bulletin a while ago, and would like to hear more about
change-sensitive scores. To a lay person, this appears to be a new concept,
and I'm not quite sure I get how it fits into the whole assessment equation
with IQ's and age-equivlant scores.
Thanks,
Lisa C.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:41:39 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E3643.7050009@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Drew,
With the gifted children coming to us, we're not having any difficulty
obtaining lots of scores above 130 on the new Wechsler tests, but we are
having that difficulty on the SB5. To what do you attribute that
problem, if the tests utilize similar scoring?
Bobbie Gilman

Andrew_Carson@hmco.com wrote:

>
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:42:12 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OF97971081.0320E5C6-ON86256E5F.00025F6B-86256E5F.0003DC6D@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Hi Merideth,

The distribution of scores in the SB: IV norm sample and the SB5 norm
samples are, so far as I know, equivalent. As stated in the SB5 manual, the
SB5 scores were only four points lower than SB: IV scores in the concurrent
validity study reported in the manual (N = 104), with the average Full
Scale score on the SB5 being nearly 108. It is highly unlikely that one
would fine a 20-point difference in scores in a representative sample of
gifted children, coadministered the SB5 and the SB: IV (ideally in a
counterbalanced fashion, as we did in the standardization project, with
half the cases getting one test first and the other half getting the other

test first). Likewise, SB5 scores were comparable to Wechsler scores, also
documented in the manual, although we were unable to compare SB5 scores to
the WISC-IV, which published shortly thereafter. All of this suggests that
it is an unfortunate myth--spread by I know not whom (possibly our
competitors?)--that SB5 scores are any lower than other test scores except
as might be expected from a general increase in intelligence of the
population over time (Flynn effect).

I'll qualify what I just said, however: If the SB5 is given only after
administration of the SB: IV, and you only test kids who score highly on
the SB:IV, then through regression to the mean SB5 scores might often be
lower than SB: IV scores. There are sound statistical reasons for that; it
doesn't mean there's a problem with the SB5 at all.

I am not saying that your respected colleague is wrong, just that those
results are implausible, unless you obtained gifted level scores first on

the SB:IV. Now, if you were comparing scores on the SB5 to the SB Form L-M,
that's another matter, and you can use ratio scores based on SB5 results to
get scores that will be very close to those obtained on the L-M. It's just
a different way of calculating the scores.

Regards,
Drew Carson

Meredith Warshaw
<mwarshaw@uniquely To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
gifted.org> cc:

Sent by: Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores
lower? No.
owner-OURGIFTED-L@
neiu.edu

03/21/2004 05:21
PM
Please respond to
OURGIFTED-L

From: <Andrew_Carson@hmco.com>
>
> Julie, with all respect, I believe Deborah Ruf's bulletin is pretty clear
> on why SB5 and SB Form L-M scores differ. They differ because they are on
> different metrics. ...
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There
was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe
we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.

But then why does one highly respected tester tell me that she's seeing
scores
on the SB5 that are generally 20 points lower than on the SB4 (not the
SB-LM)?

And kids who were scoring highly gifted on the SB4 and the WISC are now
scoring
average?

--
Meredith Warshaw, M.S.S., M.A., mailto:mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org
Special Needs Educational Advisor, http://uniquelygifted.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what
you
did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. ~ Maya Angelou

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:42:43 -0500 (EST)
From: JDCWilker@aol.com
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <78.52900f1b.2d8f9083@aol.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=-----------------------------1079916163

-------------------------------1079916163
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thank you both for this suggestion. Though we are not local to the best
places to test, next time perhaps we will take a vacation in between the start
and
end and test a few days apart once he has gotten himself back together. I
would rather pay for more hotel time than have him meltdown on day 2!

Julie

In a message dated 3/21/2004 2:59:44 PM Pacific Standard Time,
bobbie@h2net.net writes:
Excellent point, Meredith. There is a lot of compensation going on in
gifted children with deficits and it can be physically exhausting for
them. There are always ways around a strict schedule. :) Bobbie

Meredith Warshaw wrote:

-------------------------------1079916163
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

the start and end and test a few days apart once he has gotten himself back=20=
together.  I would rather pay for more hotel time than have him meltdow=
n on day 2!  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Julie</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/21/2004 2:59:44 PM Pacific Standard Time, bobbie@h=
2net.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue=20=
2px solid"><FONT face=3DArial>Excellent point, Meredith.  There is a lo=
t of compensation going on in <BR>gifted children with deficits and it can b=
e physically exhausting for <BR>them.  There are always ways around a s=
trict schedule.   :)     Bobbie<BR><BR>Meredith War=
shaw wrote:<BR><BR>> <BR>> One thing I've seen in some gifted/special=20=
needs kids (including my son) is that<BR>> they may tire more easily in t=
esting and many not have the mental stamina to do<BR>> two consecutive da=

ys.  If your child is being tested locally, he or she may do<BR>> be=
tter if you arrange one testing session/week rather than two days in a row.<=
/FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1079916163--

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:54:20 +0000
From: Sally_L@comcast.net
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks - now is an appropriate time to start posting
online thanks
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <032220040054.29315.1df6@comcast.net>

Hi List Members,

I am inviting list members to feel free to take the time to begin posting online
Thanks to our wonderful guest experts -

Kathi Kearney and Barbara J. Gilman

Please be aware of the Thank You webpage located at
http://www.neiu.edu/~ourgift/pages/Thank_You.htm

Kind regards,
Sally_L
Conference Coordinator
List Manager
www.neiu.edu/~ourgift

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:48:00 +0000
From: Debra B Walker <debbidee@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB5: generalizes to homeschoolers; role of knowledge in
scores.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <Sea2-F3UcOV1EetVoMD00003768@hotmail.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

I could see this accomodation happening frequently for physically disabled
children, and possibly those with sensory loss, especially hearing, as well.

>From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
snip----
"However, let's say (hypothetically speaking) that you have a child who's
raised in an isolated enclave with no exposure to any aspects of modern
culture, but the child is provided a rich and highly literate (but
selective) education. My guess is that child might score relatively higher
on verbal knowledge than on nonverbal knowledge. Verbal knowledge is a
vocabulary test. Nonverbal knowledge is a more hodge-podge assessment of

the sort of generic 'background knowledge' that anyone growing up in the
culture would be likely to learn.

hildren, and possibly those with sensory loss, especially hearing, as well.

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:58:53 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A181.C4CA%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Shannon wrote:

> Are there reasons to test if strictly homeschooling?
>
> I already know that my children are gifted.
>
> Please elaborate on how my children could benefit from testing (especially
> if there is something more I should be doing)?>>>>>

That really depends on what you want to know, and what your child needs.

There is no reason to test just for the sake of testing.

However, if you suspect that your child has a disability that needs to be
documented, or a particular strength that documentation would help you with,
you could consider it.

Examples of the latter would be the SAT-I and ACT used in the talent

searches. Sometimes participating in the talent searches opens up
opportunities for weekend, summer, and distance learning programs that would
not be available otherwise, for instance.

Another reason homeschoolers sometimes use tests, particularly achievement
tests, is if their state or local district requires periodic testing as part
of homeschooling law (or local policy, in local approval states). Other
homeschoolers occasionally use achievement tests simply to have a general
idea how their children are doing (and occasionally to mollify relatives!)

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:58:54 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A2B2.C4CC%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

on 3/21/04 4:10 PM, Luc Kumps at luc.kumps@pandora.be wrote:

>> Bobby pointed out some important things that should be checked,
>> such as hearing
>> and vision. When PIQ is much lower, it can also be helpful to have an OT
>> evaluation if there are signs that a child has problems with fine
>> motor skills
>> (since that can cause the child to lose speed bonuses on the PIQ in the
>> WISC-III).
>
> Thanks for the info.
> We encountered many, many parents of gifted kids reporting huge V/P gaps on
> a WPPSI-R. And we also keep reading stories of children retested with a WISC
> later on, where the gap mysteriously disappeared. After a consultant (of a

> local 'gifted development center') told us not to worry about it, we didn't
> investigate this any further.
>
> Now your and Bobbies comments make us doubt again...
>
> Luc K (Felix jun98)
>
>

Luc, I'm going to ask you a question, too. Is your child's first language
English at the time she took the WPPSI-R, and was the test given in English?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:58:54 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A3CF.C4CD%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162743945_245828_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162743945_245828_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Marie wrote about her bilingual daughter growing up outside the U. S. for
part of her schooling:

<<<2) She is now almost 16yo. For the last 3 1/2 years she has been
functioning solely in English in the USA. I know her English vocabulary has
exploded (she scored in the 98th %ile last year in reading comp. on the
CAT-5) but she still has a few idiosynchracies (sp?) in her language use, as

well as some continuing influence of APD. We are starting to think about
college but I'm worried that she may need some accommodations to function
well in the large classroom (we now homeschool). What instruments might be
useful at this age to help us in planning for college? >>>>

I'd go to your local high school guidance office and ask for the paper
registration materials for the SAT-I, which will come with a sample SAT-I
test (or, you can go to any large bookstore, such as Barnes & Noble, and
purchase a book with sample SATs in it -- look for ones that are released
versions of actual tests that were given in the past).

Then give her a sample SAT-I under standard test conditions (time limits,
etc.) and see how she does.

As far as the CAPD is concerned, she may still need accommodations in
college, but you will need to have an audiologist do the documentation for
that.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162743945_245828_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Marie wrote about her bilingual daughter growing up outside the=
U. S. for part of her schooling:<BR>
<BR>
<<<2) She is now almost 16yo. For the last 3 1/2 years she has bee=
n functioning solely in English in the USA. I know her English vocabulary ha=
s exploded (she scored in the 98th %ile last year in reading comp. on the CA=
T-5) but she still has a few idiosynchracies (sp?) in her language use, as w=
ell as some continuing influence of APD. We are starting to think about coll=
ege but I'm worried that she may need some accommodations to function well i=
n the large classroom (we now homeschool). What instruments might be useful =
at this age to help us in planning for college? >>>><BR>
<BR>
I'd go to your local high school guidance office and ask for the paper regi=

stration materials for the SAT-I, which will come with a sample SAT-I test (=
or, you can go to any large bookstore, such as Barnes & Noble, and purch=
ase a book with sample SATs in it -- look for ones that are released version=
s of actual tests that were given in the  past). <BR>
<BR>
Then give her a sample SAT-I under standard test conditions (time limits, e=
tc.) and see how she does.<BR>
<BR>
As far as the CAPD is concerned, she may still need accommodations in colle=
ge, but you will need to have an audiologist do the documentation for that.<=
/BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162743945_245828_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:58:43 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OF3A7EE20B.2D15996B-ON86256E5F.0004F154-86256E5F.00055F86@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Hi Bobbie,

I'm not sure. I guess I'd be surprised if there's a large and consistent
difference in the number of children getting different scores on the SB5
and, say, the WISC-IV, assuming you were to randomly assign order of
testing. This would particularly be the case if you used the Gifted
Composite as your primary indicator (that's the one that leaves off the two
working memory subtests and nonverbal visual-spatial processing). They
really should be yielding comparable scores, assuming similar methods were
used to collect the sample and determine the score distributions.

Regards,
Drew

Andrew D. Carson, Ph.D.
Senior Project Director
The Riverside Publishing Company
425 Spring Lake Drive

Itasca, Illinois 60143-2079
phone (630) 467-6036 or 1-800-767-8420 (extension 6036)
fax (630) 467-6150
email Andrew_Carson@hmco.com

"Barbara J.
Gilman" To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
<bobbie@h2net.net cc:
> Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores
lower? No.
Sent by:
owner-OURGIFTED-L
@neiu.edu

03/21/2004 06:41
PM
Please respond to
OURGIFTED-L

Hi Drew,
With the gifted children coming to us, we're not having any difficulty

obtaining lots of scores above 130 on the new Wechsler tests, but we are
having that difficulty on the SB5. To what do you attribute that
problem, if the tests utilize similar scoring?
Bobbie Gilman

Andrew_Carson@hmco.com wrote:

>
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There
was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe
we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:00:26 -0500
From: Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
Subject: ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <059001c40fa9$108bbee0$689a9418@DBMG0B41>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Barbara,

I'm glad I gave you a giggle. Actually, I think my misconception actually
helped out. Boy, did I try hard on that test ;-)

I love the way you explain testing to the children. I never would have
thought to bring making school more fun into it, but that's a great
approach!

I'm so glad to see that what I remember is still true and that my goal
should be for my child to go in with a fun (but focused) attitude. I am so
glad to have a solid starting point now as to which tests I need to look
into, as the abstract verbal reasoning info. would proably be most useful
whether I homeschool or not.

Thank you so much for all your wisdom and your help!

-Mary-

<<<<"(although this might have resulted in the misunderstanding about what
the presents are!) :)

Both of the above tests have very strong verbal abstract reasoning
components.

