Practice Test Questions for Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children® IV (WISC®-IV Test)
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV test), is an IQ test that is administered to children ages 6 and up. No writing or reading ability is needed of the child that is taking the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Once it has been completed, the WISC test produces an IQ score.
Like other IQ Tests, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children was designed to assess the child’s skills and abilities, rather than test for grade-level subject knowledge. The WISC-IV test is administered by a trained psychologist in a one-on-one setting with the child. The time it takes to complete the test varies because a good test proctor will usually establish a rapport with the child before they start asking questions from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Depending on the age of the child taking the WISC exam, it’s common for the test to take 2-3 hours and in some cases it takes more than one session.
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – WISC-IV test contains 16 subsets within the exam. Within each of these subtests the questions get more and more difficult as the child progresses through the sections. The format of the questions on the Wechsler Intelligence test are often subject to change. A child’s score is determined by how far they get within each subtest before getting three in a row wrong. Psychologists administering the test take the scores from the individual subtests and combine them to get the child’s IQ.
The 16 subtests of the the Wechsler Test:
- Block Design
- Digit Span
- Picture Concepts
- Letter-Number Sequencing
- Matrix Reasoning
- Symbol Search
- Picture Completion
- Word Reasoning
- Perceptual Reasoning Index
TestingMom.com provides the concepts covered Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children and WISC test prep ideas you can use with your child.
Here are some practice questions for the WISC-IV test to ask your little one!
1. Do you see these 4 boxes? In the top row the pictures go together in a certain way. Now look at the bottom row. Do you see the empty box? Which of the 4 pictures on the side goes with the picture in the bottom box the same way the 2 pictures in the top row go together?
2. Three couples go out to lunch. They all ordered the same thing. Their total bill is $54.96. They planned to split it equally, but one couple owed one of the other couples lunch. How much did the couple that owed the other couple pay?
3. Do you see these 4 boxes? In the top row the pictures go together in a certain way. Now look at the bottom row. Do you see the empty box? Which of the 4 pictures on the side goes with the picture in the bottom box the same way the 2 pictures in the top row go together?
Answers: 1) 3rd picture over the bubble; 2) $36.64; 3) 4th picture over the bubble
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children® — Fourth Edition (WISC®-IV) is a registered trademark of Pearson Education, Inc or its affiliate(s), or their licensors. TestingMom.com is not affiliated with nor related to Pearson Education, Inc or its affiliates (“Pearson”). Pearson does not sponsor or endorse any TestingMom.com product, nor have TestingMom.com products or services been reviewed, certified, or approved by Pearson. Trademarks referring to specific test providers are used by TestingMom.com for nominative purposes only and such trademarks are solely the property of their respective owners.
25 Responses to “Practice Test Questions for Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children® IV (WISC®-IV Test)”
In the 1st question the picture on the right bottom is hard to define. Is that a pile of sweaters or a wallet?, and the correct answer is that a trunk of a coffin? Based on the answer I am to assume it is a pile of sweaters and a trunk, but I thought the sweaters was a wallet, so if I had been taking this test, (I am an adult) I would have chosen the purse. I really hope that the real test does not have difficult pictures to define, because in that case the test score may be inadequate, because of the difficult visible definition of the items. The milk and refrigerator was a more obvious sample. Also I was informed that this test averages about 5-6 hours of time for a child, so how can that big of a test be sampled with only 3 questions?
I apologize for adding to my message but most children have never used or seen a glass bottle of milk in the USA, and trunks are not all that commonly used anymore too. For the example of a record and a record player, paper and a typewriter these items are obsolete in a child’s mind. I also hope that these picture questions have been updated to use more current items that children of this time period understand.
would you send me the subtest, please?
Best I can tell on the newly released IPad Air with retina display, the fuzzy 4th block in question #1 appears to be a stack of pants or jeans. If the bottle of milk is stored in the refrigerator, would not the pants be stored in the trunk? More so, milk is removed from the refrigerator, pants are removed from the trunk. How does the purse factor in? Just curious?
Oh, i also picked the purse because i thought the sweaters were money. ( Using a macbook) And I thought the trunk was a pirate treasure chest. So……
And I picked the mailbox because I thought that’s a pile of mail!
