Pass Rates at Bucks State Primary Schools with new CEM Test

[bucksdaddy]

I clearly haven't explained my question well but it is essentially what percentage of any year's cohort from Bucks Primary Schools take up a place at Grammar School in any given year (whether qualified initially or on review or appeal)?

That question is clear, and the answer is that somewhere in the region of 99% of Bucks-resident Primary school children will accept a GS place after qualifying.

The only reason a GS place would be turned down is if the child received a place at a private school that was preferred by the parent. In very rare cases the child and parent might decide that the Upper School was a better fit for the child, despite having qualified.

It is almost certainly higher than 19% (2014) and 23% (2013) quoted as qualifying in the above stats due to successful reviews but by how much?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but let's let it pass! I hope I have answered the underlying question.

There is no way I would have passed the CEM verbal reasoning test! I'm better at Maths so will try to explain my question in numbers.

Code:
2013 entry Cohort Tested Qual (121+) % qual
IN 5243 4532 1056 23.30%
PAR 1194 1030 512 49.71%
OUT 2690 1870 836 44.71%
TOT 9127 7432 2404 32.35%

2014 entry Cohort Tested Qual (121+) % qual
IN 5349 4798 935 19.49%
PAR 807 747 366 49.00%
OUT 3235 2645 1119 42.31%
TOT 9391 8190 2420 29.55%

In 2014 of the Bucks Primary School cohort of 5,349 children, 935 achieved the qualifying score. We also know there were 342 successful Review cases, many of which will have been for Bucks Primary School resident children. If for example we assume that all 342 of the successful Review cases were for Bucks Primary School resident children then in total 1,277 from 5,349 (24%) will have qualified originally or on Review, nearly all of whom will accept a Grammar School place.

If the split of Review statistics were available in the fromat above and also available for Partner schools then one could also work out pretty accurately what proportion of Grammar School Places are genuinely "going to children from out of the county" as the BFP headlined (rather than the proportion who qualified) and understand the level of scaremongering in the BFP article.

There may be a far easier way to assess this question but I hope the question is now clearer!

[southbucks3]

I know five of those successful reviews were from two independent prep schools..( I hang around with posh totty in the hope some money may rub off )

I also know one person who put in a review even though they did not want the place as they came from slough and their child achieved a pass in the slough area where they got a place st Bernards. I doubt there are too many like that though.

There are a few of us bucks yokels appealing rather than the review still, so hang on to your statistics for a while and wish us luck ( we need it)

[kittymum]

Good Luck SB3 - a good friend of DS's is appealing and I know they're finding all the waiting tough (allocations day was hard). Have you heard anything yet as to when your appeal will be heard?

[ccl]

Removing the time pressure completely would make the test better. If required, put harder maths, nvr q (English seems hard enough, or am I biased coming from maths background and my kids having English as their third language).

No time pressure would make the kids not having to worry about making tracking mistake on answer sheet, being able to think through their answers and double checking. These skills are also useful life skills.

A nervous child (who would not be?) performs worse under time pressure. I must say I feel sorry for them.

[scary mum]

Removing the time pressure completely

I'm not sure I understand this? Do you mean not have a time limit? I agree that time pressure is difficult for the children, but how else do you separate them? No time limit (or less of one) would just result in many more children gaining high marks (both genuine candidates and "tourists") which would not help. I'm not sure making the exam harder would help either, the standardistion is designed to select the top 30%, so that would not chnage. Also, all exams have time pressures, so it is another life skill to learn (I agree that it's not one I would want them to have to learn at 10, but it is the system that we have). Sorry if I have misunderstood your suggestion.

[ccl]

Yes, I would prefer less time pressure. Being quick is typically a skill achieved thanks to tutoring. We all know how crucial it is that they have practised filling out the MC sheets. Accurately and quickly.

Harder questions would ensure children who manage harder problems would pass, not those speeding through. Nervosity or problems with filling out the answer sheet would have less impact. They would all have time to take a deep breath and think through their answer and finally double check. This appeals to me. I really find it ridiculous sitting with a stop watch trying to cut the seconds for my 9 year old instead of teaching him harder maths and more difficult problem solving. The latter is far more useful. Possibly depends on your career choice.

I agree that this would have no impact on the "tourism" though. So, I guess we would just be back to square one regarding that.

[scary mum]

Harder questions would ensure children who manage harder problems would pass

No, the top 30% would still pass.

[Sally-Anne]

In 2014 of the Bucks Primary School cohort of 5,349 children, 935 achieved the qualifying score. We also know there were 342 successful Review cases, many of which will have been for Bucks Primary School resident children. If for example we assume that all 342 of the successful Review cases were for Bucks Primary School resident children then in total 1,277 from 5,349 (24%) will have qualified originally or on Review, nearly all of whom will accept a Grammar School place.

If the split of Review statistics were available in the fromat above and also available for Partner schools then one could also work out pretty accurately what proportion of Grammar School Places are genuinely "going to children from out of the county" as the BFP headlined (rather than the proportion who qualified) and understand the level of scaremongering in the BFP article.

There may be a far easier way to assess this question but I hope the question is now clearer!

I'm with you now, and I suddenly had a moment. The statistics we are being given overall for Partner Schools are not split into In/Out County, not just those for appeals.

I have just spent rather too much time crunching the numbers, and I have a summary of figures for 2010 - 2014. Unfortunately, I have still never mastered the trick of getting a huge spreadsheet to post in Code, so I will ask one of my fellow Mods to do that for me and post it later.

In the meantime, I have extrapolated from previous years to give a possible breakdown of in/out county for 2013/2014. Assuming that all qualified Bucks resident children take up take up a GS place (which, as I posted earlier, is pretty much the case), the percentages of all in/out county children at Bucks grammars are shown below.

(Caveat: Only Reviews have been heard so far in 2014, and Appeals have yet to take place.)

PAN for all grammar schools = 2126

Code: Select all

YEAR	IN     %	  OUT	%
2010	1612	76%	514	24%
2011	1593	75%	533	25%
2012	1464	69%	662	31%
2013	1477	69%	649	31%
2014	1420	67%	706	33%

Nothing like 47% of GS places are going to out-of-county children.

[southbucks3]

I bet if you looked at Henry Floyd/chesham school stats individually the ooc would he shockingly high, and from big distances too.

[Guest55]

And if you looked at Lord Bill's there would be a high % of OOC!

These schools can't help their geographic position ... however I don't think you are correct.