Generally, this is a fun situation for gifted children and they respond
accordingly.">>>>>>

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 09:01:03 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Re: Feeling betrayed by the new testing regime (was Re: ASAT: Which
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC845BCF.1A895%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

on 22/3/04 2:08 AM, Barbara J. Gilman at bobbie@h2net.net wrote:

> Tracy, let me ascend the soapbox so you won't be alone. :)

<smile> It can often be very lonely where I sit. Welcome :-)

> A Full Scale IQ score that "averages" gifted reasoning
> and average processing skills fails to identify either the giftedness or
> the relative weaknesses.

Good point. It comes back to my point on what these tests are being designed
for now. It looks to me that certain attributes, one of which is speed in
processing (time is money) are being newly constructed into 'giftedness',

rather than formerly being a measure of abstract reasoning, increased
capacity for learning, high level analysis, etc.
>
> One test author at our Summit was surprised to learn gifted children
> weren't especially fast processors. It had just been "assumed" that
> gifted children would be the fastest processors.

And if this was assumed, without properly researching or consulting, what
else has been assumed about gifted children which has been incorporated into
test construction. This on top of the assumptions of normal distribution and
Flynn effect...

> Our concern was that
> whenever a strand is added to an IQ test that identifies a different
> group as scoring the highest, than was identified by the other strands,
> there will be a "confounding" of the Full Scale IQ score.
>
> Now that we have some newly revised and renormed tests, we do have
> confounding in the Full Scale scores (Note the fact that the gifted
> group in the WISC-IV normative sample scored a 124.7 on Verbal

> Comprehension and a 120.4 on Perceptual Reasoning, but only earned a
> 112.5 in Working Memory and a 110.6 in Processing Speed, according to
> the WISC-IV Technical Manual p. 77).

So therefore this 'confounding' points to the flawed nature of the tests in
determining FSIQ, and the other constructs as you mention above. Thus in
reality perhaps they shouldn't be used in the gifted population at all, like
Weschler said of the WISC-R, that it shouldn't be used outside the range of
70-130 IQ. The individual subtests may provide good quality information but
the test as a construct for use in the gifted population is obviously
flawed.

> The only real way to continue to
> identify the gifted children who need accommodations in school for their
> advanced reasoning and efficent learning will be to carefully assess the
> instruments we have, and choose the ones--or parts of them--that can be
> useful in identification. Experts in gifted testing will need to share

> the best approaches, and some different ways of using tests in schools
> will need to be established.

This should be the subject of a conference (IRL or online) so that it can be
disseminated and discussed more fully. Then the test manufacturers should be
approached to provide addenda to their manuals to cover the discrepancies.
>
> We do have some excellent resources.

Many thanks for this information. Very helpful.
>
> The WPPSI-III offers improvements over its predecessor for gifted
> children. It appears to us to be a better diagnostic test and it
> emphasizes abstract reasoning quite well.

DS did very well on the WPPSI-R at 4-7, scoring 155 FSIQ. In fact this test
was our first real clue of the level of his intelligence and the profile it
generated appeared to be quite accurate (VIQ>PIQ). It took us another 7
years to get the SBLM done, which was far too late because at age 11-5 he
got 4 out of 6 Adult Superior III items correct. The tester said he appeared

to be only getting started (thinking in depth) when the test ran out! The
WISC-III on the other hand produced PIQ>VIQ (so we almost didn't get the
SBLM done because it was reportedly so verbal!). DS is very strong both in
PIQ and VIQ but how he scores in tests depends on the type of tests and what
they are rewarding.

> The SBL-M and SB5 show real strengths used
> together because their content varies significantly.

I think you have answered an earlier post of mine about retesting. The
problem is that where I am there are very few testers who know about this
information or who have the requisite experience. DS' SBLM was done by the
GERRIC psychologist flown over from Sydney to Perth (2500 miles) by a small
group of parents. She was fabulous but the GERRIC politics leave a lot to be
desired in the reporting, so I would not use them again.
>
> I hope this helps, Tracy. We share your concern and want to address this
> need.

Thank goodness! It helps a lot to know that people who really 'get it' are
working on these issues. Thank you once again.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:06:38 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OF661F6DBF.36A56290-ON86256E5F.00058AF3-86256E5F.000618DE@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

See *** for quick answers...
Drew

----- Forwarded by Andrew Carson/RPC/hmco on 03/21/2004 07:00 PM -----

Kathi Kearney
<kkearney@ttlc.ne To:
<Andrew_Carson@hmco.com>
t> cc:
Subject: Can you answer this,
Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5
03/21/2004 08:58 Results)
PM

----------
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Reply-To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:18:29 -0800
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: Re: ASAT: SB 5 Results

***change-sensitive scores are like mental age. They refer to an absolute
level of ability. But for a specific given age, a particular IQ score
(which is norm referenced) will necessarily be linkable to a specific
change-sensitive score. At different ages that same change-sensitive score
will be linked to different IQ scores.

What I'm trying to
ask is, is a 140 the same for all kids the same age? Will the Rasch-ratio
number be the same for all 8 yr 5 month kids who score a 140?

***Yes, see above.

I'm trying to figure out if only a fraction of children will actually get a
140 on the SBV (kids who used to get 160s on the IV)

***The proportion of kids who get a 140 should today be the same as it once
was.

or whether a 140
doesn't mean the same thing to different children, ie kids who got 140's on
the IV will still get 140's, but kids who got 160's on the IV will also get

140s, but still answer more questions correctly, or reach higher ceilings
by
actually answering more questions at higher levels.

***Well, you wouldn't see kids getting over 160 on the IV. On the L-M you
would and do, of course.

***The SB5 was developed to have a higher range in terms of absolute level
of difficulty of the items than the IV. However, this should not negatively
skew the results to result in lower scores. I believe the idea that SB5
scores are lower than other tests, or than the SB:IV, is a myth.

Cathy

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:11:43 -0500
From: Mary Kimrey <marymacattack@earthlink.net>
Subject: ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <05a201c40faa$a382c5d0$689a9418@DBMG0B41>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Glenda,

That is very interesting. I had never thought of considering my quandry of
early K/home K in terms of "other factors" + achievement scores, yet the way
you put it, it makes more sense to me now. Certainly something to consider,
as I would love to delay more formal testing until 5-6. I have heard of
K-Seals but know nothing about it. Now I have a reason to learn more :-)
Thank you!

-Mary-

<<<"I recently did a "test run" wither her using the K-Seals test
In addition I got some uselful information from the test which may allow us
to delay testing a little longer - we are doing it for early entry to

kindergarten and the results we got may be enough to start the ball rolling
at least">>>

> Glenda in Oz.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:16:22 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Necessity for retest?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A6E9.C4D7%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162744983_308254_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162744983_308254_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Kathryn wrote (some parts snipped here for brevity):

<<<<I was wondering if you could advise me on the following dilemma: what to
do when testing may have gone awry.....?

The day of the test was a disaster. She was tired, moody and uncooperative.
It was the end of term, and she was extremely run down and disillusioned
with school. Furthermore, she was fed up with testing and with the long

recitals of her problems and faults which always *preceded* the testing
<sigh - do they really think this is helpful???!!>. I wasn't allowed in the
test room, but my daughter confided in me afterwards that the tester had
told her off for fidgeting, and so she decided not to try at all. :-(

Not surprisingly, the results were significantly down on what we (and the
school) would have been expecting. . .
However, the results have been written up, and one mark in particular (for
block design - where her score was in the 90s!) was highlighted. We and the
school have been told that, because of this mark, my daughter would be
unable to develop higher functioning skills, and that her apparent early
school ability is founded simply upon good general memory skills and
exceptional visual storage ability.

And this is now on her file....which they closed because they believe this
disparity of scores solves the 'problem': she was 'acting up' because she

was struggling with the work once it became less routine.

I am curious to find out what you think we should do at this point. Neither
we nor the school believe that this is a true picture of my daughter: they
emphatically believe that she is gifted, and so do we. And the WIPPSI does
not change who she is, nor how the school is treating her. Furthermore, even
a year further on, I am reluctant to start up the whole testing cycle again,
and fearful of the effect this might have on my daughter's morale.>>>>>

This is typical of a description of a test situation that probably didn't
yield a valid score. This sometimes happens (with young children,
especially). Should you want or need a more accurate measure of her
abilities in the future, another test may be administered at some point.

But, you are also correct in being concerned about your daughter's feelings.
Since the school seems to be doing fine by her in recognizing her

giftedness and providing appropriate educational interventions, there
probably isn't any need of doing further testing right now. She may feel
very differently about the testing experience when she is older.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162744983_308254_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT Necessity for retest?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Kathryn wrote (some parts snipped here for brevity):<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<<<<<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">I was wondering if you co=
uld advise me on the following dilemma: what to do when testing may have gon=
e awry.....?<BR>
</FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">The day of the test was a disaster. She w=
as tired, moody and uncooperative. It was the end of term, and she was extre=
mely run down and disillusioned with school. Furthermore, she was fed up wit=

h testing and with the long recitals of her problems and faults which always=
*preceded* the testing <sigh - do they really think this is helpful???!!=
>. I wasn't allowed in the test room, but my daughter confided in me afte=
rwards that the tester had told her off for fidgeting, and so she decided no=
t to try at all.  :-(<BR>
</FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">Not surprisingly, the results were signif=
icantly down on what we (and the school) would have been expecting. . .<BR>
However, the results have been written up, and one mark in particular (for =
block design - where her score was in the 90s!) was highlighted. We and the =
school have been told that, because of this mark, my daughter would be unabl=
e to develop higher functioning skills, and that her apparent early school a=
bility is founded simply upon good general memory skills and exceptional vis=
ual storage ability.<BR>
</FONT></FONT> <BR>

<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">And this is now on her file....which they=
closed because they believe this disparity of scores solves the 'problem': =
she was 'acting up' because she was struggling with the work once it became =
less routine.<BR>
</FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">I am curious to find out what you think w=
e should do at this point. Neither we nor the school believe that this is a =
true picture of my daughter: they emphatically believe that she is gifted, a=
nd so do we. And the WIPPSI does not change who she is, nor how the school i=
s treating her. Furthermore, even a year further on, I am reluctant to start=
up the whole testing cycle again, and fearful of the effect this might have=
on my daughter's morale.</FONT></FONT>>>>>><BR>
<BR>
This is typical of a description of a test situation that probably didn't y=
ield a valid score. This sometimes happens  (with young children, espec=

ially). Should you want or need a more accurate measure of her abilities in =
the future, another test may  be administered at some point.<BR>
<BR>
But, you are also correct in being concerned about your daughter's feelings=
. Since the school seems to be doing fine by her in recognizing  her gi=
ftedness and providing appropriate educational interventions, there probably=
isn't any need of doing further testing right now. She may feel very differ=
ently about the testing experience when she is older.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162744983_308254_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:16:23 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A867.C4DB%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Lisa C. asked:
>
> When Ds11 was given the SBLM (age 6), he was given scores like "Superior
> Adult II" for the subtests, and only one resultant mental age. This doesn't
> give much to compare to other tests. Is this because his IQ had to be
> calculated with the Revised Deviation IQ formula?>>>>

No. It's because the SBLM yields only a mental age and an IQ score, but not
individual subtest scores in various factor areas such as the SB5 offers.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:16:23 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A79F.C4D9%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Donna wrote:

> so what does it mean if the verbal reasoning is at the 98- 99% and non
> verbal is at the 25%? The school psychologist doesn't to think this is a
> problem but it must mean something.>>>

On which test, Donna?

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:13:37 -0600
From: Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Subject: Re: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <OFAA001EFE.6559AE9E-ON86256E5F.00065586-86256E5F.0006BCBA@hmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Thanks for the work, Kathi and Bobbie! Nice conference.

To those who love the Form L-M: Riverside continues to sell the record
forms. I do recommend Ruf's excellent bulletin, available on the site. One
thing it mentions is that you can get L-M like scores by calculating a
Rasch ratio IQ by dividing age-equivalent score (age) by chronological age.
That's still essentially at the research stage right now, but it holds
promise for being able to transition the long-developed expertise from L-M
usage into contemporary assessment. In addition, Ruf provides information
on linking L-M scores to SB5 scores.

Regards,
Drew

Andrew D. Carson, Ph.D.
Senior Project Director
The Riverside Publishing Company

425 Spring Lake Drive
Itasca, Illinois 60143-2079
phone (630) 467-6036 or 1-800-767-8420 (extension 6036)
fax (630) 467-6150
email Andrew_Carson@hmco.com

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:29:10 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No. - Disagree!!!
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E4166.BB954573@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------3E07B126E53361D73D5EF015

--------------3E07B126E53361D73D5EF015
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> That's actually reasonable,
> because apparently that's what gifted programs are doing anyway, at least
> in most of the country. The average SB5 score for students enrolled in
> gifted programs was around 123.
>
I'd sure love to hear of a school district that does. Here in CA I don't
know of a single district that considers anything lower than 130 for a
gifted program or 145 for a highly gifted program.