I thought so called Intelligence tests were a thing of the past Two hours testing is a nightmare for a child. Responses to it from an 8yr old: I am not answering any more questions in case I get into trouble. Shame on the psychologists and schools for still using such out of date assessment strategies.
I agree with Autumn, as I had the same issue, caused by a blurry indeterminate picture. However, a quick interrogation of the questions shows that it is just a picture and not an interactive piece and therefore the resolution problem will not be presented to the kids. The picture will be clear, and they can clearly associate the clothes with a chest.
Autumn second question about obsolete items also carries some merit. However, you can be surprised at how much the children may know.
This is so crazy. I can’t believe these are the questions they give kids and then they are diagnosed with learning disabilities? So not fair. I feel bad for my students. I will never underestimate a child ever again. Just because they can’t perform on these stupid tests doesn’t mean they definitely are “learning disabled” or have a “speech /language impairment”
As a person who is trained to give the WISC and many other intelligence tests, I can guarantee that these Re not questions from the WISC,…. At all.
Hi Robert – you are correct. None of the materials on our web site are from the actual test. We would never, ever post actual questions from a test plus we’ve never seen the actual test. Our materials on Testing Mom provide guidance for the child to develop the underlying skills needed to be successful on tests like the WISC and WPPSI not to just memorize questions to repeat back on the test. That’s not what our program is about. Thanks for your comment!
Not only arn’t these sample items on the WISC, but they are poor substitutes. In any event, coaching a child for a test like this is what invalidates results because the results are premised on novelty. I would also say, as one who administers these tests, that they typically take approximately one hour, not two or three (only ten of the sixteen subtests are required). Bright children who answer more questions than is typical for their age may take twenty or thirty minutes longer. As for comments in this thread about what constitutes assessing for disability, suffice it to say that many factors go into this complex process, including extensive training. Results of the WISC, or an assessment like it are just one piece.
Forgive me for my blunt response, but this webpage is completely inappropriate. It is against several copyright and other federal regulations to post questions from this or any other type of assessments. Although it is good that you did not utilize real questions from the test, the ones you do provide are very poor representations of the actual subtests administered. These examples are possibly representative of one or two of the subtests, although it’s impossible to be sure without any type of functional or meta-analysis.
The WISC is a test that, as Norm mentioned, should not be practiced. This could lead to test findings based on practice, rather than on the student’s actual cognitive ability. We call these practice effects, and it is for this reason that the WISC and similar assessments are not given more than once a year. At the extreme end of folly, the information provided on this webpage could encourage a parent to coach their child on the test which in turn may result in them making higher scores that are not representative of their true functioning. This could subsequently lead to the student’s ineligibility for social or special education services. Thus, although the information on this page is intended to help parents and children , it is antithetical to that purpose.
If I were working with a child and knew that he or she had practiced portions of an assessment prior to my evaluation, I would use a different test. Or, I would note this in the psychological report of the results. At any rate, results from student who has practiced any subtlest on any cognitive assessment should be interpreted with extreme caution. That said, I highly encourage you to edit this webpage to remove the portion concerning the practice questions.
Thank you for your opinion and contributing to the ongoing war on moms and dads. Across the country, issues that were seemingly settled years ago are becoming fresh fodder for debate such as these comments, with moms and dads under attack from multiple fronts from people of your same opinion. Sending a child into the testing room prepared shouldn’t be a controversial subject. What parent wouldn’t want their child to feel comfortable and confident when facing one of the most important tests of their young lives?
Thanks to some out there who think that giving a child the tools they need to succeed is among the most offensive things a parent can do. Shame on us parents who only want the best for our children! We’re used to hearing from self-proclaimed psychology experts all the time, who preach that preparing your child for a test that may well determine their educational future “invalidates” the test and renders the results null and void. Never mind the fact that passing the test increases a child’s chances of getting into a competitive Gifted and Talented program and, later on, a top college – or the fact that making it into one of these coveted programs will open up career opportunities that your child might otherwise have never had. We’re making a stand and saying “NO” to these individuals waging the war on parents, where the only thing that matters is the “validity” of “their” test – which apparently requires you to send your child in blind, and leave their entire future up to chance. The foot soldiers may be loud and aggressive in their war on parents and taking choice away, but in our opinion they are wrong – and on the wrong side of history.
