Woodcock-Johnson

There is a “cognitive potential” test battery and an “achievement test” battery. There’s a good correlation between the cognitive potential test and WISC scores; the achievement is much, much better than teh WRAT which is basically a screening test.

I have a chart with me that I made up of ds’ scores, on which I made note of the battery tests/battery clusters. If they’re not the same on both tests, maybe you can determine by this? Here’s the list:

letter-word idenfication
passage comprehension
calculation
applied problems
dictation
writing samples
science
social studies
humanities
broad reading
broad math
broad written language
broad knowledge

Thanks!

the achievement battery. The standard battery in fact. There are more tests in this section- called the supplemental battery. So this is the performance section.
Robin

to find out it’s the performance battery. On the WRAT his standard scores were only 89-82, but on the W-J they ranged from 79-116. That’s certainly closer to the WISC scores of 85-125!

However, in order to compare apples to apples, the scores above are from 3/96, as that is the last time the school did the WISC with other testing were at the same time. As I’m learning how to read these reports, I can hardly wait to see the W-J scores this time, because I have found that between the 3/96 testing, where his scores ranged from 79-116, to the W-J testing in 4/98 (88-109), his scores in some areas did improve considerably (by 29 and 23 points in two tests - ignoring the clusters), however, there are 3 test in which his scores regressed by 7, 10, and 11 points, and most distressing was a regression of 9 points in Broad Knowledge! What can’t wait to do is get the current testing’s scores (I’ve requested to receive a copy in advance of the Team meeting), to compare progression/regression with each of these scores.

Any thoughts?

What about progression/regression showing up on WISC scores? I’m going to start a new thread with that question.

That is not necessarily a regression- it is more like a slowing of progress. And that isn’t a bad thing is all his energy has been focused elsewhere. You worry when the range changes a little more- but even then it would have to be a bigger change than 9 points to be considered a problem I think. Here are the generally recognized ranges of standard scores and percentile ranks so you can have an idea of how this works.

Standard Score Percentile
131 and above Very Superior 98-99.9
121 - 130 Superior 92-97
111- 120 High Average 76-91
90- 110 Average 25-75
80-89 Low Average 9-24
70-79 Borderline/Low 3-8
69 and below Very low 0.1-2

People have different words that they use- but this is the language I was taught. Hopefully this will print out the way I typed it:)

15 points is generally considered a significant variation- and the clusters are the important parts- the individual tests are less accurate diagnostically. This makes sense if you really think about it- this is so important and I would never want decisions of this magnitiude about my child made on the basis of one subtest. The law is written to address clusters so that you can’t do that. Variation between subtests in a cluster is important too- the wider the spread- and keep that fifteen points in your head here- the closer you need to look at why it happened (or the diagnostician does-they have to explain it). That will be different for every child.

Robin

Standard Score Percentile
131 and above Very Superior 98-99.9
121 - 130 Superior 92-97
111- 120 High Average 76-91
90- 110 Average 25-75
80-89 Low Average 9-24
70-79 Borderline/Low 3-8
69 and below Very low 0.1-2

Oh well- envision three columns and hopefully it will make sense.

Thanks - I got all the info - strangely enough, I had checked off the “e-mail replies” box, and on my e-mail it came out perfectly formatted.

You think I should only be really concerned if there is more than a 9 point loss in scores, huh? I see what you mean about how the 15 points can be a big difference. I’ll be more specific, and then you can tell me if if you still think I shouldn’t make it an issue:

subtest | 4/98 | 3/96| point loss
Science 109 116 7
Social Studies 100 110 10
Humanities 98 109 11
Broad Knowledge 103 112 9

On the other hand, in most of the clusters he gained:

Broad… | 4/98 | 3/96| point gain (loss)
Reading 98 83 15
Mathematics 105 79 26
Written Language 93 88 5
Knowledge 103 112 (9)

Thanks for helping me though this!

I still wouldn’t worry- his cluster score is solidly average for his age and grade and the difference may only reflect the general curriculum he has been exposed to. It is equally possible that his score from 3 years ago was higher because of a fluke in his repsonses- some little guys just know a lot from being read to and watching Educational Television. These are/were actually great results with lots of growth in the important areas. Celebration stuff. Besides- this was 3 years ago? Hope the new results are as positive.

Robin

I still wouldn’t worry- his cluster score is solidly average for his age and grade and the difference may only reflect the general curriculum he has been exposed to. It is equally possible that his score from 3 years ago was higher because of a fluke in his repsonses- some little guys just know a lot from being read to and watching Educational Television. These are/were actually great results with lots of growth in the important areas. Celebration stuff. Besides- this was 3 years ago? Hope the new results are as positive.

Robin