> Again, I'd refer
> you to Ruf's fine bulletin on that, but use of the change-senstive scores
> can be helpful in this effort.\
>

Only if your district understands it or is willing to read about it. This
has not been our experience with our district.

> You can obtain L-M like scores on the SB5 by dividing age-equivalent scores
> by chronological age, by the way.
>
Yes, but that does no good when trying to convince a school district that
your child needs differentiation, acceleration or a gifted program but due
to the "IQ score" does not qualify.

Cathy

--------------3E07B126E53361D73D5EF015
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre> That's actually reasonable,
because apparently that's what gifted programs are doing anyway, at least
in most of the country. The average SB5 score for students enrolled in
gifted programs was around 123.</pre>
</blockquote>
I'd sure love to hear of a school district that does. Here in CA I don't

know of a single district that considers anything lower than 130 for a
gifted program or 145 for a highly gifted program.
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre> Again, I'd refer
you to Ruf's fine bulletin on that, but use of the change-senstive scores
can be helpful in this effort.\</pre>
</blockquote>
Only if your district understands it or is willing to read about it. This
has not been our experience with our district.
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre>You can obtain L-M like scores on the SB5 by dividing age-equivalent scores
by chronological age, by the way.</pre>
</blockquote>
Yes, but that does no good when trying to convince a school district that
your child needs differentiation, acceleration or a gifted program but
due to the "IQ score" does not qualify.
<p>Cathy
<br> 
<br> 
<br> </html>

--------------3E07B126E53361D73D5EF015--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:20:47 -0500
From: mblochfamily1@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <010901c40fab$e7e5fc50$020ba8c0@Blochfamily>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

At least in our state(PA), it is written in the gifted laws that the IQ
score should be 130 and if it is lower, there have to be several other
criteria for a child to be considered gifted.

If they start testing students using the SB-V, a huge portion of children
would not qualify.

Carol
----- Original Message -----
From: <Andrew_Carson@hmco.com>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 4:21 PM
Subject: Are SB5 scores lower? No.

>
>
>
>
> Julie, with all respect, I believe Deborah Ruf's bulletin is pretty clear
> on why SB5 and SB Form L-M scores differ. They differ because they are on
> different metrics. The L-M is based on a scoring metric that incorporates
a

> ratio IQ. Because of this, scores tend to get much larger (at the high
end)
> the greater the degree of discrepancy between mental age (or
> age-equivalent) and chronological age. The SB5's metric is the same as
> you'll find in other standard ability/IQ tests (including the Wechsler
> tests, and the SB: IV). The scores are apples (on the L-M side) and
oranges
> (with the other tests).
>
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. There
was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I believe we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.
>
> If there is IQ variance that's unusual, it's based on reliance of ratio
> IQs. Reliance on ratio IQs, such as you essentially get with the Form L-M,
> appears to result in a distribution of IQ scores that is different from
the

> Gaussian normal curve.
>
> In an earlier post, it was noted that one might begin considering gifted
> classification with SB5 scores in the 120s. That's actually reasonable,
> because apparently that's what gifted programs are doing anyway, at least
> in most of the country. The average SB5 score for students enrolled in
> gifted programs was around 123. This is not atypical for what you see with
> other ability tests. It would appear that programs are selecting kids for
> gifted programs on criteria that include but are not limited to measured
> intelligence.
>
> This all being said, it is relatively easy to obtain distribution and
> differentiation at high levels of ability using the SB5. Again, I'd refer
> you to Ruf's fine bulletin on that, but use of the change-senstive scores
> can be helpful in this effort.\
>
> Regards,
> Drew
>
> You can obtain L-M like scores on the SB5 by dividing age-equivalent
scores
> by chronological age, by the way.
>
> Andrew D. Carson, Ph.D.

> Senior Project Director
> The Riverside Publishing Company
> 425 Spring Lake Drive
> Itasca, Illinois 60143-2079
> phone (630) 467-6036 or 1-800-767-8420 (extension 6036)
> fax (630) 467-6150
> email Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Julie Knapp
> <littleredhenschool To:
OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
> @yahoo.com> cc:
> Sent by: Subject: ASAT Re: What
can you learn from the SB-V
> owner-OURGIFTED-L@n
> eiu.edu
>
>
> 03/20/2004 11:23 PM

> Please respond to
> OURGIFTED-L
>
>
>
>
>
>
> LWalshETAL@aol.com wrote:
> >>...I am concerned about the immediate effect of the new lower scores on
> acceptance into established gifted programs... With the new, lower
> scores, far fewer children will qualify for the program... I am afraid

> that districts will say, in effect, see, there isn't any more need for
> gifted programming - those other scores
> were inflated and, anyway, we can't afford it any more...<<
>
>
> The "Estimated Equating" table which compares SB-V and SB-LM scores (as
> shown on page 10 of Deborah Ruf's "Use of the SB5 in the Assessment of
High
> Abilities paper -
> http://www.riverpub.com/products/clinical/sbis5/SB5_ASB_3.pdf ) Shows
that,
> not only does the SB-V seem to "supress" the scores on the upper end... it
> seems to do the same on the lower end, as well.
>
> Call me suspicious... but it leads me to wonder if this was an unfortunate
> out-come of the test... or the intention of the test... (?) With just
the
> right "spin", maybe we can show that there really isn't as much IQ
varience
> in the population as we thought... and not as much need for
differentiation
> on either end of the scale...
>
> If tests lower the ceiling and install an elevator in the basement.. then

> there no longer *are* levels of intelligence for the schools to deal with.
>
> just my 2cents worth
> -julie
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:20:24 -0500
From: Helene <helene@one.net>
Subject: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040321193806.039c3b00@mail.one.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======152E5C08=======";
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644

--=======152E5C08=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644; charset=us-ascii;
format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hello Bobbie and Kathi and list members,

I have a question regarding the WJ III and its "high ceiling." I was
surprised that the standard scores my children received on it were lower
than those received on the WISC III, a test with lower ceilings. At the
same time, the age equivalents were really high (at least in child1). Could
you please explain how this works?

For illustration purposes: My child1 was tested at age 12.3 months and,
beside "written expression" and math and writing fluency scores (which, as
Kathi or Bobbie already mentioned, are often not good in gifted kids) which
were between 13.2 and 14.5 year old, everything was above ">22 year old",
including ">34" for reading comp, "40 year old" for picture vocab or ">56
year old" for reading vocab. The latter translates as (only?) 140 or 99.6
percentile, while a lower age equivalent of ">22" in spelling and in
academic skills translates as ">99.9 percentile" or 152 SS. How can a lower
AE give a higher percentile and SS?

Child2 tested at age 7.4 has similar results for SS and percentiles, while
the age equivalents don't seem (to me) to show such a large difference.
Most AE scores are between 9.4 and 11.8, with a few higher (basic writing
skills, pic vocab and spelling between 12.2 and 15-11).

Both children end up with a total achievement of 99.8 percentile (SS of 144
and 143), with the youngest having an AE of 10.5 (tested at 7.4) and the
oldest with an AE of >22 (while tested at 12.3).

Anyway, I have probably confused everyone with those numbers... but, two
things leave me perplex. First the (seemingly) inconsistencies within the
test: if "over 56 year old" only translates as a 152, how old do you need
to "test at" to get something close to 200? And wouldn't one think that
some skills will *decrease* with age rather than increase? (for instance I
think my spelling is worse than it used to be!) And I'm not even 56 yet!!).
And I guess I expected "higher ceilings" to translate into "higher scores".
Can you shed some light?

Thank you,

Helene

--=======152E5C08=======
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert;
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644
Content-Disposition: inline

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.615 / Virus Database: 394 - Release Date: 3/8/2004

--=======152E5C08=======--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:25:58 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83A9BD.C4E5%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162745558_342849_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162745558_342849_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Julie wrote:

<<<< Though we are not local to the best places to test, next time perhaps
we will take a vacation in between the start and end and test a few days
apart once he has gotten himself back together. I would rather pay for more
hotel time than have him meltdown on day 2! >>>>>

Aha! So Julie is going to take the Stanford-Binet 5 and WISC-IV Tour of
America! :-)

--MS_Mac_OE_3162745558_342849_MIME_Part

Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT: testing early elementary</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Julie wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<<< Though we are not local to the best places to test, next t=
ime perhaps we will take a vacation in between the start and end and test a =
few days apart once he has gotten himself back together.  I would rathe=
r pay for more hotel time than have him meltdown on day 2! >>>>&=
gt;<BR>
<BR>
Aha! So Julie is going to take the Stanford-Binet 5 and WISC-IV Tour of Ame=
rica! :-)</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162745558_342849_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:28:45 -0500 (EST)
From: JDCWilker@aol.com
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <126.3cb749b9.2d8f9b4d@aol.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=-----------------------------1079918925

-------------------------------1079918925
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/21/2004 5:27:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kkearney@ttlc.net writes:
Aha! So Julie is going to take the Stanford-Binet 5 and WISC-IV Tour of
America! :-)
Well, my son has always dreamed of going to Maine. And he would love to
return to Denver. :)

Julie

-------------------------------1079918925
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/21/2004 5:27:28 PM Pacific Standard Time, kkearney=
@ttlc.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue=20=
2px solid"><FONT face=3DArial>Aha! So Julie is going to take the Stanford-Bi=
net 5 and WISC-IV Tour of America! :-)</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>Well, my son has always dreamed of going to Maine.  And he would l=
ove to return to Denver.  :)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Julie</DIV></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1079918925--

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:31:24 +1100
From: Glenda Parsons <glendap@parsonsdesigns.com>
Subject: RE: ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <200403220131.i2M1VMNh011205@mail1.tpgi.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Mary,

Glad to be of help, it was just an idea that I wanted to throw out there. I
would expect that there are several tests available which could serve the
same purpose for you. I am currently on my way to deliver a letter to the
public school outlining my reasons for wanting DD considered for early entry
next year, and then am meeting with the principal tomorrow, so fingers
crossed :).

Glenda in Oz

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu [mailto:owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu] On
Behalf Of Mary Kimrey
Sent: Monday, 22 March 2004 12:12 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: ASAT Re: More "testing the young child" questions

Glenda,

-Mary-

<<<"I recently did a "test run" wither her using the K-Seals test In
addition I got some uselful information from the test which may allow us to
delay testing a little longer - we are doing it for early entry to
kindergarten and the results we got may be enough to start the ball rolling
at least">>>

> Glenda in Oz.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:43:19 -0500
From: "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: testing early elementary
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E44B7.5060600@optonline.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_CvtyjnfT805LixdDogjMJQ)"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--Boundary_(ID_CvtyjnfT805LixdDogjMJQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

> back together. I would rather pay for more hotel time than have
> him meltdown on day 2! >>>>>
>
> Aha! So Julie is going to take the Stanford-Binet 5 and WISC-IV
> Tour of America! :-)
>
post the schedule and I bet we could get a caravan...

r.j.

--Boundary_(ID_CvtyjnfT805LixdDogjMJQ)
Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>

--Boundary_(ID_CvtyjnfT805LixdDogjMJQ)--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:52:27 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83B10B.C4FA%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Drew wrote:
>
> Thanks for the work, Kathi and Bobbie! Nice conference.>>>>

I'd also like to offer *my* thanks to *Drew* for the perspectives he has
offered and the technical info on the SB5 he has provided here within this
conference, as a Riverside senior project director -- on a day off from
work, to boot! Thank you, Drew!

Drew continued:

>
> To those who love the Form L-M: Riverside continues to sell the record
> forms. I do recommend Ruf's excellent bulletin, available on the site. One
> thing it mentions is that you can get L-M like scores by calculating a
> Rasch ratio IQ by dividing age-equivalent score (age) by chronological age.

> That's still essentially at the research stage right now, but it holds
> promise for being able to transition the long-developed expertise from L-M
> usage into contemporary assessment. In addition, Ruf provides information
> on linking L-M scores to SB5 scores.>>>>>>

I'm also collecting as much data as I can on SB5/SBLM score comparisons. We
will all keep you posted.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:13:07 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E3DA3.9000808@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Donna,
It may not be the nonverbal "reasoning" that is lower just because the
scores are lower. Nonverbal reasoning subtests require good vision and
visual processing, as well as the visual-motor coordination to work well
and quickly with the materials. Have a vision evaluation done to rule
out such difficulties, or if apparent motor problems exist, explore that
further. The discrepancy gives us clues about problems we may be able
to lessen. Bobbie Gilman

Donna Langlois White wrote:

> so what does it mean if the verbal reasoning is at the 98- 99% and non
> verbal is at the 25%? The school psychologist doesn't to think this is a
> problem but it must mean something.
>

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:48:45 -0600
From: "Logue, Theodosia Nowell (UMC-Student)" <tnltg2@mizzou.edu>
Subject: RE: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <E04CBC981EC8E6488947205B3698A9E6054FEB@UM-EMAIL05.um.umsystem.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C40FB0.5AE0138E"
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40FB0.5AE0138E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I attended a conference recently where local psychologists were =
discussing the SB5 as it relates to older tests, and the primary =
difference highlighted was the difference in subtests and what was being =
measured. Is this mainly what accounts for different scores? One of the =
presenters discussed the idea of using different tests for achieving =
different ends, i.e. identifying more or less of the school district's =

population for gifted programs, or using one test over another because =
it better suited the child (and perhaps showed him/her in a better =
light). Can you comment on either of these ideas? (Incidentally, they =
pointed out that the SB5 would probably give a student a lower score, =
therefore identifying fewer kids for local gifted programs, than say, =
the WISC-IV, which may have been used to identify students already IN =
the programs.)=20

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu on behalf of Andrew_Carson@hmco.com
Sent: Sun 3/21/2004 6:58 PM
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Subject: Re: Are SB5 scores lower? No.
=20

Hi Bobbie,

Composite as your primary indicator (that's the one that leaves off the =
two
working memory subtests and nonverbal visual-spatial processing). They
really should be yielding comparable scores, assuming similar methods =
were
used to collect the sample and determine the score distributions.