Thanks for your request for us to remove the questions but request is denied as we stand for moms and dads and their freedom of choice!
Your reasoning is highly flawed in many ways. Coaching a child who is need of services prior to an assessment does not help them in any way, shape, or form. To argue against this is to argue against almost 100 years of research on cognitive assessment and academic achievement published by people much smarter than you and I. If a student has practiced a test, how can we accurately understand their true functioning or strengths and weaknesses? How can we provide appropriate interventions when we can’t get a true read on their abilities? Considering this, your rational makes no sense.
Coaching is not only detrimental to children in need of services. Have you ever thought of what would happen if student got coached, scored higher, and subsequently was admitted into a gifted program that he or she is not cognitively equipped for? Gifted programs instruct at a faster pace and are more in depth in content. Thus, if a child is not cognitively able to handle this pace and depth of instruction they will suffer academically and miss out on important lessons that they would have easily grasped in a regular education setting.
For the record, the WISC does not have a “passing” score. The scores are based on sophisticated statistics and normative data that takes years to gather. The average score is 100 and 85-115 are within normal limits. Also, the scores are highly confidential and protected. If a parent does not want their child’s scores to be disclosed (for fear of the loss of gifted instruction opportunities, scholarships, what have you) they have the ability and every right to do so. Do doctors not protect medical records? If so, how can you reasonably think that most psychologists would not?
Yes, a parent should make every effort to make sure their child is calm and confident prior to any testing. However, if you had done research on this topic you would know that psychologists are trained to discontinue an assessment if the student is not feeling comfortable as this too could invalidate the results. As with avoiding practice effects, we make sure that a student is comfortable and focused during the assessment in order to REDUCE chance outcomes. Have you ever considered that perhaps psychologists are so concerned with validity because it’s important? Again, this is evidence of flawed reasoning; I implore you to read more on this topic and consider editing this page.
Is it really reasonable to consider the WISC “the most important test” of a child’s life. Is it really reasonable to consider that a student “entire future” is based on this one test? There are countless other factors that come into play, including PARENTS to a significant degree. If a parent is really concerned with their students functioning, part of their energy needs to be focused on improving their parenting skills. That is much more important than coaching them for a test that they should not be coached on especially considering, as I have mentioned, that such coaching may actually bar a student from services they may need or place them into a program that they are not equipped to handle.
Your passive notion that school psychologists are “foot soldiers” in a war against parents is highly offensive. My colleagues and I make countless sacrifices for the families we serve. Do you know any school psychologists personally? If not, please sit down and speak with one. Afterwards, you should be able to edit this page with a more realistic and learned view of psychological assessment. We are trained to look out for whats best for children. I can assure you, coaching a student through a standardized intelligence test beforehand is NOT what’s best.
In the future, please consider studying any topic you write about before posting. Although you believe that you are helping children, placing parents/child versus school/psychologist etc., achieves the opposite outcome. Children grow best when parents, schools, and the community all collaborate to work towards progress. Your divisive writings and comments appear to be based on blind idealism, and are not conducive to positive growth in children. Lastly, I may be wrong but it sounds like some of your feelings about this topic are personal and this is never a good stance to take when advising others.
As stated before, this is a war on moms and dads and please stop trying to take away a parent’s choice on such a personal matter. We cannot condone or support these bully type comments. We are only showing these comments by these people who want to take away a person’s right to choose so parents can know the tactics that are being used to shut them down. It’s downright shameful.
Our comments aren’t based on blind idealism, but rather the reality of the situation that parents care about their child’s educational success. Please stop casting stones against good parents who are just trying to do the right thing and make the best decision for their particular situation.
Our program doesn’t “coach” kids but rather introduces the child to skills that will last a lifetime – not just for a 2 hours test given by a complete stranger (whom by the way makes over $300 to administer the test). That’s what we call offensive. We suggest you study the greatest love a mom or dad can have – the love for their own child. You’re making blanket statements about parents with no supporting data so please refrain from such comments.
We get all of our information from publicly available information and none of our practice materials are from the actual test. We have never seen the test and all of our artwork is originally created. We do not violate any copyright or federal laws so please verify your statements before posting false statements.
