Seven of the children in the Maine group who had been tested on the WISC, WISC-R, WPPSI, or K-ABC intelligence tests scored between 139 and 155, with only two scoring above 145. They were then given the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale [Form L-M].On this test, these same children scored between 169+ and 194. One child’s score showed a discrepancy of more than 50 points between the K-ABC and the Stanford-Binet (143 as opposed to 194); another had a similar discrepancy between the WISC (139) and the Stanford-Binet L-M (187+). In the Colorado group, similar discrepancies were found for the six children who had been tested on both the WISC-R and the Stanford-Binet L-M. Only one child in the 170+ range scored above 150 on the WISC-R, and another scored as low as 135.Since the time that article was released, an additional child has been found who scored 182 on the Stanford-Binet (Form L-M) and 127 on the Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition. Another scored 137 on the WISC-R, and a year later tested 229+ on the Stanford-Binet (Form L-M), at the age of nine missing only two items on the entire test! This “test artifact” amounts to blatant discrimination against the highly gifted, and has major implications for the location of gifted students, and for their placement in programs. The situation is shocking, but no one appears to be paying attention because the highly gifted are not of central interest to test constructors. In contrast, the gifted and highly gifted were definitely important to Lewis Terman, who constructed the original Stanford-Binet. Among other things, Terman planned to use the test to find potential “geniuses,” so he had an investment in creating a difficult enough examination with a high enough ceiling to permit their discovery.
Don’t throw away the old binet
And certainly stop wasting money on the mentally cripple and the terminally average.. Focus efforts- and funding on those AT LEAST four standard deviations above the mean on the L-M.
Public schools need a better sieve for highly gifted students… for anyone left who values the public good.
.
