Go to navigation
It is currently Sun Dec 04, 2016 2:01 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 10:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 11:17 pm
Posts: 13
Hi, I'm going to be careful not to describe anything in the exam itself and speak more in general terms.
But DS came back yesterday and said that whole sections of what we studied in the Bond Books and at Explore Learning were not present in the exam.

He said the exam was more like the CATS style of papers and not like the types of questions we revised. Did anyone else have the same feedback?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:01 pm
Posts: 6684
Location: Herts
The CEM sections change every year. Was the Bond material you used CEM? What materials did you use at Explore Learning?

I know of students who sat Bucks as well as DAO, HBS and Latymer. Their feedback from all of them was the same; they were CEM exams with some of the CEM exam content they expected but not all of it.

This is what you expect from CEM. Different aspects of CEM come up every year.

If you had been working with CEM format material that is easily available from shops and amazon then some of what you revised would have come up.

It sounds like you might have been using old style VR and perhaps not CEM. Did your Bond books say CEM on the front? DG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 11:17 pm
Posts: 13
Yes the bond books were the CEM ones and they were very similar in content to Explore Learning.

It's hard to give examples of what was missing and staying within the rules of the forum so I'm struggling a bit. He said a whole section (style of paper) we covered wasn't in the exam. It sounds like he was the only one who thought that was the case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:42 pm
Posts: 820
Both my children have been through the Bucks CEM test - one in 2013 and one last year. As DG says different things have come up in different years but all contained elements of Verbal, Non Verbal and Numeric which is all CEM say will be in the test. Explore Learning, Bond et al I imagine provide material which cover all the variants which have come up over the years but couldn't possibly be covered within 2 45 min tests.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 4584
Location: Essex
Sorry, but this is a quote from the Durham University Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring:

'CEM strives to make the selection process fair for all candidates with assessments designed to enable all children to demonstrate their academic potential without excessive preparation. In order to maintain the fairness of the tests, CEM does not provide any commercially available practice materials, nor recommend any other commercially available materials'.
(my italics)

So really, it should come as no surprise if what your child found in a real exam written by the real CEM doesn't conform to what you have been sold by a completely different organisation...

_________________
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.Groucho Marx


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:24 pm
Posts: 629
Location: Petts Wood, Bromley, Kent
We never expected content to be the same as in DD's practice, her practice was all about being agile for the unknown. It was more about the skills of how to answer questions, being able to answer them etc that we practiced. We tried Explore Learning for a few weeks and it became apparent they didn't have a clue about the real tests in our area and the ability of the students in the test centre was so wide ranging that despite 'setting' by pod it was clearly an utter nonsense to us and we decided to home tutor looking at identifying areas of weakness ourselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 224
This kind of post raises a number of issues.

Firstly, you simply cannot expect to coach - unlike the late (and not lamented) old Bucks test.

You actually need to teach - and to inspire the love of learning.

For example in one of the comprehension books there is an article about seashells.

You could just go through it.

Or,

You can start asking questions.

What are they made of - science vocab.
Where do you find them? Well, in the sea, but what are our hills made of? - geology.
How many of them are there? - big number maths - standard form.
When people came to this country why did they walk along the chalk hills? Pre-history/geography.
What do we use seashells for? Science.
Example of slipper limpets from USA. How did they get here? Trade. Why do we trade? Economics.

OK, it takes time and there are never any guarantees, but what can the child find out themselves?

Or, take an author, or a science topic. Build the VR and Numeracy in. Develop the child's vocabulary.

Secondly, every child is an individual. So why do some people think groups are going to be the answer? Is it because they really think it's about coaching?

Thirdly, there aren't any short-cuts to learning. This is a test of a child's cultural capital as much as ability. You can't teach culture in a few hours. (One reason this test is a barrier to social mobility.) You need to put in a huge effort - and I don't mean practising answer questions from a book. You can get better by practising, but only if the foundations are in place.

A child should never go into the test thinking that they have covered all the different types of questions that will come up, nor should they be 'thrown' by the possibility of encountering new question types. They should be prepared for unexpected types of questions and flexible and resilient enough to adapt.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 04, 2016 4:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Posts: 2610
I disagree, my third child is very knowledgeable but still flunked the VR section of the test. I don't think it tests knowledge at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 1:42 pm
Posts: 987
Location: Birmingham
I agree with Tolstoy.

CEM tests a type of ability and there are some very bright children who do not do well in them despite being top of the class, well-read, high achievers. Children who always work methodically and check accuracy, in particular, do not always fare well. CEM is about speed and a certain amount of psychopathy :lol:

A child cannot pass the CEM test unless they are bright - no matter how much training they have had. But that does not mean the test always gets it right in selecting the brightest.

_________________
UmSusu


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 11:17 pm
Posts: 13
For clarification, the mock tests/revision papers from Bond Books/Explore Learning, etc.seemed to have the same sort of format:

A paragraph of text and then questions about the text
A set of words asking for the odd one out
A group of words asking to choose the synonym or antonym of a word
Long style maths questions
Short style maths questions
Non verbal reasoning style questions.

Comments on exam content removed by moderator. Do not post info about exam content.

We studied a variety of styles of questions and tons of maths and we're very happy that he passed.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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