Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:40 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1239
Just stumbled across one of my previous posts which I thought was worth sharing.

VZA shared some interesting stats a while back and according to these a child scoring a raw score of 85% in 2008 Warwickshire exam was ranked 1st. So it's a myth many parents carry that a child has to score nearly 90% raw score to get into one of the KE schools.


"The actual high scores achieved are not often reported, but here are two of them:
QM Boys 2009 exam- raw score of 186 out of 227 (82%, ranked 4th) corresponding to standardised score of 131.
South War. 2008 exam- raw score of 85%, ranked 1st with standardised score of 142.

For CEM test a child needs to achieve a raw score of 60 to 65% or more to obtain a grammar school place. 55 to 60% will possibly achieve the waiting list and score of 80% or more will be the top or near the top. However, 60 to 65% in the CEM test does not compare to the scores children achieve at home or in a mock exam based on GL assessments practice papers or practice papers of similar difficulties."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
all makes sense

"However, 60 to 65% in the CEM test does not compare to the scores children achieve at home or in a mock exam based on GL assessments practice papers or practice papers of similar difficulties."

could you add any more logic to this. There must be some correlation between your bond scores and your ability to achieve a raw score on CEM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:14 am
Posts: 1186
I remember vza saying to get a sd score of 240 you need around a 68% raw score.
I think this year it'll be more like 73%.
A tall ask if you ask me. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1239
Petitpois wrote:
all makes sense

"However, 60 to 65% in the CEM test does not compare to the scores children achieve at home or in a mock exam based on GL assessments practice papers or practice papers of similar difficulties."

could you add any more logic to this. There must be some correlation between your bond scores and your ability to achieve a raw score on CEM


That's a difficult one to answer PP, but I hope this has lifted your mood and you are looking forward to the rank order for your DC :D

I can only give you figures based on our experience. Our eldest was consistently achieving 90%+ on bond and the rest. On the Bond 10 minute NVR he always managed to finish in around 5 minutes without dropping a mark. His final score in QM Walsall was 371 and ranked 31st (around 75% to 80% raw), and in KE he achieved 235 (around 65% to 70% raw).

And going back I now feel he did a lot better in QM as there was no pressure on him (back up for us), but for KE his nerves played a part. Our tutor predicted around 245 for KE and she is generally spot on!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
That so mirrors my our experience. I think DD was generally fine with the Queen Mary time wise. King Edward was a complete sucker punch from a time perspective and she crumbled initially under time pressure. Although she appears to have recovered in later sections and paper 2.

DD averaged around the 80% mark , except for NVR which were lower, on bond. Quite a few times she would score above 90%, but not regularly and certainly no where near that for NVR (more like best 75%)

Based on the numbers missed and her averages from bond we scored her for each section. For the sections where she missed significant numbers we believe raw score scores could be as low as

39% &
42%

we have two further sections at 70% a piece. Rest hover about the 60-65% mark

Killer question - Are the sections with lower number of questions weighted higher? This is one possible reason that could save our KE bacon.

Giving us a predicted Standardised score of 194. Based on your post (and the SD formula) I am getting increasingly confident that this is pretty right. I am confident with this, because I have pretty detailed information

a) on sections per paper
b) number of questions per section
c) missed answers
D) a few remembered answers where she has asked us
E) Total questions for each paper

BTW I did not ask her to remember this all (she just did).

This prediction might seem way off from the bond scores she was getting at home and with the tutor. But speed massively impacts. As she could not do them in the time she missed a wopping X% questions from two critical sections. Very few results can recover from that kind of loss.

Also might explain why lots of parents see 80-85% on bonds, but the harsh reality on the day for the raw results is much closer to 55% cohort average raw score and SD of say 195.

I think our hopes are pinned on Queen Mary, as time (speed) was less of a critical factor (although she say questions were harder) and she say she got through all sections pretty okay with only the odd Questions missed. It will be fascinating indeed to see how both scores play out.

Not least because they are both CEM and theoretically she had two months extra prep (2 weekly tutoring sessions over the summer, apart from 1 week hols), plus read 4 or 5 of harry potter series for fun over summer holidays, so we had hoped for a better crack at KE than QM.

Hope this is useful even though I obviously have had to redact requisite details DD provided.

In conclusion I never thought 80% bond would do it. Tutor always said 90%. Harsh reality is were looking at 60% on the actual test overall, so Perhaps that is a guide in its self. MSD thanks so much for the guide numbers you provided.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
btw I think more likely nearer 70% raw for an SD score of 234.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1239
Petitpois wrote:
Killer question - Are the sections with lower number of questions weighted higher?


My understanding is that each correct answer equates to 1 raw mark for all subjects areas, unless someone can correct me. And then 50% weighting is applied for English, 25% for Maths and 25% for NVR. For QM the weighting is even at 33.3%. English being the second language spoken in our house, even weighting works in our favour.

Forgot to add that because each question is 1 mark, I feel synonyms/antonyms plays a big part in the final score. I am not sure how many appeared this year, but traditionally you will get 3 times the amount of comprehension questions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
That's a spanner in the works the weighting bit If 50% weighting applied. Not sure how to factor this into formula.

But the method I have used, bumps Raw score up a bit

Will check later


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
That's a spanner in the works the weighting bit If 50% weighting applied. Not sure how to factor this into formula.

But the method I have used, bumps Raw score up a bit

Will check later


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Raw score myth
PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Posts: 2610
PP as NVR is your DD weakest area I would factor it in as a plus :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016