Some of your points against me were directly addressed by my previous commentary. For your reference, I have posted them below:
“It is against several copyright and other federal regulations to post questions from this or any other type of assessments. Although it is good that you did not utilize real questions from the test, the ones you do provide are very poor representations of the actual subtests administered. These examples are possibly representative of one or two of the subtests, although it’s impossible to be sure without any type of functional or meta-analysis”
“If a parent is really concerned with their students functioning, part of their energy needs to be focused on improving their parenting skills. That is much more important than coaching them for a test that they should not be coached on especially considering, as I have mentioned, that such coaching may actually bar a student from services they may need or place them into a program that they are not equipped to handle.”
“My colleagues and I make countless sacrifices for the families we serve…We are trained to look out for whats best for children. I can assure you, coaching a student through a standardized intelligence test beforehand is NOT what’s best.”
“Although you believe that you are helping children, placing parents/child versus school/psychologist etc., achieves the opposite outcome. Children grow best when parents, schools, and the community all collaborate to work towards progress.”
Thanks for your point of view. We appreciate the open dialog but in our opinion this goes back to parents not being given the right to choose what’s best for them and their child. The war on moms and dads continues with attitudes such as this. If these questions are poor representations then why such a ruckus about them? Based upon that statement if a child sees these questions then they will for sure never have seen anything similar to what’s on the actual test. Our program isn’t about “coaching” – it’s about skill building. There’s a big difference. Yes, we do help countless children much more so than the people who only meet the child for 1 time to take a 2 hour test. By the way, how much do you charge to administer the test?
I’m glad you make sacrifices as do parents of young children who only want the best for their child.
I agree; the war on moms and dads will continue with the attitudes presented and endorsed by TestingMom.com.
Your question about my fees reflects the ignorance amassed throughout this website; you are grouping together private practice psychologists with everyone else who is qualified to administer this test. That said, I do not charge anything to administer psychological assessments. I am employed in an education setting and receive a teacher’s salary. FYI- most people who are qualified to administer these assessments do not make anywhere near the kind of money that you think they make. This is more evidence of the highly flawed reasoning that is being used to justify some of your perspectives.
The beat goes on…..these are the types of attitudes and tactics used by some to shut down parents who only want the best for their children. Parents can come up with their own conclusions based upon these comments and decide what’s best for their child and their situation. We’re here to help parents who want to help their kids not to those that only want to consider the “validity” of “their” sacred test. As you (MV) stated before: “Although it is good that you did not utilize real questions from the test, the ones you do provide are very poor representations of the actual subtests administered.” If this is the case then why all the bullying about our skill building materials? You, yourself, state that our practice materials are nothing like the real test. As we stated before, we have never seen the real test and only use publicly available information for our skill building materials.
I’m shocked by these comments by these so-called psychologist. Thanks Testing Mom for sticking up to them (and defending us moms!) and not backing down. I don’t understand why these people are getting so bent out of shape and why don’t they just go away if they don’t like this web site. My other mom-friends all talk about how we love your program and it’s great for everything you get for the price. Reading such comments by these so-called professionals really makes me wonder what they are trying to hide from parents. Seems really suspicious to me.
i agree; this seems very suspicious to me too. what are these “psycho”logists trying to hide from parents and go in such rabid dog attack mode against the testingmom program. and why won’t these “psycho”logist post their full names to these posts if they are so concerned about the children. they really need to chill out and if they are so involved with children why do they have so much time to post on here. i thought testingmoms war on parents was a bit dramatic but now i’m thinking there might be something to it after reading these comments.
I think that what the psychologist are trying to explain is that if your child is gifted, he/she might benefit from a gifted program, but if they are not truly gifted (as evidenced by the ability to figure things out on their own, without being “coached” beforehand) then they likely will not benefit from a gifted program, and could even be harmed. Gifted children would not need to learn skills behind an IQ test. IQ tests are designed to measure a person’s thinking processes, not skills. That is why the tests are supposed to be given without prior exposure to the same or similar questions- to see how the person can reason through novel situations. If they can reason through a question better than 96% of the population who similarly has not had prior exposure to the same or similar questions, then that child is considered gifted. You can’t determine giftedness if you aren’t comparing apples to apples.
Thanks for your comments and not lashing out at our program like the others who are anti-helping their child succeed. We respect your opinion but in the end it’s just that, opinion.