Regards,
Drew

=
=20
"Barbara J. =
=20
Gilman" To: =
OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu =20
<bobbie@h2net.net cc: =

=20
> Subject: Re: Are SB5 =
scores lower? No. =20
Sent by: =
=20
owner-OURGIFTED-L =
=20
@neiu.edu =
=20
=
=20
=
=20
03/21/2004 06:41 =
=20
PM =
=20

Please respond to =
=20
OURGIFTED-L =
=20
=
=20
=
=20

Andrew_Carson@hmco.com wrote:

>
> The SB5 norms were created in the standard way, and presumably do =
reflect
> distributions of ability in the general population. Scores on the SB5 =
and
> Wechsler and other tests should and generally will be equivalent. =

There
was
> no intention to create lower scores on the SB5! Our goal, and I =
believe
we
> succeeded in it, was to create accurate scores.
>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40FB0.5AE0138E
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef;
name="winmail.dat"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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dQBTTVRQAG93bmVyLU9VUkdJRlRFRC1MQG5laXUuZWR1AAACAVwAAQAAACAAAABTTVRQOk9XTkVS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d2gVHgEgF7BjB0AgcHNWeRPQF6FnBAB0BCB3ZR8iZAQAY3UEEAuAZ8wgdB8QBgBCNR0ABCA+aQVA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J+BqBZBZcVJlv1TgBxAhxCzkR1QtQE5YkAdR5FHbYG8KSGkgQhVF4GIIkCxR6kknbf4gOlEnwRgg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N12/n17LvM+6P7zfLKJiebbf/8Tfxe/G/8D/x7/Jc1UPyX//zJ/Nr86/yL/QmrDv0q/Tv//Uz9Xf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AHIAZQBzACAAbABvAHcAZQByACUAMwBGACAATgBvAC4ALgBFAE0ATAAAAAsA9hAAAAAAQAAHMK6m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AABEAAAAPEUwNENCQzk4MUVDOEU2NDg4OTQ3MjA1QjM2OThBOUU2MDU0RkVCQFVNLUVNQUlMMDUu
dW0udW1zeXN0ZW0uZWR1PgDD+A==

------_=_NextPart_001_01C40FB0.5AE0138E--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:52:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Maura MacKenzie <msmack44@yahoo.com>
Subject: ASAT: WISC IV
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322015249.73573.qmail@web61109.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-643883736-1079920369=:72920"

--0-643883736-1079920369=:72920
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

My 7 year old son, who is in second grade, was tested last month with the WISC
IV. I saw the earlier post which recommended further testing (SB LM?) if the
child hits the ceiling on two or more of the Verbal Comprehension subtests. My
son hit two test ceilings; however one was a Verbal Comprehension subtest and
the other was a Perceptual Reasoning subtest. Does the same recommendation
apply in this instance?

Also, I am curious as to the distinctions between mildly, highly and profoundly
gifted. If, as I've read, a full scale IQ of 145 is considered highly gifted,
which test does this apply to? WISC III, WISC IV, SB IV, SB V, SB LM?

I am new to all of this, and am trying to get a handle on what it all means so
that I can be informed and advocate for my son. Thanks for your help. And
thanks for a very interesting and informative conference!

Maura

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-643883736-1079920369=:72920
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>
<DIV>My 7 year old son, who is in second grade, was tested last month with the
WISC IV.  I saw the earlier post which recommended further testing (SB LM?)
if the child hits the ceiling on two or more of the Verbal Comprehension
subtests.  My son hit two test ceilings; however one was a Verbal
Comprehension subtest and the other was a Perceptual Reasoning subtest. 
Does the same recommendation apply in this instance?  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Also, I am curious as to the distinctions between mildly, highly and
profoundly gifted.  If, as I've read, a full scale IQ of 145 is
considered highly gifted, which test does this apply to?  WISC III, WISC
IV, SB IV, SB V, SB LM?  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am new to all of this, and am trying to get a handle on what it all means
so that I can be informed and advocate for my son.  Thanks for your
help.  And thanks for a very interesting and informative conference!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Maura</DIV></DIV><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-643883736-1079920369=:72920--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:01:47 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83B32A.C4FB%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Helene wrote:

> I have a question regarding the WJ III and its "high ceiling." I was
> surprised that the standard scores my children received on it were lower
> than those received on the WISC III, a test with lower ceilings. At the
> same time, the age equivalents were really high (at least in child1). Could
> you please explain how this works?>>>>

At some ages and on some subtests, the standard scores don't go as high as
on others. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that there is less room
on the test for an older child than a younger one. . .a six year old can
answer questions for children ages six and up, but a 14 year old has fewer
questions available to him or her, since the test ceiling is at the college

level. A 14 year old is closer to college level in age than is a six year
old.

Just for my own information, I've taken to also running a set of "Mythical
Child" score profiles when I test a gifted child. In addition to running the
child's set of raw scores through the computer program, I also run a
"mythical child" profile for a child of the same chronological age who got
all items correct. That lets me see what the highest standard score
available is for each subtest for a "mythical child" who got all the items
correct at that particular age.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:00:53 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT thank you Drew
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E48D5.8070003@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Drew, please accept my thanks, as well. We are busily testing and
tabulating SB5 results in Denver, too, and are recommending some
SBL-M/SB5 combination tests, especially where children appear to have
exceptional verbal and spatial/mathematical strengths. The combination
covers both areas well, and offers new norms from one of the tests.
Bobbie Gilman

Kathi Kearney wrote:

> Drew wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the work, Kathi and Bobbie! Nice conference.>>>>
>
>
> I'd also like to offer *my* thanks to *Drew* for the perspectives he has
> offered and the technical info on the SB5 he has provided here within this
> conference, as a Riverside senior project director -- on a day off from

> work, to boot! Thank you, Drew!
>
> Drew continued:
>
>> To those who love the Form L-M: Riverside continues to sell the record
>> forms. I do recommend Ruf's excellent bulletin, available on the site. One
>> thing it mentions is that you can get L-M like scores by calculating a
>> Rasch ratio IQ by dividing age-equivalent score (age) by chronological age.
>> That's still essentially at the research stage right now, but it holds
>> promise for being able to transition the long-developed expertise from L-M
>> usage into contemporary assessment. In addition, Ruf provides information
>> on linking L-M scores to SB5 scores.>>>>>>
>
>
> I'm also collecting as much data as I can on SB5/SBLM score comparisons. We
> will all keep you posted.
>
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:02:57 -0500
From: Tonya <tonya.andersen@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E4951.9090408@verizon.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Drew,

I appreciate the information you are sharing on the SB5. I have a
couple of very specific questions. Would it be ok to contact you off-list?

Regards,

Tonya
tonya.andersen@verizon.net

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:04:41 -0700
From: "Barbara A. Minton, Ph.D." <minmay@cableone.net>
Subject: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <004901c40fb2$0a277590$6601a8c0@barbaraxvsykfp>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

My 8 year old son received a 144 on the SB5 with an age equivalent score of
31 years. He received a 191 on the SBLM. When he was five he received a
score of 145 on a poor administration of the SB-IV (though his quantitative
subscale score was calculated at 162). Anyone care to comment?

Thanks,

Barb

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:05:07 -0500
From: Meredith Warshaw <mwarshaw@uniquelygifted.org>
Subject: ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks - now is an appropriate time to start posting
online thanks
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <1b9c01c40fb2$1af70c50$6400a8c0@MEREDITH>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Thanks so much for sharing your time and expertise - this has been wonderfully
helpful!

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:07:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Mft814@aol.com
Subject: Re: ASAT School GT gate tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <161.2cf6c6bb.2d8fa46a@aol.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=-----------------------------1079921258

-------------------------------1079921258
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I know I am late and may not get replies. Family crises caused me to miss
most of the conference. I will get to read it all, eventually, but not
participate as I had hoped. Any response will be most welcome.

Our PS uses Cogat for entry into the limited GT enrichment available in
elementary grades. (BTW - not an issue for us, DS qualified for 4th grade
program
in 1st. Not bragging, just trying to make clear I am looking, here, for what
would be best for the more general GT population, whom I think the school can
and should serve better, even if they cannot accommodate the HG so readily).

I will be working with a task force to review and revisit the GT curriculum.
I intend to push hard for homogeneous/cluster grouping. Other issues I may
emphasize are identification, compacting, pre-testing, etc. I am not happy with
the pull-out program, at least as it works (not) for my child.

Tips on identification testing issues are sought.

Thanks!!
Mary

-------------------------------1079921258
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

rticipate as I had hoped. Any  response will be most welcome.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Our PS uses Cogat for entry into the limited GT enrichment available in=
elementary grades. (BTW - not an issue for us, DS qualified for 4th gr=
ade program in 1st. Not bragging, just trying to make clear I am looking, he=
re, for what would be best for the more general GT population, whom I think=20=
the school can and should serve better, even if they cannot accommodate the=20=
HG so readily). </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I will be working with a task force to review and revisit the GT curric=
ulum. I intend to push hard for homogeneous/cluster grouping. Other issues I=
may emphasize are identification, compacting, pre-testing, etc. I am not ha=
ppy with the pull-out program, at least as it works (not) for my child.</DIV=
>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tips on identification testing issues are sought.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks!!</DIV>
<DIV>Mary</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>

-------------------------------1079921258--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:05:57 -0500
From: Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com>
Subject: ASAT:thank you
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <200403220208.i2M281fA011929@ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01CD_01C40F88.4E604F40"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01CD_01C40F88.4E604F40
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thank you Bobbie and Kathi for sharing your time, observations, and
expertise. Sally, you, too, for your extra efforts and hours of 'sweating
it' this weekend. I enjoyed soaking up the many perspectives shared this
weekend. Thanks to all.

Lorri in Maine

kanga@maine.rr.com

------=_NextPart_000_01CD_01C40F88.4E604F40
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>

</head>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Thank you Bobbie and Kathi for sharing your time,
observations, and expertise.  Sally, you, too, for your extra =
efforts and hours
of ‘sweating it’ this weekend. I enjoyed soaking up the many

perspectives shared this weekend. Thanks to all.</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Lorri in Maine</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>kanga@maine.rr.com</span></font></p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_01CD_01C40F88.4E604F40--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:16:08 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83B697.C50C%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Not so good to reply to my own post (I must be getting tired or else
drowning in posts!) but rereading this, and rereading the original post,
it's unclear whether the original poster was referring to the WJ-III Tests
of Achievement or the WJ-III Tests of Cognitive Abilities.

Can you clarify?

on 3/21/04 9:01 PM, Kathi Kearney at kkearney@ttlc.net wrote:

> Helene wrote:
>
>> I have a question regarding the WJ III and its "high ceiling." I was
>> surprised that the standard scores my children received on it were lower
>> than those received on the WISC III, a test with lower ceilings. At the
>> same time, the age equivalents were really high (at least in child1). Could
>> you please explain how this works?>>>>
>

> At some ages and on some subtests, the standard scores don't go as high as
> on others. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that there is less room
> on the test for an older child than a younger one. . .a six year old can
> answer questions for children ages six and up, but a 14 year old has fewer
> questions available to him or her, since the test ceiling is at the college
> level. A 14 year old is closer to college level in age than is a six year
> old.
>
> Just for my own information, I've taken to also running a set of "Mythical
> Child" score profiles when I test a gifted child. In addition to running the
> child's set of raw scores through the computer program, I also run a
> "mythical child" profile for a child of the same chronological age who got
> all items correct. That lets me see what the highest standard score
> available is for each subtest for a "mythical child" who got all the items
> correct at that particular age.
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:24:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Mft814@aol.com
Subject: ASAT - prereading
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <1e5.1bdf58ce.2d8fa871@aol.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=-----------------------------1079922289

-------------------------------1079922289
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/20/2004 10:01:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
wubison@optonline.net writes:
We are already careful about what we let dd read but thank you for the
reminder. My pre-reading load keeps growing.

r.j.
rj

mine too!

