A variety of ways in which classification labels can be presented in reports by John Willis (Word document)
Sample Explanations of Classification Labels for Test Scores
John Willis has also authored a discussion of Publisher classification systems.
There is no known way to present test results without confusing someone. Even if you gave only a WISC-V and used only David Wechsler’s venerable classification scheme (with “Extremely Low” now substituted for “Intellectually Deficient” [WISC-III], “Mentally Deficient” [WISC-R] and “Mental Defective” [WISC]; “Low” for “Low Average” or “Dull Normal”; “Very Low” and “Very High” substituted for “Borderline” and “Superior”; and “Extremely High” for “Very Superior”) there is no classification scheme given in the Wechsler manuals for scaled scores. If “Average” is the asymmetrical 90 – 109, then a scaled score of 12, which is statistically equivalent to a standard score of 110, would presumably be “High Average,” even though 8 (equivalent to 90) would be “Average.”
If we, as careful and thorough evaluators, use more than one test, we are doomed to a Tower of Babel. . . .
For the complete discussion, see:
Publishers’ Classification Schemes for Test Scores
For a handy dandy table of descriptors also see the Useful tables for Writing Up Cognitive Assessment Results by Catherine Fiorello.