Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:29 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 15  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:51 pm
Posts: 136
Anyone prepared to post predictions for INITIAL cut offs for Birmingham consortium schools come March 1st?
My predictions are (for what they're worth):
CHB 246
CHG 232
KEA 226
FW 233
BV 222
KEVIHS 223
SCGSG 219
HGS 210

Higher cut-offs this year methinks! :(

Feel free to post your predictions folks. :wink: :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
[quote="shakey"]

My predictions are (for what they're worth):
CHB 246 - No should be fairly stable
CHG 232 - Yes I agree
KEA 226 - No idea
FW 233 - No should be fairly stable, but pupil premium people are in for a shock.
BV 222 - Demand affected by decent non selective comps locally
KEVIHS 223 - I think possibly 225 due to pupil premium. I think some Free Meals parents are in for a shock. So many think that 209 PP will do it this year. No way Jose! If 228, the I will be looking for house swop.
SCGSG 219 - No - your forgetting that a lot over that way opt for Queen Mary
HGS 210 - Nope - sadly there are non academic factors that mean people won't go for this. We know people that easily could get in there and would rather send their kids to the local comp, even though the schools result blow local comps out the water.

BTW - I don't if many of you recall Zulky
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum ... hp?t=44234, moment of truth beckons, Never did get to the bottom of her assertion. However now that I have seen some of the fairly low average scores shared, my guess is that several factors are at play

1) A small increase in slightly high scorers, putting pressure on the more popular KE schools.
2) Shifting demand patterns. CHG and CHB both had stable numbers applying last year and there is no reason think otherwise this year.
3) FW will be higher as it is talked about most often in places I go.
4) I predict and big increase in applications to KEVIHS
5) Those schools that did not allocate all PP places last year, but are likely to fill them 10% this year.

Overall I am hoping that the spread of scores was about the same if not slightly worse than last year, which is what I think Zulky was alluding to. Presumably because her contact had said that raw scores were quite poor on KE this year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:38 am
Posts: 1043
Location: West Midlands / warks border
shakey wrote:
Anyone prepared to post predictions for INITIAL cut offs for Birmingham consortium schools come March 1st?
My predictions are (for what they're worth):
CHB 246
CHG 232
KEA 226
FW 233
BV 222
KEVIHS 223
SCGSG 219
HGS 210

Higher cut-offs this year methinks! :(

Feel free to post your predictions folks. :wink: :D


Are you basing this on exact numbers offered or over offers?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:51 pm
Posts: 136
nervousmom wrote:
shakey wrote:
Anyone prepared to post predictions for INITIAL cut offs for Birmingham consortium schools come March 1st?
My predictions are (for what they're worth):
CHB 246
CHG 232
KEA 226
FW 233
BV 222
KEVIHS 223
SCGSG 219
HGS 210

Higher cut-offs this year methinks! :(

Feel free to post your predictions folks. :wink: :D


Are you basing this on exact numbers offered or over offers?

Exact offers- I don't think they go over PAN anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:38 am
Posts: 1043
Location: West Midlands / warks border
If they're not offering over PAN again this year, I think there will be quite a few people who will have a nerve racking wait over the summer!

I spoke to the FO a while ago and she said they may offer about 20 over PAN (this is not set in stone, probably more her opinion) the reason being is that it created a lot more work for them regarding offer letters etc by offering at PAN, offering over PAN would make it easier for the FO from an administrative point of view.

Edit - just spoke to FO, she seems to think the should be offering at PAN not over, so your score predictions for offers day could be about right.

PP won't effect cut off score at FW for non pp, as they has their full uptake of PP last year, but I believe CHG didn't have full uptake of PP last year, so the PP uptake will increase this year, therefore increasing the CHG cut off score for non PP.

Last year 58 places were offered from the FW waiting list, so as I say, a nerve racking wait for people again this summer.

A boy in my DD class scored 238 and is hoping for CHB, so his family will more than likely be in the nail biting category this year!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
Big shock coming for those expecting places on PP at the qualifying score, 209. Qualifying score will not do this year in my view. Full PP take up will push up non PP cut off scores possibly significantly in some instances. CHG and KEVIHS are the obvious two, and with the latter a rebound in application volumes will have an impact also.

Harsh for KEVIHS hopefuls in the low 220's as 219 would have got you an offer last year, but probably won't this time round. Time to consider whether to play the game with DD2 and seek out a brief PP scenario.

The only thing to note was the low cohort average raw scores. Much lower than expected especially as people had been claiming that the papers were easy, So 55% raw was something more like 52% raw (for a standardised 200 score). Will be fascinating. BTW the numbers your up against were 5574 taking the test and roughly the following, so divvy that up by the standard deviations of 34% each side of 200, then 13.8% for next SD and 2.2% for the next and that plays out as follows

scored

<160 approx 123 candidates (bottom 2.2%)
160-179 approx 769 candidates
180 - 199 approx 1895 candidates
200-221 approx 1895 candidates
222-242 approx 769 candidates
>243 approx 123 candidates (top 2.2%)

So the top 16% of candidates are approx 892 (769 +123) up against the KE schools 1138 places and you can see that most of those scoring above 221 will get a place, if they want one. At the margins around 220 your chancing it, especially with additional PP take up this year, but even some below 220 might get a place non PP off waiting lists

F.Y.I. as of 03/04/2014:

KEA: PAN = 120,
KECHB: PAN = 120
KEFW: PAN = 180
KECHG: PAN = 150
KEVIHS PAN = 160
SCGSG: PAN = 180
BV: PAN = 128
HGB: PAN = 150

Will be interesting to see lowest scores on offer day


Last edited by Petitpois on Tue Jan 26, 2016 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1239
Petitpois wrote:
Time to consider whether to play the game with DD2 and seek out a brief PP scenario.