My ds is almost 9, and I expect there will come a time when I dont' "censor."
not yet.
If you can track where recommendations come from, and tap into reading lists
for gt kids, you do not necessarily (or, I don't) have to read all of every
book. I can no longer keep up, and so the screening process evolves. E.g, once I

am comfortable with the author (like, Bruce Coville), I need only read the
book description. If your kid is a Davidson YS, the kids' bulletin boards are a
great resource for reading suggestions.

mary

-------------------------------1079922289
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=3DUS-ASCII http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; cha=
rset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff=
f">
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/20/2004 10:01:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, wubison=
@optonline.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue=20=
2px solid"><FONT face=3DArial>We are already careful about what we let dd re=
ad but thank you for the <BR>reminder. <STRONG> My pre-reading load kee=

ps growing.<BR></STRONG><BR>r.j.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV>rj</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>mine too! </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My ds is almost 9, and I expect there will come a time when I dont' "ce=
nsor." not yet.</DIV>
<DIV>If you can track where recommendations come from, and tap into rea=
ding lists for gt kids, you do not necessarily (or, I don't) have to read&nb=
sp;all of every book. I can no longer keep up, and so the screening&nbs=
p;process evolves. E.g, once I am comfortable with the author (like, Bruce C=
oville), I need only read the book description. If your kid is a Davids=
on YS, the kids' bulletin boards are a great resource for reading suggestion=
s. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>mary</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>  </DIV></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1079922289--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:44:09 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E52F9.A1A4721A@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------2207939ADD961E03EEECB94E

--------------2207939ADD961E03EEECB94E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> I believe the idea that SB5
> scores are lower than other tests, or than the SB:IV, is a myth.
>
Odd, I haven't heard of a single person who scored in the high 140s or above
on the WISCIII or SBIV who has gotten equivalent SBV scores. I know of
children who scored in the 150's on the WISC getting 120's on the SBV with
age equivalents double their actual ages. To be honest I know of 100s of
kids who scored in the 150's on the WISC/WIPPSI and don't know of anyone who
has scored above 140 on the SBV.

As someone who is considering having her child tested with the SBV to look
for potential LD's (suspected due to VIQ/PIQ disparity and the very low
outlier score), knowing that said child already hit hard ceilings on 9 of
the 10 subtests of the WISC-III at almost 8yo (18s and 19s with additional
points). I am actually afraid to use the test as I am fairly certain the
score will not come to the same 158 on the SBV and the school may use said
test to refuse continued acceptance in their highly gifted program.

I do appreciate your taking to time to partake in this conference, but am
still honestly scared to have my child take this test unless I do it
completely privately so the scores will not follow him.

Cathy

--------------2207939ADD961E03EEECB94E
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre> I believe the idea that SB5

scores are lower than other tests, or than the SB:IV, is a myth.</pre>
</blockquote>
Odd, I haven't heard of a single person who scored in the high 140s or
above on the WISCIII or SBIV who has gotten equivalent SBV scores. I know
of children who scored in the 150's on the WISC getting 120's on the SBV
with age equivalents double their actual ages. To be honest I know of 100s
of kids who scored in the 150's on the WISC/WIPPSI and don't know of anyone
who has scored above 140 on the SBV.
<p>As someone who is considering having her child tested with the SBV to
look for potential LD's (suspected due to VIQ/PIQ disparity and the very
low outlier score), knowing that said child already hit hard ceilings on
9 of the 10 subtests of the WISC-III at almost 8yo (18s and 19s with additional
points). I am actually afraid to use the test as I am fairly certain the
score will not come to the same 158 on the SBV and the school may use said
test to refuse continued acceptance in their highly gifted program.

<p>I do appreciate your taking to time to partake in this conference, but
am still honestly scared to have my child take this test unless I do it
completely privately so the scores will not follow him.
<p>Cathy
<br> </html>

--------------2207939ADD961E03EEECB94E--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:35:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322023508.50564.qmail@web20212.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-693230795-1079922908=:49036"

--0-693230795-1079922908=:49036
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

For anyone interested in learning about all sorts of tests, check out John
Willis's and Ron Dumont's website at http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/

There is a wealth of information there. I believe that Ron ran maximum scores
on all subtests at all ages and provided information on the highest scores for
them, although I'm not sure where they are on the website. Drew, did you follow
this thread and do you know where they can be found?

John and Ron are the most test-knowledgeable people I know (present presenters
excepted). There is a lot to investigate on their website. Happy browsing -
Laurie

Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net> wrote:
Helene wrote:

Just for my own information, I've taken to also running a set of "Mythical
Child" score profiles when I test a gifted child. In addition to running the

child's set of raw scores through the computer program, I also run a
"mythical child" profile for a child of the same chronological age who got
all items correct. That lets me see what the highest standard score
available is for each subtest for a "mythical child" who got all the items
correct at that particular age.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
--0-693230795-1079922908=:49036
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>For anyone interested in learning about all sorts of tests, check out John
Willis's and Ron Dumont's website at <A
href="http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/">http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/</A></DI
V>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is a wealth of information there.  I believe that Ron ran
maximum scores on all subtests at all ages and provided information on the
highest scores for them, although I'm not sure where they are on the
website.  Drew, did you follow this thread and do you know where they can
be found?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John and Ron are the most test-knowledgeable people I know (present
presenters excepted).   There is a lot to investigate on their
website.  Happy browsing - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>Kathi Kearney
<kkearney@ttlc.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Helene wrote:<BR><BR>> I have a question
regarding the WJ III and its "high ceiling." I was<BR>> surprised that the
standard scores my children received on it were lower<BR>> than those
received on the WISC III, a test with lower ceilings. At the<BR>> same time,
the age equivalents were really high (at least in child1). Could<BR>> you
please explain how this works?>>>><BR><BR>At some ages and on some
subtests, the standard scores don't go as high as<BR>on others. Part of the
reason for this, I think, is that there is less room<BR>on the test for an older
child than a younger one. . .a six year old can<BR>answer questions for children
ages six and up, but a 14 year old has fewer<BR>questions available to him or
her, since the test ceiling is at the college<BR>level. A 14 year old is closer
to college level in age than is a six year<BR>old.<BR><BR>Just
for my
own information, I've taken to also running a set of "Mythical<BR>Child" score
profiles when I test a gifted child. In addition to running the<BR>child's set
of raw scores through the computer program, I also run a<BR>"mythical child"
profile for a child of the same chronological age who got<BR>all items correct.
That lets me see what the highest standard score<BR>available is for each
subtest for a "mythical child" who got all the items<BR>correct at that
particular age.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree">Protect your identity with
Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard</a>
--0-693230795-1079922908=:49036--

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:38:09 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Re: ASAT: ADMIN - Thanks
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC847291.1A8B4%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Another excellent conference Sally! And the work you must be doing to
moderate all these posts... a special thanks for your dedication.

Kathi and Bobbi, thank you so much for your informative and reasoned
responses, and for caring so much about our gifted children.

It has once again been a conference full of high quality discussion, robust
debate and extensive information sharing. A testament to what can be done in
an online community.

warm wishes
Tracy
Pemberton, Western Australia
tracy@cycloneco.com.au

"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
‹Eleanor Roosevelt, American First Lady, Civil Rights Activist

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:46:59 -0500
From: "R.J. Herbison" <wubison@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT - prereading
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E53A3.4010801@optonline.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

I have yet to have her put back a book that she has picked -- but I do
prefer to steer her upfront.

> the screening process evolves. E.g, once I am comfortable with the
> author (like, Bruce Coville), I need only read the book description.
> If your kid is a Davidson YS, the kids' bulletin boards are a great
> resource for reading suggestions.

I would be careful with that -- my recollection is that Coville (and
certainly D. W. Jones, Anne MacCaffery and many other authors) write on
a wide range and although some are appropriate for my daughter, some are
not. Right now what keeps me OK is that I am a fast reader and,

probably more importantly, I had read ahead a while back looking for
"read to" books and now she is ready and wants to read them herself.

ymmv
r.j.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:44:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT:thank you
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322024411.97461.qmail@web20202.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_JKFuUPmvKZkMrpFbiOSlqQ)"

--Boundary_(ID_JKFuUPmvKZkMrpFbiOSlqQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

Before my eyes cross and my head comes crashing down on the keyboard, I, too,
would like to thank all those who made this presentation possible. It is
exciting to talk to others in this field, especially as I come from a state with
no mandated gifted programming. The upside of this is that we don't have to
worry about IQ cutoffs! We just worry about whether each district elects to
have a program at all, and then hope for a gifted teacher who can make the best
of what is available.

It was an invigorating weekend. Thank you.

Laurie Jensen in New Hampshire - almost in Maine!
lauriej49@yahoo.com

Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com> wrote:

Thank you Bobbie and Kathi for sharing your time, observations, and expertise.
Sally, you, too, for your extra efforts and hours of ‘sweating it’ this weekend.
I enjoyed soaking up the many perspectives shared this weekend. Thanks to all.

Lorri in Maine

kanga@maine.rr.com

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

--Boundary_(ID_JKFuUPmvKZkMrpFbiOSlqQ)
Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

<DIV>Before my eyes cross and my head comes crashing down on the keyboard, I,
too, would like to thank all those who made this presentation possible.  It
is exciting to talk to others in this field, especially as I come from a state
with no mandated gifted programming.  The upside of this is that we don't
have to worry about IQ cutoffs!  We just worry about whether each district
elects to have a program at all, and then hope for a gifted teacher who can make
the best of what is available.  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It was an invigorating weekend.  Thank you.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Laurie Jensen in New Hampshire - almost in Maine!</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:lauriej49@yahoo.com">lauriej49@yahoo.com</A></DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Centineo <kanga@maine.rr.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<META content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered)" name=Generator>
<STYLE>

</STYLE>

<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Thank you Bobbie and Kathi for sharing your time,
observations, and expertise.  Sally, you, too, for your extra efforts and
hours of ‘sweating it’ this weekend. I enjoyed soaking up the many perspectives
shared this weekend. Thanks to all.</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial"></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Lorri in Maine</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><A
href="mailto:kanga@maine.rr.com">kanga@maine.rr.com</A></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV><
/BLOCKQUOTE><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.

--Boundary_(ID_JKFuUPmvKZkMrpFbiOSlqQ)--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:48:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322024810.51688.qmail@web20203.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1601432237-1079923690=:50481"

--0-1601432237-1079923690=:50481
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he had ceilings on 9 of the 10
subtests of the WISC-III? - Laurie

Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com> wrote:As someone who is considering having her child
tested with the SBV to look for potential LD's (suspected due to VIQ/PIQ
disparity and the very low outlier score), knowing that said child already hit
hard ceilings on 9 of the 10 subtests of the WISC-III at almost 8yo (18s and 19s
with additional points).
Cathy

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1601432237-1079923690=:50481
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he had ceilings on 9 of the
10 subtests of the WISC-III?  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>Cathy S
<cathy@bowchow.com></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE="CITE">As someone who is considering having her child tested
with the SBV to look for potential LD's (suspected due to VIQ/PIQ disparity and
the very low outlier score), knowing that said child already hit hard ceilings
on 9 of the 10 subtests of the WISC-III at almost 8yo (18s and 19s with
additional points). </BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>Cathy <BR>  </P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you
Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1601432237-1079923690=:50481--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:48:00 -0500
From: Helene <helene@one.net>
Subject: Re: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040321214646.039d6398@mail.one.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======FA84F6D=======";
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644

--=======FA84F6D=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644; charset=us-ascii;
format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Oops. I forgot to mention I was referring to the Achievement test.

At 09:16 PM 3/21/2004 -0700, you wrote:

>Not so good to reply to my own post (I must be getting tired or else
>drowning in posts!) but rereading this, and rereading the original post,
>it's unclear whether the original poster was referring to the WJ-III Tests
>of Achievement or the WJ-III Tests of Cognitive Abilities.
>
>Can you clarify?
>
>
>
>
>on 3/21/04 9:01 PM, Kathi Kearney at kkearney@ttlc.net wrote:
>
> > Helene wrote:
> >
> >> I have a question regarding the WJ III and its "high ceiling." I was
> >> surprised that the standard scores my children received on it were lower
> >> than those received on the WISC III, a test with lower ceilings. At the
> >> same time, the age equivalents were really high (at least in child1).
> Could
> >> you please explain how this works?>>>>
> >
> > At some ages and on some subtests, the standard scores don't go as high as
> > on others. Part of the reason for this, I think, is that there is less room
> > on the test for an older child than a younger one. . .a six year old can
> > answer questions for children ages six and up, but a 14 year old has fewer
> > questions available to him or her, since the test ceiling is at the college
> > level. A 14 year old is closer to college level in age than is a six year
> > old.
> >
> > Just for my own information, I've taken to also running a set of "Mythical
> > Child" score profiles when I test a gifted child. In addition to

> running the
> > child's set of raw scores through the computer program, I also run a
> > "mythical child" profile for a child of the same chronological age who got
> > all items correct. That lets me see what the highest standard score
> > available is for each subtest for a "mythical child" who got all the items
> > correct at that particular age.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.615 / Virus Database: 394 - Release Date: 3/8/2004

--=======FA84F6D=======
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert;
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-14C92644
Content-Disposition: inline

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.615 / Virus Database: 394 - Release Date: 3/8/2004

--=======FA84F6D=======--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:59:31 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: WJ III
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83C0C3.C526%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162751171_680457_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162751171_680457_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Laurie wrote:

<<<For anyone interested in learning about all sorts of tests, check out
John Willis's and Ron Dumont's website at http://alpha.fdu.edu/psychology/

There is a wealth of information there. I believe that Ron ran maximum
scores on all subtests at all ages and provided information on the highest
scores for them, although I'm not sure where they are on the website. Drew,
did you follow this thread and do you know where they can be found?

