The CogAT is three batteries, and the Nonverbal one is where most children meet something they have never seen before: figure matrices, figure classification, paper folding. You cannot revise facts for those, which is exactly why sitting a few beats reading about them. Five are below, no account needed.
No account needed for these. They come from the same engine as our full practice tests.
The most widely used gifted screener in US schools, and the only common one with a quantitative battery.
Verbal analogies, sentence completion and verbal classification. Depends on reading, so it is the battery most affected by a child still learning English.
Number analogies, number puzzles and number series. Reasoning about quantity rather than arithmetic taught in class.
Figure matrices, figure classification and paper folding. No words and no numbers at all.
A 2x2 or 3x3 grid with one cell empty. The rule runs one way across and another way down, and both have to hold.
Three figures share something. Find the fourth that shares it too, which means working out what "it" is first.
Paper is folded, a hole is punched, and the child pictures it unfolded. Every fold doubles the holes and mirrors their positions.
From the quantitative battery: a sequence with a rule to find and continue.
Also quantitative: a number sentence with a missing piece, solved by reasoning rather than by a taught method.
The CogAT does not report a raw mark. It converts performance to a Standard Age Score against children of the same age in months, then to percentile ranks and a stanine, and finally to an Ability Profile that describes the shape of the result rather than its height.
| Standard Age Score (SAS) | mean 100 | An SAS of 100 with a percentile rank of 50 is exactly age-typical. |
|---|---|---|
| Commonly cited gifted range | 95th percentile and above | Often quoted as roughly SAS 130 or a stanine of 8 to 9. |
| Typical district thresholds | 92nd to 97th percentile | Highly selective programmes are often reported at the 98th or 99th. |
| Batteries reported | Verbal, Quantitative, Nonverbal, plus a composite | Some districts weight the quantitative battery more heavily for maths placement. |
| Ability Profile | a number plus a letter, e.g. 6A | The number is the median stanine; the letter describes whether the batteries were even (A) or uneven. |
None of those bands is a national rule. Districts set their own cutoff, revisit it, and often read the CogAT alongside teacher ratings, portfolio work or a second test. Ask your district for this year's criteria rather than trusting any number on a prep site, including this one.
Riverside Insights has listed both Form 7 and Form 8 for recent school years. Form 8 was built as an equivalent to Form 7 and keeps the same three reasoning domains, so preparation does not change between them.
The CogAT Screening Form uses only the analogies portion of each battery and returns a composite, not three separate battery scores. If your school mentions screening, the child may sit the full test later.
CogAT levels are keyed to age, which is why two children in the same class can sit different levels and why scores are age-normed to the month.
Published by Riverside Insights. We are not affiliated with them, and these practice questions are our own.
The Cognitive Abilities Test, published by Riverside Insights, measures reasoning rather than taught content. It runs from kindergarten through grade 12 and is the most widely used screener for gifted and talented programmes in US schools. It has three batteries, Verbal, Quantitative and Nonverbal, and many districts look at the composite of all three.
Figure matrices, figure classification and paper folding. All three are picture puzzles with no words and no arithmetic, which is the point: the battery is designed to measure reasoning without depending on reading level or English fluency.
You cannot revise facts for it, but familiarity matters more than most parents expect. A child who has never seen a paper folding item spends their first minutes working out what is even being asked; a child who has seen a few starts solving immediately. That gap is worth closing. The underlying reasoning develops over years, not over a weekend.
There is no national cutoff. The commonly cited gifted range is the 95th percentile and above, often quoted as around SAS 130 or a stanine of 8 to 9, and many programmes sit somewhere between the 92nd and 97th percentile. Highly selective programmes are frequently reported at the 98th or 99th. Your district sets the actual number and can change it, so ask them.
A profile like 6A or 5B describes the shape of a result, not just its height. The number is the median stanine across the batteries and the letter says whether the three were roughly even, or whether one stood out or lagged. Two children with the same composite can have very different profiles, and that difference is usually more useful to a teacher than the composite itself.
Form 8 was introduced as an equivalent version of Form 7 and keeps the same three reasoning domains, so nothing about how a child prepares changes between them. Riverside Insights has listed both for recent school years. Which form a school administers is a scheduling decision, not a difficulty one.
A shorter version that uses only the analogies portion of each battery and reports a single composite rather than three battery scores. Districts use it to decide who sits the full test. If your child has taken a screening form, a full CogAT may still be ahead of them.
Scores are normed against other children of the same age in months, not against the child's class. That matters most for the youngest and oldest children in a year group: an autumn-born child is compared with children of the same age, not with classmates who may be nearly a year older.
It varies by level and by whether all three batteries are given. Schools typically spread the batteries across sessions rather than running them back to back, and younger levels are read aloud by the teacher. Your school can tell you which batteries and which sessions are scheduled.
Worth knowing it exists, because it is the battery parents most often overlook. Number series and number puzzles reward reasoning about quantity rather than arithmetic speed, and some districts weight quantitative scores more heavily when placing children into accelerated maths.
No. It measures reasoning in three domains and reports ability relative to age peers, but it is a group-administered school ability test, not an individually administered IQ assessment. Districts that need a full cognitive assessment use a different instrument administered by a psychologist.
That is exactly what the Ability Profile is for. An uneven profile is common and is not a problem in itself: it says the child reasons more readily in one domain than another. It is worth discussing with the teacher, because it often explains classroom patterns that a single composite score hides.
A timed test the length of the real thing, scored, with every wrong answer explained.
Create an account