Which exam typically kept scores down: Maths, VR, NVR ?
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Maths is my childs best subject but he got the lowest score in it 120 which is very odd especially as he is considered gifted in it. The one I was worried about VR he got 134 which almost surprised me just as much as I thought he might fail due to it. For NVR he got 139. Seems quite a difference in scores which was never the case during practise
We are not in a super selective region so the overall score is not a problem for us but it would seem the maths paper held some surprises this year.
I feel very fortunate they passed as realise that it was only by 3 points on a subject I thought there would be no issues with. I really feel for those whose children didn't make it and I agree it seems really unfair when childrens scores are well over 360 combined that they can fail due a few points on just one subject.
We are not in a super selective region so the overall score is not a problem for us but it would seem the maths paper held some surprises this year.
I feel very fortunate they passed as realise that it was only by 3 points on a subject I thought there would be no issues with. I really feel for those whose children didn't make it and I agree it seems really unfair when childrens scores are well over 360 combined that they can fail due a few points on just one subject.
-
long and winding road
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 7:36 pm
My first post!!! Have been on the site for weeks reading everyone elses and thought it was time to contribute!
My DS scored lower in Maths than was expected - this is his strongest subject and he got 131 with VR 140 and NVR 140 - we are delighted with his overall score of 411 as we are OOC and it looks likely he will get into Skinners with this score.
My DS scored lower in Maths than was expected - this is his strongest subject and he got 131 with VR 140 and NVR 140 - we are delighted with his overall score of 411 as we are OOC and it looks likely he will get into Skinners with this score.
-
scattydolores
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 1:02 am
- Location: TW
AAAAAGH - why did no-one read SSM's succinct and correct answer early on in the thread?
The original question is based on a fallacy - there can be no paper in which children typically scored worse in than others. One paper might be "harder" than others in any one year, but this will not be reflected in the final standardised scores that you receive in the post. Everyone sits the same paper, and the standardised scores are there to help select the top quarter of the kids.
The same percentage of children receive each score on each paper. So in a year that the maths paper was particularly difficult a child would have had to get a lower percentage of answers correct to score 120, 130, 140 etc than in previous years.
140 does not mean that your child got all the questions right. Roughly speaking you have to get about 50% correct to score 120 in a paper, and maybe around 75% correct to score 140 but this floats from year to year. For a more difficult paper, a child would have to get a lower percentage correct.
If you score 120 or more in a paper, this roughly means that you are in the top quarter of the population for that particular paper.
Most of the answers on this thread are at worst incorrect, or at best misleading. Sorry if this sounds rude.
The original question is based on a fallacy - there can be no paper in which children typically scored worse in than others. One paper might be "harder" than others in any one year, but this will not be reflected in the final standardised scores that you receive in the post. Everyone sits the same paper, and the standardised scores are there to help select the top quarter of the kids.
The same percentage of children receive each score on each paper. So in a year that the maths paper was particularly difficult a child would have had to get a lower percentage of answers correct to score 120, 130, 140 etc than in previous years.
140 does not mean that your child got all the questions right. Roughly speaking you have to get about 50% correct to score 120 in a paper, and maybe around 75% correct to score 140 but this floats from year to year. For a more difficult paper, a child would have to get a lower percentage correct.
If you score 120 or more in a paper, this roughly means that you are in the top quarter of the population for that particular paper.
Most of the answers on this thread are at worst incorrect, or at best misleading. Sorry if this sounds rude.
-
tired_dad_2008
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 9:24 am
Mystery is correct.
There is one corollary of the system that you need to watch though, which is that when a given paper is easier than normal, more children will score higher raw scores. This can have the effect of making it harder to differentiate between the very good children and the "merely" good children, as all will score well and a few careless slips by the brighter ones may be enough to drag them way down the standardised curve.
There is one corollary of the system that you need to watch though, which is that when a given paper is easier than normal, more children will score higher raw scores. This can have the effect of making it harder to differentiate between the very good children and the "merely" good children, as all will score well and a few careless slips by the brighter ones may be enough to drag them way down the standardised curve.
For Kent it should be pointed out.mystery wrote:
140 does not mean that your child got all the questions right. Roughly speaking you have to get about 50% correct to score 120 in a paper, and maybe around 75% correct to score 140 but this floats from year to year. For a more difficult paper, a child would have to get a lower percentage correct.
-
Bexley Mum 2
- Posts: 851
- Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 9:55 pm
- Location: Bexley
Mystery's comments make perfect sense.
But can anyone explain why it is that, as in previous years, maths seems to be the subject that most children fall down on? I'm sure there's been a debate on this in previous years. Perhaps forum users are not a representative group and there are lots of children out there getting high scores in maths and one of the reasoning papers, but not passing on the other reasoning. I've never, for example, seen anyone say their child has scored highly in maths and NVR, but failed on the VR paper.
But can anyone explain why it is that, as in previous years, maths seems to be the subject that most children fall down on? I'm sure there's been a debate on this in previous years. Perhaps forum users are not a representative group and there are lots of children out there getting high scores in maths and one of the reasoning papers, but not passing on the other reasoning. I've never, for example, seen anyone say their child has scored highly in maths and NVR, but failed on the VR paper.
my guess would be the content.
some questions cover areas not covered,in KS2 also looking at the nfer papers they often sneak in a second layer of question, converting from cm to m or the fact that an event happens every 2years and the question required an answer per year. These extra bits tend to sort out those who skim read
some questions cover areas not covered,in KS2 also looking at the nfer papers they often sneak in a second layer of question, converting from cm to m or the fact that an event happens every 2years and the question required an answer per year. These extra bits tend to sort out those who skim read