John and Ron are the most test-knowledgeable people I know (present
presenters excepted). There is a lot to investigate on their website.
Happy browsing>>>>

Thanks, Laurie, for providing this link for us!!

--MS_Mac_OE_3162751171_680457_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: WJ III</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Laurie wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><<<For anyone interested in learning about all sorts o=
f tests, check out John Willis's and Ron Dumont's website at http://alpha.fd=
u.edu/psychology/<BR>
<BR>
There is a wealth of information there.  I believe that Ron ran maximu=
m scores on all subtests at all ages and provided information on the highest=
scores for them, although I'm not sure where they are on the website. &nbsp=
;Drew, did you follow this thread and do you know where they can be found?<B=
R>
<BR>

John and Ron are the most test-knowledgeable people I know (present present=
ers excepted).   There is a lot to investigate on their website. &=
nbsp;Happy browsing>>>><BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Laurie, for providing this link for us!!</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162751171_680457_MIME_Part--

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:56:42 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC8476EA.1A8BD%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

on 22/3/04 9:06 AM, Andrew_Carson@hmco.com at Andrew_Carson@hmco.com wrote:

> I believe the idea that SB5
> scores are lower than other tests, or than the SB:IV, is a myth.

Interesting how the myth of the Flynn effect on intelligence (especially at
the extreme ends of the 'curve') and the myth of normal distribution of
intelligence in human population are used as reality, yet the reality of
repeated observations of lower scores on the SB5, compared to other
similarly constructed tests, is constructed as a myth.

I am left shaking my head once more.

all the best
Tracy
Pemberton, Western Australia
tracy@cycloneco.com.au
----------------------

"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
‹Eleanor Roosevelt, American First Lady, Civil Rights Activist

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:02:17 -0500 (EST)
From: RDlouruf@cs.com
Subject: Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <cf.80be93f.2d8fb139@cs.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary=part1_cf.80be93f.2d8fb139_boundary

--part1_cf.80be93f.2d8fb139_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear Barb:
I see that the SB5 144 is virtually the same as the SBLM 191. I have
tested numerous kids in both ranges on both tests and separate tests, and my
intake form, Developmental Milestones, shows the same sorts of confirming
evidence. I don't give the SB4, so would have to have Kathi answer that.
Deborah Ruf
> My 8 year old son received a 144 on the SB5 with an age equivalent score of
> 31 years. He received a 191 on the SBLM. When he was five he received a
> score of 145 on a poor administration of the SB-IV (though his quantitative

> subscale score was calculated at 162). Anyone care to comment?

--part1_cf.80be93f.2d8fb139_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR=3D"#008080" SIZE=3D2 P=
TSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Tahoma" LANG=3D"0">Dear Barb:<BR>
       I see that the SB5 144 is virtually the=
same as the SBLM 191.  I have tested numerous kids in both ranges on b=
oth tests and separate tests, and my intake form, Developmental Milestones,=20=
shows the same sorts of confirming evidence.  I don't give the SB4, so=20=
would have to have Kathi answer that.<BR>
Deborah Ruf</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGRO=
UND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial"=
LANG=3D"0"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=

: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">My 8 year old son received a 14=
4 on the SB5 with an age equivalent score of<BR>
31 years.  He received a 191 on the SBLM.  When he was five he rec=
eived a<BR>
score of 145 on a poor administration of the SB-IV (though his quantitative<=
BR>
subscale score was calculated at 162).  Anyone care to comment?</BLOCKQ=
UOTE><BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_cf.80be93f.2d8fb139_boundary--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:02:18 -0500
From: ebn@rcn.com
Subject: Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E573A.6010809@rcn.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I work in a school in the U.S. which is 82% low income, 23% Cambodian,
and 56% Hispanic, with smaller percentages of African, European, and
native American children, in that order. I see a great deal of
unrecognized potential and am forever thinking about enrichment which is
not language based, to offer children who are learning the language. I
am also thinking about screening large numbers of children, and wonder
what tests would be useful - is there anything which might be used in
larger groups as a screening tool, and which gets at intelligence even
when a child has language issues?

As far as looking at individual children goes, would you, Kathi and/or

Bobbie, compare and contrast the UNIT, Leiter, and Ravens? Seems to me
there might be a couple of others which avoid heavy language use to add
to the list....the Nagliari?.....something else.....can't remember.....

Last question - could you talk a little about how emotional and mental
health issues affect intelligence test scores? We have plenty of those,
too. My working theory is that emotional issues would probably depress
scores, as well as "appearance" of intelligence (guess I'm really
talking about teachers' assumptions here), even though enrichment
offered to higher scorers (or smart "looking" kids) might be appropriate
and/or freeing for some emotionally at risk children.

And a clarification - children are not being tested in my school now,
but the administration is open minded, and it is a possibility for the
future.

Ellen N.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:19:58 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E5B5E.84B4CEA8@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------616A16BFBDF3C42D4360140A

--------------616A16BFBDF3C42D4360140A
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he had ceilings on 9 of the 10
subtests of the WISC-III? - Laurie
>
Because the ONE score that wasn't a ceiling was so low (10 points lower than
the lowest other score). The VIQ/PIQ difference was 17 points and the
Processing Speed percentile was over 70 points lower than any other
subscale. The score was so far lower that I was given two FSIQ scores, one
removing the "severe outlier" the other including it.

Cathy

--------------616A16BFBDF3C42D4360140A
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre>How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he had ceilings on 9 of the
10 subtests of the WISC-III?  - Laurie</pre>
</blockquote>
Because the ONE score that wasn't a ceiling was so low (10 points lower
than the lowest other score). The VIQ/PIQ difference was 17 points and
the Processing Speed percentile was over 70 points lower than any other
subscale. The score was so far lower that I was given two FSIQ scores,
one removing the "severe outlier" the other including it.
<p>Cathy
<br> </html>

--------------616A16BFBDF3C42D4360140A--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:20:26 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT School GT gate tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83C5A9.C539%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162752426_755917_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752426_755917_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Mary wrote:

<<<<Our PS uses Cogat for entry into the limited GT enrichment available in
elementary grades. . ..

I will be working with a task force to review and revisit the GT curriculum.
I intend to push hard for homogeneous/cluster grouping. Other issues I may
emphasize are identification, compacting, pre-testing, etc. I am not happy
with the pull-out program, at least as it works (not) for my child.

Tips on identification testing issues are sought.>>>>

Obviously, individual testing is better than group testing, but of the group
ability tests out there, CoGAT and Otis-Lennon are, in my opinion, the best
of the bunch for the gifted population. (But be aware of two things: group
tests such as these tend to miss about 25% of highly gifted students, and
both of these tests have ceilings of 150)

Group tests should preferably be used for screening purposes only, not for
formal identification. However, the reality is that many school districts do
use them for identification. . .

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752426_755917_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT School GT gate tests</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE>Mary wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<<<Our PS uses Cogat for entry into the limited GT enrichment =
available in elementary grades. . ..<BR>
<BR>

I will be working with a task force to review and revisit the GT curriculum=
. I intend to push hard for homogeneous/cluster grouping. Other issues I may=
emphasize are identification, compacting, pre-testing, etc. I am not happy =
with the pull-out program, at least as it works (not) for my child.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>Tips on identification testing issues are sought.>>>&=
gt;<BR>
<BR>
Obviously, individual testing is better than group testing, but of the grou=
p ability tests out there, CoGAT and Otis-Lennon are, in my opinion, the bes=
t of the bunch for the gifted population. (But be aware of two things: group=
tests such as these tend to miss about 25% of highly gifted students, and b=
oth of these tests have ceilings of 150)<BR>
<BR>
Group tests should preferably be used for screening purposes only, not for =
formal identification. However, the reality is that many school districts do=
use them for identification. . .<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752426_755917_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:24:11 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83C68A.C53E%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=MS_Mac_OE_3162752651_769453_MIME_Part

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752651_769453_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Deborah Ruf wrote, in response to Barb:

The SB-IV and SB5 scores quoted above are for all intents and purposes,
identical.

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752651_769453_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Deborah Ruf wrote, in response to Barb:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT COLOR=3D"#008080"><FONT SIZE=3D"2">Dear Barb:<BR>
      I see that the SB5 144 is virtually th=
e same as the SBLM 191.  I have tested numerous kids in both ranges on =
both tests and separate tests, and my intake form, Developmental Milestones,=

shows the same sorts of confirming evidence.  I don't give the SB4, so=
would have to have Kathi answer that.<BR>
Deborah Ruf<BR>
</FONT></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">My 8 year old s=
on received a 144 on the SB5 with an age equivalent score of<BR>
31 years.  He received a 191 on the SBLM.  When he was five he re=
ceived a<BR>
score of 145 on a poor administration of the SB-IV (though his quantitative=
<BR>
subscale score was calculated at 162).  Anyone care to comment?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>The SB-IV and SB5 scores quoted abo=
ve are for all intents and purposes, identical.<BR>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial"><BR>
</FONT></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial"><BR>
</FONT></FONT><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3162752651_769453_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 19:20:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Laurie Jensen <lauriej49@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322032016.62862.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1242087751-1079925616=:62553"

--0-1242087751-1079925616=:62553
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Cathy,
Not knowing which score was the lowest (my guess is Coding), I would think
that there isn't really a V/P difference so much as a significant deficit in one
process (processing speed?). So you would want a test that doesn't penalize for
processing speed? - Laurie

Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com> wrote:

How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he had ceilings on 9 of the 10
subtests of the WISC-III? - Laurie
Because the ONE score that wasn't a ceiling was so low (10 points lower than the
lowest other score). The VIQ/PIQ difference was 17 points and the Processing
Speed percentile was over 70 points lower than any other subscale. The score was
so far lower that I was given two FSIQ scores, one removing the "severe outlier"
the other including it.
Cathy

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
--0-1242087751-1079925616=:62553
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Hi Cathy,</DIV>
<DIV>  Not knowing which score was the lowest (my guess is Coding), I would
think that there isn't really a V/P difference so much as a significant deficit
in one process (processing speed?).  So you would want a test that doesn't
penalize for processing speed?  - Laurie<BR><BR><B><I>Cathy S
<cathy@bowchow.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE="CITE"><PRE>How did your child have a VIQ/PIQ disparity if he
had ceilings on 9 of the 10 subtests of the WISC-III?  -
Laurie</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE>Because the ONE score that wasn't a ceiling was so low
(10 points lower than the lowest other score). The VIQ/PIQ difference was 17
points and the Processing Speed percentile was over 70 points lower than any
other subscale. The score was so far lower that I was given two FSIQ scores, one
removing the "severe outlier" the other including it.
<P>Cathy <BR>  </P></BLOCKQUOTE><p><font face=arial size=-1>Do you
Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html"><b>Yahoo! Finance Tax
Center</a></b> - File online. File on time.
--0-1242087751-1079925616=:62553--

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:25:27 +0800
From: Tracy Chaloner <tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
Subject: Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC847DA7.1A8C8%tracy@cycloneco.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

on 22/3/04 11:02 AM, RDlouruf@cs.com at RDlouruf@cs.com wrote:

> Dear Barb:
> I see that the SB5 144 is virtually the same as the SBLM 191. I have tested
> numerous kids in both ranges on both tests and separate tests, and my intake
> form, Developmental Milestones, shows the same sorts of confirming evidence.
> I don't give the SB4, so would have to have Kathi answer that.
> Deborah Ruf

This provides a good argument for the reconfiguration of the much touted
ranges of IQ levels, most specifically those cited in Gross, M.U.M, 1993,
'Exceptionally Gifted Children' which appear to be the most widely used at

the present time. If I remember correctly, at the time Gross was using the
ratio IQ on the SB-LM to report IQ scores. This means that the table she
constructed would be largely irrelevant in light of the new testing regime,
most specifically at exceptionally and profoundly gifted levels.

