COGNITIVE PROFILES WITH A LOW FSIQ: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF WISC-IV RESULTS IN CHILDREN WITH SLD AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PEDAGOGICAL SUPPORT

Abstract

This article is based on a comparative analysis of two WISC-IV protocols of children with special educational needs (SEN) whose Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) scores are similar, yet whose cognitive functioning profiles – across indices (VCI, PRI, WMI, PSI) and subtests-differ significantly. The study aims to demonstrate that a "similar IQ" does not equate to "similar capabilities"; therefore, conclusions by Inclusive Resource Centers (IRCs) and support plans must be built upon profile interpretation and the identification of resources and learning barriers rather than a generalized figure.

The analysis compares subtest patterns, intra-profile discrepancies, and their functional implications for learning: processing speed, graphomotor limitations, the ability to retain and manipulate sequences, and characteristics of verbal abstraction and fluid reasoning. It illustrates how the same category of "low FSIQ" can mask distinct mechanisms of difficulty and, consequently, require different support strategies.

The paper proposes an algorithm for translating results into practical solutions: selection of adaptations and modifications, adjustments to instruction formats and response modes, organization of the learning environment. Furthermore, emphasis is placed on the need for dynamic assessment of changes in a child’s cognitive profile during the learning process, which enables timely adjustments to be made to the educational pathway, support measures and methods in line with current needs and developmental potential. Particular attention is paid to interdisciplinary collaboration among specialists in the process of supporting the child.

Furthermore, educational support within the institution is ensured through team collaboration and the consultative involvement of IRC specialists. The practical value of the work lies in the "from subtest to action" logic: utilizing strengths as instructional scaffolds and addressing vulnerable areas as a basis for removing barriers.