Pass Marks?

reggie · Post by **reggie** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:39 pm

I am a teacher in a Kent Grammar school and know someone who sat on the Headteacher appeals panel this year. They told me that the pass mark was an aggregate of 360 and a minimum of 114 in each exam.

tired_dad_2008 · Post by **tired_dad_2008** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:18 am

reggie wrote:I am a teacher in a Kent Grammar school and know someone who sat on the Headteacher appeals panel this year. They told me that the pass mark was an aggregate of 360 and a minimum of 114 in each exam.

Sorry edited by Moderator - not a non profit making site
He and I disagree on the topic of cut off marks for Judd and Skinners but that is a separate issue.

bigrob · Post by **bigrob** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:24 am

He says on this page sorry - same as above - editor

Scores for a Kent grammar school pass were: at least 120 in two tests, and at least 115 in the third.

tired_dad_2008 · Post by **tired_dad_2008** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:33 am

That page is giving statistics from the 2007 exams, not from this year's exams. The information is correct for 2007 but as he states (in red) on his news page the format of the pass mark (as well as the pass number) changed for this year.

kentish maid · Post by **kentish maid** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:33 am

Confusion has arisen as there have been two 11+ tests in kent in 2008. One lot in Jan for entry into grammar in sept 2008 and one lot in Sept 2008 for enrty in Sept 2009.

The 120 120 115 figs relate to pass mark for Jan 08 test. The 360 aggregate with lowest possible pass on any paper at 114 relates to Sept 2008 test.

Re HT appeal, you only have to worry about the it being fair or not if it was carried out for the medway test under that tests HT review stage. The HT appeal in kent is not the same thing and you can appeal to a grammar in March if your child has not passed.

Janedingdong · Post by **Janedingdong** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:34 am

With regard to the above 2 posts:-

They conflict each other completely. One gives 120, 120 and 115 and the other gives 360 with a min of 114.

Which is correct?

Also interested to see that this chap is actually offering his services at Â£40 per half hour for help with an appeal? Is that allowed on this forum?

tired_dad_2008 · Post by **tired_dad_2008** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:38 am

I think you will see that the apparent contradiction is resolved in the two posts above. Talking about two different exams (2008 entry and 2009 entry).
Details removed by a moderator, would link to a commecial website

bigrob · Post by **bigrob** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:39 am

I followed the link that you posted but didn't scroll down.

The scores that you posted were exactly as I had understood from this forum. i.e. total of 360 or above with no individual score lower than 114.

tired_dad_2008 · Post by **tired_dad_2008** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:39 am

bigrob wrote:I followed the link that you posted but didn't scroll down.

The scores that you posted were exactly as I had understood from this forum. i.e. total of 360 or above with no individual score lower than 114.

Correct.

bigrob · Post by **bigrob** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:47 am

Janedingdong and kentishmaid

Have a read of page 2. I was getting into a little heated debate last nite.

I think the matter has now been cleared up and we can all go back to being concerned parents as opposed to " a spouse of a high ranking insider of the application and appeals process"

I will leave it at that as I was reminded (quite rightly so) by yoyo123 to calm it down.

I don't want to get caned and told to leave the forum.

Caning - that brings back memories !!