I hope that once enough data becomes available that the reconstitution of
the bands of levels of giftedness will indeed occur. It is time to get some
perspective on this issue that is based in real world outcomes, and not just
theory.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:39:13 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83CA11.C548%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Tracy wrote:
>
> This provides a good argument for the reconfiguration of the much touted
> ranges of IQ levels, most specifically those cited in Gross, M.U.M, 1993,
> 'Exceptionally Gifted Children' which appear to be the most widely used at
> the present time. If I remember correctly, at the time Gross was using the
> ratio IQ on the SB-LM to report IQ scores. This means that the table she
> constructed would be largely irrelevant in light of the new testing regime,
> most specifically at exceptionally and profoundly gifted levels.
>
> I hope that once enough data becomes available that the reconstitution of
> the bands of levels of giftedness will indeed occur. It is time to get some

> perspective on this issue that is based in real world outcomes, and not just
> theory.>>>>

I have some initial thoughts about where these levels should be, but I feel
strongly about obtaining more data first before writing about it.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:35:15 -0500
From: TODD CLENNY <TCLENNY@msn.com>
Subject: Visual LD and testing
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BAY4-DAV925CRTYBK1C00000b19@hotmail.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0000_01C40F94.C7F38BE0"

------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C40F94.C7F38BE0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks so much for this opportunity. Dd 8 is scheduled for testing next =
week, probably WISC-V and WJ-III. She was just evaluated two weeks ago f=
or VT and was found to have some significant, though not severe disabilit=
ies. (tho I wonder if that should be adjusted since results are based on =
age levels) I am wondering if we should postpone the testing until the v=
isual issues have been addressed or would they in fact be likely to have =
any bearing on her test results.
Molly C.

------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C40F94.C7F38BE0

Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><BODY STYLE=3D"font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> </DIV> <=
DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5=
px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">=
<P>Thanks so much for this opportunity.  Dd 8 is scheduled for test=
ing next week, probably WISC-V and WJ-III.  She was just evaluated t=
wo weeks ago for VT and was found to have some significant, though not se=
vere disabilities. (tho I wonder if that should be adjusted since re=
sults are based on age levels)  I am wondering if we should postpone=
the testing until the visual issues have been addressed or would they in=
fact be likely to have any bearing on her test results.</P> <P>Molly C.<=
/P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C40F94.C7F38BE0--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:46:31 -0700
From: Barbara Minton <minmay@cableone.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: comparing scores on different tests
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <001801c40fc0$43a6d140$6501a8c0@barb>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Thank you all Deborah, Kathi, Drew, Bobbie and others for your incisive
comments and hard work in this area during a very difficult and confusing
time for all. I appreciate everyone giving up their weekend time!

Barb

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:17:57 -0800
From: Cathy S <cathy@bowchow.com>
Subject: Re: Can you answer this, Drew? (FW: ASAT: SB 5 Results)
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E68F5.3027BC89@bowchow.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------D47E0A474945B746F7E66626

--------------D47E0A474945B746F7E66626
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> So you would want a test that doesn't penalize for processing speed? -
Laurie
>
Actually I am fine with his WISC scores and his SB-LM, though wonder what
they would be without the possible problems (tester believes visual
processing, visual motor, grapho motor, and visual and auditory memory). He
tests PG, what I am doing is still trying to understand his relative
"weaknesses" and probable "learning disabilities" which go completely
unnoticed due to his compensating abilities (tester commented on how quickly
he learned to compensate, but that it is was clear to her that he was, even
with his ceiling scores). I do wonder if they will show up, as he gets to
harder and harder curriculum, which is why I am trying to be proactive vs.
reactive.

Cathy

--------------D47E0A474945B746F7E66626
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre> So you would want a test that doesn't penalize for processing
speed?  - Laurie</pre>
</blockquote>
Actually I am fine with his WISC scores and his SB-LM, though wonder what
they would be without the possible problems (tester believes visual processing,
visual motor, grapho motor, and visual and auditory memory). He tests PG,
what I am doing is still trying to understand his relative "weaknesses"
and probable "learning disabilities" which go completely unnoticed due
to his compensating abilities (tester commented on how quickly he learned
to compensate, but that it is was clear to her that he was, even with his
ceiling scores). I do wonder if they will show up, as he gets to harder
and harder curriculum, which is why I am trying to be proactive vs. reactive.
<p>Cathy
<br> </html>

--------------D47E0A474945B746F7E66626--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:08:34 -0700
From: Kathi Kearney <kkearney@ttlc.net>
Subject: ASAT: Testing very young gifted children
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <BC83D0F1.C549%kkearney@ttlc.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

It's probably less than wise for *me* to be bringing up a brand-new topic
just as the conference winds down, but I did want to make a few comments
about testing very young gifted children (ages 2 to 4) before we end.

There are only a few really good reasons for testing gifted children this
young, in my opinion. Among them are the following:

1. The child also has a disability. Documenting this may require testing as
part of the process, in order to put early interventions in place. We know
that early intervention for young children with disabilities is very
effective.

2. The testing is required for access to a specialized appropriate

educational program for gifted and highly gifted preschoolers. This is true
for the handful of preschools for gifted children in various parts of the
country, and true for the state of Louisiana, which mandates services to
highly gifted preschoolers (the only state which does so).

3. The child is demonstrating difficult social problems and issues with
peers that seem to stem from his or her very high abilities (e. g.,
complicating the play to the point where most other children in a typical
preschool setting cannot follow it, deliberately starting to hide his or her
abilities or starting to deliberately underachieve in preschool, etc.)
Testing, in this case, can provide guidance as to how asynchronous the
child's development really is, and what types of educational interventions
may be needed at an early age in order to encourage optimal social/emotional
development as well as intellectual development.

4. Early entrance to kindergarten for gifted children is allowed in your

state. In those states, districts, and private schools that do allow early
entrance to kindergarten for gifted children before the age of five, an IQ
test is often required as part of the conditions for early entrance.

The WPPSI-III and the SB5 (and SBLM) all are designed to be used with
preschool children and have appropriate norms for children this age. The
Stanford-Binets can be used with children as young as 2 years, 0 months. But
there are very few good reasons to test a child that young.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:13:52 -0600
From: Donna Langlois White <donna2143@cox.net>
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <001e01c40fc4$16344ef0$dc1c6e44@CPQ50832916483>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

the SB5
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kathi Kearney" <kkearney@ttlc.net>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 9:16 PM
Subject: Re: What about the SB-LM?

> Donna wrote:
>
> > so what does it mean if the verbal reasoning is at the 98- 99% and non
> > verbal is at the 25%? The school psychologist doesn't to think this is a
> > problem but it must mean something.>>>
>
> On which test, Donna?
>
>

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:16:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Julie Knapp <littleredhenschool@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ASAT: thank you
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <20040322041642.15865.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1462831392-1079929002=:11111"

--0-1462831392-1079929002=:11111
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Thanks, Kathi and Bobbie!! :-))

I don't know what we parents would do without kind-hearted souls like yourselves
- who are willing to share your time and expertise to help us understand the
ins and outs of testing our G/T kids. We so appreciate it :-))

Thank you Sally, for another great conference!

-julie

--0-1462831392-1079929002=:11111
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<DIV>Thanks, Kathi and Bobbie!!  :-))  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't know what we parents would do without kind-hearted souls like
yourselves -  who are willing to share your time and expertise to help us
understand the ins and outs of testing our G/T kids.  We so appreciate
it :-))  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you Sally, for another great conference!  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-julie<BR></DIV>
--0-1462831392-1079929002=:11111--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:15:34 -0500
From: "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT Bilingual Assessment
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E685D.3A0911BC@chartermi.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=------------96E2FFFBE5020CCE5B47E796

--------------96E2FFFBE5020CCE5B47E796
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks, Kathi, for your reply. I am already planning to have her do
practice SAT-I and ACT tests within a few weeks. I am anxious to get a
read on where she will score. I've put off doing this until now because
she has lived in the shadow of her big sis who did the talent search and
JHU summer camp programs for several years. I knew that doing any early
SAT-I testing would just highlight the differences between them and make
little sis feel inferior. Will there be any practice tests available for
the new SAT-I before the first administration? Dd is in that first
cohort that will be required to submit scores from the new test.

As to the APD question, will the college only ask for audiology test
results to determine the need for any accommodation? In my original
question, I was assuming that they would want recent ability test
results- in which case, would one instrument be better than another for
a young adult of her background?

Marie H.

Kathi Kearney wrote:

> Marie wrote about her bilingual daughter growing up outside
> the U. S. for part of her schooling:
>
> Then give her a sample SAT-I under standard test conditions
> (time limits, etc.) and see how she does.
>
> As far as the CAPD is concerned, she may still need
> accommodations in college, but you will need to have an
> audiologist do the documentation for that.
>

--------------96E2FFFBE5020CCE5B47E796
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Thanks, Kathi, for your reply. I am already planning to have her do practice
SAT-I and ACT tests within a few weeks. I am anxious to get a read on where
she will score. I've put off doing this until now because she has lived
in the shadow of her big sis who did the talent search and JHU summer camp
programs for several years. I knew that doing any early SAT-I testing would
just highlight the differences between them and make little sis feel inferior.
Will there be any practice tests available for the new SAT-I before the
first administration? Dd is in that first cohort that will be required
to submit scores from the new test.
<p>As to the APD question, will the college only ask for audiology test
results to determine the need for any accommodation? In my original question,
I was assuming that they would want recent ability test results- in which
case, would one instrument be better than another for a young adult of

her background?
<p>Marie H.
<p>Kathi Kearney wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<blockquote>Marie wrote about her bilingual daughter growing up outside
the U. S. for part of her schooling:
<p>Then give her a sample SAT-I under standard test conditions (time limits,
etc.) and see how she does.
<p>As far as the CAPD is concerned, she may still need accommodations in
college, but you will need to have an audiologist do the documentation
for that.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</html>

--------------96E2FFFBE5020CCE5B47E796--

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:24:09 -0700
From: "Barbara J. Gilman" <bobbie@h2net.net>
Subject: Re: Visual LD and testing
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E6A69.4040608@h2net.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Hi Molly,
We do sometimes recommend that visual issues be addressed before testing
as they can affect visual reasoning and visual-motor performance. At
the very least, take any information gleaned about them to the tester.
Re-testing at a future time might be needed to gain a better estimate of
abilities.

Bobbie Gilman

TODD CLENNY wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Thanks so much for this opportunity. Dd 8 is scheduled for
> testing next week, probably WISC-V and WJ-III. She was just
> evaluated two weeks ago for VT and was found to have some
> significant, though not severe disabilities. (tho I wonder if that

> should be adjusted since results are based on age levels) I am
> wondering if we should postpone the testing until the visual
> issues have been addressed or would they in fact be likely to have
> any bearing on her test results.
>
> Molly C.
>

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:23:25 +1100
From: "main.family" <main.family@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: RE: ASAT thank you Kathi and Bobbie
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <AIENIABCBHHEMHDLJPFICEJNCCAA.main.family@optusnet.com.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Many thanks for the time and effort you have put into this, including the
unexpected start. It is a most valuable way of bringing people together who
share a common vision and helping us work together for the gifted community.

Susan
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.637 / Virus Database: 408 - Release Date: 20/03/2004

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:28:30 -0500
From: "Marie H." <jjhavens@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: thank you
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <405E6B63.560D7CD7@chartermi.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; x-mac-creator=4D4F5353; x-mac-type=54455854;
charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

You've said it well, Julie! It has been very interesting to read about
the new tests and the challenges they present. I have one elementary age
child who hasn't had any ability testing- no need as yet- but may within
the year for various reasons. This helps me to sort out some of the
changes.

Marie H.

> Thanks, Kathi and Bobbie!! :-)) I don't know what we parents would do
> without kind-hearted souls like yourselves - who are willing to share
> your time and expertise to help us understand the ins and outs of
> testing our G/T kids. We so appreciate it :-)) Thank you Sally, for
> another great conference! -julie

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:39:25 -0600
From: Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
Subject: Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <01eb01c40fc7$a7f3d560$d007140a@yourxhtr8hvc4p>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Beginning in 2005, the ACT will have an optional writing exam. I understand
that the University of Illinois is going to require
this writing exam. It will be interesting to see if other colleges and
universities will be requiring it as well.

Elizabeth

----- Original Message -----
From: "Donna Langlois White" <donna2143@cox.net>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: Regarding the new SAt Re: ASAT

: my own 2E son will not be taking the SAT. He's going to take the ACT because
: it doesn't have the essay component of the new SAT.
:
: donna
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Carolyn & Mark K." <carolyn@thehoagies.com>
: >
: > I've heard that a shift to the ACT might be a solution. Does this sound
: > reasonable?
:
:

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:42:00 -0600
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
Subject: Re: ASAT: thank you
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <025401c40fc8$040d8fd0$bfaae144@nngco.mehcpipelines.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

This really has been an incredible conference. Thank you, everyone, for
your contributions. Thanks especially to our host experts, Kathi and
Bobbie, and thanks to the various other experts who shared their time and
talents with us this weekend. And, thank you, Sally for hosting and
moderating this conference to make it possible. This must be a labor of
love for you. I truly appreciate it.

Lisa C.