:lol: :lol: :wink:

+1 on cut-off scores increasing for PP places. I will give it a maximum of 3 to 4 years before the cut-off scores for PP and normal are the same. Shame though as it really defeats the purpose of having PP places as the truly disadvantaged will have no chance of competing with increasing number of people fiddling the system.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
MSD those that have their own service companies and therefore can manage accounts / periods on and off payroll etc or who live more at the margins are in much better places to "engineer" things. People in secure regular paying "decent" jobs will find it much harder to do this. The former are definitely in a more limited in number than the latter, but no system is perfect. Overall though PP scores are only going one way.

I looked at the 11+ materials we did last year,sorting out what to keep etc, I think I gave my self PTSD!!

PP


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 1239
I had a couple of PM's asking why I thought there won't be any difference in PP and normal last cut-off score in years to come. Here's why..

Firstly, last year was the first time the PP scheme was trialed in Birmingham and I am sure lot of parents weren't aware of ins and outs of the scheme. And I think we will start seeing a lot more PP applications in years to come.

I don't know the exact number of PP places available across all KE schools, but let's assume 150 places. And we also know that these places are spread between 5 or 6 schools. We also know that at the usual cut-off score for an average grammar (e.g 225), you could potentially have around 15 to 20 children on the same point. So if we have to accommodate an extra 150 children who are naturally able and also have the luxury of all the required resources at their disposal (books, private tutors etc), as compared to the truly disadvantaged children, it will require an extra 6 or 7 SD points which will be spread between 6 schools.

So in a nutshell, if the above 150 children happen to be eligible for PP scheme, the overall cut-off score across NON-PP or PP will only marginally reduce by a point or two. Now, out of the nearly 6000 children taking the test next year, would it not be reasonable to assume that around 2 to 3% of overall cohort might not be truly disadvantaged but still be eligible for a PP place.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1425
MSD wrote:
Firstly, last year was the first time the PP scheme was trialled in Birmingham and I am sure lot of parents weren't aware of ins and outs of the scheme. And I think we will start seeing a lot more PP applications in years to come.

Yes agreed
MSD wrote:
I don't know the exact number of PP places available across all KE schools, but let's assume 150 places. And we also know that these places are spread between 5 or 6 schools. We also know that at the usual cut-off score for an average grammar (e.g 225), you could potentially have around 15 to 20 children on the same point. So if we have to accommodate an extra 150 children who are naturally able and also have the luxury of all the required resources at their disposal (books, private tutors etc), as compared to the truly disadvantaged children, it will require an extra 6 or 7 SD points which will be spread between 6 schools.


I think there are 120 PP places across KE schools. So 20% less than the assumption as per below. Four schools of which the two that had unused places were CHG and KEVIHS. My assumption is that the 8 places not used last year for KEVIHS will be taken this year. I think those 8 places that will be taken will push the non PP cut off to 225 for KEVIHS. I also think it will push the CHG numbers higher. This creates a double whammy effect, because I know people on 230. If they get displaced from CHG they will take a place at KEVIHS.

My analysis is different from MSD, in that it assumes that the impact is more localised to those schools that did not achieve 100% PP uptake in year 1. Also numbers of children at each SD above 220 start to tail off massively. Of the 769 kids approx between 222 and 242, probably 569 of those sit between 222 and 232. with about 359 between 222 and 226.

I think the truth probably lies somewhere between MSD less harsh interpretation and mine. I know quite a few people on SD scores of 217 to 221, and I have to say I think anyone below 224 (not PP) ought to be extremely cautious about the prospects of a result on offer day (i am not expecting one). I am certainly praying that we will get a chance through the waiting list over the summer, but I genuinely think it is a scrape.

The one area I think offers some hope is the spread between offer day and waiting list acceptance. I think as long as the lowest offer on offer day is say 224/5 for KEVIHS then there is a realistic chance of a waiting list offer down to 220. Also perhaps PP take is still lower. The head at Handsworth told me last year that the expectation was that PP take would take several years to get up to 100%, but 80% in year 1 seems PDQ to me.


KEA: PAN = 120 but 0 PP places
KECHB: PAN = 120 - 22 places of which 100% taken in 2015
KEFW: PAN = 180 - 36 places of which 100% taken in 2015
KECHG: PAN = 150 - 30 places of which 26 taken (this might be out)
KEVIHS PAN = 160 - 32 places of which 24 taken (80%), resulting in 219 on offer day and 215 from waiting list
SCGSG: PAN = 180 0 PP place
BV: PAN = 128 0 PP places
HGB: PAN = 150 0 PP places
MSD wrote:
So in a nutshell, if the above 150 children happen to be eligible for PP scheme, the overall cut-off score across NON-PP or PP will only marginally reduce by a point or two. Now, out of the nearly 6000 children taking the test next year, would it not be reasonable to assume that around 2 to 3% of overall cohort might not be truly disadvantaged but still be eligible for a PP place.

No system is perfect, but that's another debate


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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