Ranking

[cazien]

I am also not sure how they would know, as the paper is marked anonymously as a number, and they have no background details on any of the candidates.

If I remember correctly we had to register our primary school along with parent status when applying to sit test test - so background details are available to the school you sit the test at. Very naughty if Pates have done that (but can understand why with all the recent press coverage of Grammars are for rich kids only!)

[Frostythesnowman]

I thought they were under pressure to increase the "free school meals" sector within the schools. And there is such criticism that there has been unfair advantage in the past from parents who either privately educate and or have lots of tutoring (and the inference in this is that these parents are more wealthy than a lot). One girl I know who got in to Pates 150 was exceptionally bright, but she also had 3 different tutors.
No, I am sure they wouldn't be allowed to do something that isn't in their selection criteria, but in the whole scheme of things, everyone was wondering whether they have put different weightings on different sections than some of the other schools and that is looking very likely. But would anyone ever find out if they were looking at other criteria too? They also have to prove that they aren't discriminating against those who can't afford to tutor.

[GL2Mum]

I really can't see that Pates (or any of the grammars) will have chosen their list on anything other than the sheer ability - they possibly/probably ensure their ranked list goes to an acceptable (in their eyes) level of aptitude in both maths and English but I can't see them being swayed by the possibility of which primary school the child attends/ possible free meal places etc.

Pates wont provide an actual ranking of those in the top 150, so if you are in there you have no idea whether your child is no 1 or no 150. You can make a guess, of course, as to which third they may fall in. 1200 students' results were shared with Pates. The boys' grammars all had around 850ish share results, I think (I'm not going to look the exact figures up) Some students will not have had their results shared with Pates, just the other 3 applicable schools. A handful may have only chosen to share just with Pates (possibly the ones to which the Head referred to in his speech yesterday where he said some places will not be taken up as the results will be used to try and obtain a bursary at a fee paying school)

At the end of the day the results are in and can't be changed. Speculating about this and that changes nothing.

[chococandy16]

First post... I thought I'd add my DS results in case it helps with the debate on Pates entry. He was within PAN for Marling (150 places), ranked 146 (140 places) for Crypt, ranked 160 (120 places) for STR and ranked 195 for Pates (150 places). So pretty even across the 4 schools. Pates had 1200 share their results and they ranked to 200 (so very small chance we will get in there!). At the Pates open morning the Headmaster said you can't compare to other schools as they are the only Co-Ed. My DS is strong in maths (although said this was hard in the test) and NVR. Weakness is VR. In his class at school (a state comp) 1 girl was within PAN for Pates and another was ranked 169 at Pates (within PAN for the 3 girls schools), 1 boy within PAN for Pates and 1 boy ranked for 3 boys schools but not on Pates list.

His tutor always told us the weighting was 50% VR, 30% Maths and 20% NVR but no idea if that is how the schools weight the sections or not!

Its interesting to see varied rankings for pates, my DD is ranked after your DS and in the top 120 for HSFG and Ribston. Her strength is more in VR and English, evidenced from mock tests and her school teacher's reports.
This is in contrast to what you have described as your DS abilities.

I am confused since there seem to be no clear pattern in Pates rankings and it will be useful if they can be transparent in giving feedback to parents. Not for entry / appeal purposes but for us to understand their true assessment approach.

It will be useful to know if anyone has an idea on how far down the 200 qualified candidates they actually admitted in 2016.
Thanks

[MintTea71]

Pates said at the open morning that they admitted to 180 last year (of the 200 who were ranked) but that it does fluctuant year to year...

[nav_dah]

First post... I thought I'd add my DS results in case it helps with the debate on Pates entry. He was within PAN for Marling (150 places), ranked 146 (140 places) for Crypt, ranked 160 (120 places) for STR and ranked 195 for Pates (150 places). So pretty even across the 4 schools. Pates had 1200 share their results and they ranked to 200 (so very small chance we will get in there!). At the Pates open morning the Headmaster said you can't compare to other schools as they are the only Co-Ed. My DS is strong in maths (although said this was hard in the test) and NVR. Weakness is VR. In his class at school (a state comp) 1 girl was within PAN for Pates and another was ranked 169 at Pates (within PAN for the 3 girls schools), 1 boy within PAN for Pates and 1 boy ranked for 3 boys schools but not on Pates list.

His tutor always told us the weighting was 50% VR, 30% Maths and 20% NVR but no idea if that is how the schools weight the sections or not!

My DS was ranked in the first 85 at Crypt, within the qualifying 120 at STR but did not get a rank at Pates. His mock tests suggested Maths and NVR were his strong areas. Pates must have very specific requirements.

[MintTea71]

Well that is strange. My DS is February born in case it's the age standardisation that makes a difference. Otherwise Pates must have different weightings across the paper sections.