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 22:46:47 -0600
From: Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
Subject: ASAT: Book: Developing Your Child For Success
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <020701c40fc8$af3f3ed0$d007140a@yourxhtr8hvc4p>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

FYI: I recently purchased a copy through the GDC.

http://gifteddevelopment.com

Elizabeth

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lisa C." <ljchoquette@cox.net>
To: <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: ASAT: Does the V/P gap have a meaning?

: FYI - Bookfinder.com has one copy available for $40, if someone here has'nt
: already snatched it up.
: Lisa C.
: >
: > >> The book *Developing Your Child for Success* by Dr. Kenneth
: > >> Lane also describes these issues and offers vision exercises (helpful
: if
: > >> you don't have a behavioral optometrist nearby).
: > >
:
:

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:55:57 -0500
From: Aimee Yermish <ayermish@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: ASAT -- how are the tests changing
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <002b01c40fc9$fc3cc260$6601a8c0@TESLA>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Apologies for jumping in so late -- this weekend conference has not
meshed well with my schedule, I'm afraid. Thank you to the experts who
have so generously shared your knowledge and experience.

I have some thoughts on the whole new/old IQ test thing that I've been
kicking around, and I'd be interested in hearing from those more
knowledgeable as to whether I have any valid points or whether I'm just
blowing smoke.

One quickie: I have heard a number of posters (on this and other lists)
stating that it is unfair for test norms to "push" kids' scores into a
normal curve," and they accuse the test designers of changing the data

to fit the theory (*the* classic scientific no-no). They claim that the
large number of stratospheric scores on other tests proves that the
normal curve hypothesis (the hypothesis that IQ scores should fit a
normal distribution) is incorrect. But here's the problem. How do you
know what those kids' scores should have been? Older IQ tests?
Different IQ tests? Achievement tests? Which ones? And how do we know
that *those* scores were correct? How do you know that it's not that
the modern tests are *more* accurate, and it's the *old* scores that are
wrong? (I know, no one wants to hear this possibility, but hey, my own
IQ non-score (hard, hard, hard ceiling) comes off the SBLM, too, so if
I'm willing to place my PG bragging rights at risk in the name of
scientific rigor, you can, too.) It is not currently (perhaps ever)
possible to get any truly independent information to check the scores
against, so it's formally impossible to distinguish between the

possibilities (whether the scores are incorrect or the normal curve
hypothesis is incorrect or whether both are partially incorrect). It's
a chicken-and-egg problem. Test design is an ongoing scientific
process, and, as we learn more about this strange beast we call
"intelligence" and the best ways to measure it, scores and their
interpretations may, in fact, change. That's a normal part of science.

(I am just as concerned as everyone else about the potential negative
consequences of the lack of understanding of these changes in science on
the part of educators (kicking kids out of gifted programs (or not
admitting them in the first place) because the test scores change out
from under them, etc), and I believe that the test developers need to
recognize that the educators and legislators are not going to follow the
ins and outs of psychometric research, and that most of them (the
educators and legislators) don't even understand what a standard error

of measurement even *is*, much less what the difference is between a
deviation IQ score and a ratio IQ score (the discussion about an SB-V
144 being equivalent to an SB-LM 191). I just noticed that the
definition of gifted currently percolating through the MA legislature
would require IQ test scores to be over *145*, for heaven's sake...)

Now, the more meaty concern. The more modern tests are moving towards a
theory of intelligence that appears to define it in terms of accurately
and efficiently acquiring information through a variety of channels,
processing it, and effecting an appropriate output, and away from
theories of intelligence that are mixed up with actual achievement.
Well, hmmm. This "information processing" model certainly has more face
validity, at least to my eyes, than its predecessors, and although I
have not personally read all of the peer-reviewed literature on which it
is based (yet), the literature does exist and is convincing lots of

people who think skeptically about these things for a living. And this
model suggests that one should design tests as batteries of subtests,
each one loading as narrowly as possible one particular module of that
information-processing machine. These more narrowly tailored tests are
*much* more useful than the older ones for purposes of diagnosis when
something *isn't* going well for a kid (LD and 2E kids), but the change
in theory has other consequences. The lens you choose determines what
you see.

Think about it. Intelligence is multifaceted, sure. But we never *use*
our intelligence in such narrow ways, outside of the
carefully-constructed test situations. Depending upon the nature of the
task, we *choose* an appropriate way to gather the information, to
organize it in our minds, and to create an appropriate output. In fact,
I'd submit that an important part of being gifted, to my knowledge not
yet measured in any of the major IQ tests, is that (often subconscious)

metacognitive ability that lets us choose on the fly which cognitive
abilities are going to be most effective for us in a given situation.
(One could argue that the older tests were measuring this metacognition
because they were allowing it to function, but that was not so much
"measuring" it as it was "not preventing it from working.") People with
different profiles of strengths and weaknesses will choose different
strategies for the same task -- they may all get there just as well, but
there's no reason to assume that they all use the same internal
methodology to get there. (By the way, I respectfully disagree with
those who have said that processing speed is not an important factor of
giftedness. Just because *some* gifted kids have a more deliberative
style and thus should not be penalized for the relative weakness in
processing speed does not mean that *no* gifted kids use their relative
strengths in processing speed to improve their ability to perform

cognitive tasks (to sort through different possibilities, to think ahead
about potential consequences, to come at a problem in multiple ways and
compare the results, etc (as someone who uses rapid processing speed to
excellent effect in handling tasks loading higher-order cognition, not
just to ace the mad minutes, I respectfully request that you let my kind
of intelligence count, too)). Not only that, but it's entirely possible
that people use their various cognitive abilities in a *synergistic*
fashion (again, not measured on current instruments). If it were to be
true that the normal curve hypothesis was flawed, my money would be on
these synergies causing the "bump" at the high end.

So back to the test. Let's say you've got an older intelligence test,
one that's not so narrowly tailored. One subtest loads
information-processing abilities A, B, C, and D. And the kid in front
of you has a weakness in D. But he may well be able to use his

strengths in A, B, and C (and potentially in E, which wasn't really the
way the testers thought kids would answer those questions, but hey, you
use whatever works) to do pretty well on this subtest. You might not
even notice the weakness in D (which is part of why the older tests are
so tricky to use for diagnostic purposes). Now, same kid, on a more
modern test. Now, A, B, C, and D are loaded on four *different*
subtests, and each one is carefully constructed to make it as hard as
possible for students to use alternate strategies to get around a
weakness in the ability being tested. It's going to be much harder for
him to pull out a score on D that looks like his score on A, B, and C,
and summing all those scaled scores may very well end him up with a
lower overall IQ score. Not being globally gifted is going to hurt this
kid much more now than it would have a long time ago. Even small
weaknesses that might not get in the way of a child's academic

excellence (which is, after all, what we're usually using the tests to
predict) may have serious effects on his score.

Furthermore, intelligence theory is currently in a "splitting" phase.
There are more and more different kinds of information-processing
abilities to test in order to allow a diverse range of children to
demonstrate their levels of intelligence. That's good for the kids who
used to fall through the cracks, but bad for the ones who didn't. All
those new subtests have the effect of "diluting" a child's areas of
strength, and making it even more difficult for a child to be globally
gifted enough to demonstrate his giftedness.

And one more thing. The entire process of adding together scaled
subtest scores and then scaling those to get the overall score is making
a very important assumption: that all of the subtests are of equal
importance. Is there any data to suggest that this assumption is valid,
or is this only a situation where, since we don't know what a better

weighting system might look like (or even whether it makes any sense to
create a single weighting system at all), we're just assuming everything
is equal?

I tend to draw sports analogies in education all the time, so here's
another one (courtesy of my husband). If you were going to make a test
to define AQ (that would be athletic quotient), it might include
subtests measuring speed, endurance, cardiovascular fitness, body mass
index, power, balance, core strength, peripheral muscle strength,
whole-body coordination, eye-hand coordination, reaction time, etc. But
we know that not all gifted athletes are gifted in the same way, and
that they don't all have the same constellation of abilities that make
them gifted. Think about Lance Armstrong, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods,
Nadia Comaneci, and other athletes who are incredible in their own
sports but probably wouldn't do all that well in each other's. Even
within a single team sport, different positions may require completely

different underlying abilities (think about the diversity of specialists
on a football team). Would it make any sense to calculate a single AQ
and to say that Lance is a better or worse athlete than Nadia? Would it
make sense to weight all of the underlying abilities equally?

When I think about the AQ analogy, it seems obvious that it would make
more sense to have the overall score calculated in terms of, say, one's
top N scores (where N is some number less than the total number of
subtests), and that if one wished to predict success in different
sports, different weightings of the subtests would be appropriate. We
already know that in a case where there is significant scatter between
clusters on an IQ test, the higher clusters are supposed to be
considered as better indicators of what the true IQ probably is
(although many practicioners and almost all educational administrators
do not follow this practice). I would hope that future editions of

these tests (and their associated scoring software) would take this idea
into consideration...

Just some random musings...

-- Aimee Yermish
da Vinci Learning Center
aimee@davincilearning.org

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 23:07:00 -0600
From: Weber <weber81@ineffingham.com>
Subject: Re: impact of SI, Vision on WISC
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <022f01c40fcb$82b2cc30$d007140a@yourxhtr8hvc4p>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elan Long" <elong@springsmart.com>
To: "OURGIFTED-L (E-mail)" <OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 2:21 PM
Subject: impact of SI, Vision on WISC

: I am trying to figure out whether and how to get a full or more holistic
: evaluation done of my DS, 10. We recently (last fall) discovered that he
: had a vision (convergence and tracking) problem and sensory integration
: dysfunction (low sensory). He has been doing OT and vision therapy with
: remarkable results.
:
: Is there a way to assess these kids that more acccurately reflects both the
: strengths and weaknesses? :

FWIW:

The NEPSY (Korkman, Kirk, and Kemp, 1998) is a neuropsychological instrument
used to assess children with developmental disabilities
and to develop effective intervention strategies. It provides comprehensive
assessment over five functional domains:
Attention/Executive Functions, Language, Sensorimotor Functions, Visuospatial
Processing, and Memory and Learning. It consists of
27 subtests designed specifically for children ages 3-12.

Our son has visual issues and SID as well and the NEPSY provided useful data
beyond the WISC and WIAT scores.

Elizabeth

Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:23:12 -0500 (EST)
From: RDlouruf@cs.com
Subject: Re: ASAT SB5
To: OURGIFTED-L@neiu.edu
Message-id: <c4.80ea888.2d8fd240@cs.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary=part1_c4.80ea888.2d8fd240_boundary

--part1_c4.80ea888.2d8fd240_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kathi asked me to "chime in" more but it is hers and Bobbie's conference and
they have done an absolutely great job. I read every last post and was so
impressed with all the questions, answers, and opinions. I do love the SB5
myself and I ranted and raved at all the people who made it when it first came
out
and I hated the scores. Now I understand them, and all of my reports for
parents simply "cut to the chase." This is what the score means. Period.
I agree with Tracy. We need a new categorization method that takes all
the different scores into account. Many of us are working on it. We will
have information that will help with interpretation out within the year. It
really does take that long. Sorry. We need to learn what it is we learn from the
results. I charged my clients less during this period:-) The most important
thing we have to do is make sure the schools know that mixed-ability grouping is
harmful. Both Bobbie and Kathi covered all sorts of issues regarding
curriculum compacting and ways to informally assess what different children are
ready
for. This is good stuff. Thanks to all of you for your thoughts and ideas.
Deborah Ruf

Deborah L. Ruf, PhD
Educational Options
4500 Heathbrooke Circle
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Educational Options

--part1_c4.80ea888.2d8fd240_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR=3D"#008080" SIZE=3D2 P=
TSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Tahoma" LANG=3D"0">Kathi asked me to=
"chime in" more but it is hers and Bobbie's conference and they have done a=
n absolutely great job.  I read every last post and was so impressed wi=
th all the questions, answers, and opinions.  I do love the SB5 myself=20=
and I ranted and raved at all the people who made it when it first came out=20=
and I hated the scores. Now I understand them, and all of my reports for par=
ents simply "cut to the chase." This is what the score means. Period.<BR>
       I agree with Tracy. We need a new categ=
orization method that takes all the different scores into account.  Man=
y of us are working on it.  We will have information that will help wit=
h interpretation out within the year.  It really does take that long. S=
orry. We need to learn what it is we learn from the results. I charged my cl=
ients less during this period:-) The most important thing we have to do is m=

ake sure the schools know that mixed-ability grouping is harmful. Both Bobbi=
e and Kathi covered all sorts of issues regarding curriculum compacting and=20=
ways to informally assess what different children are ready for.  This=20=
is good stuff.  Thanks to all of you for your thoughts and ideas.<BR>
Deborah Ruf <BR>
<BR>
<B><I>Deborah L. Ruf, PhD<BR>
Educational Options<BR>
4500 Heathbrooke Circle<BR>
Golden Valley, MN 55422<BR>
<A HREF=3D"www.educationaloptions.com">Educa