Some important information.
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
y is a square number etc.
First of all, bear in mind that this is one of 50 questions to be covered in 50 minutes. I would agree that any bright 10 year old should know square numbers, it is a) the exam situation and b) the manner of asking the question that are the challenges here. In the classroom this would not represent a particular difficulty if the child has been taught the meaning of the 'less than or equal to' sign. Had you been taught these by the age of ten? I somehow doubt it.
Someone quoted this as an indictment of the GCSE exam. That was not my intention. GCSE exams can be taken at several levels. Yes, I know that the 11+ is designed to be taken by the more able, it is not an exam for all.
One reader replied
‘I thought this question was quite difficult. I then sat there trying to work it out, and I was beginning to think that there is no number that fits. Then I realised that I read it as prime number not squared
I agree with the the above that any child in Y6 should know the square numbers, thus this question is not at all difficult.’ Hold on, you initially made a mistake, presumably as and adult in the comfort of own home etc. not in a strange place, surrounded by strangers, under the stress of pace and unfamiliarity with wording. It is very easy to remark how simple a question is under totally different circumstances. Try thinking like a ten year old! If you would care to read my original post, you will see that I am referring to a Head of Maths department, not a Headteacher, who may or may not have a specialism in Mathematics and may well be 'out of practice' on such questions.
Another comment on the two systems, Kent and Medway: yes, the voters may well have voted it in, but they probably did not take into account the changes that have taken place such as the movement to September for Kent and October for Medway. If the arrangement was made 15 years ago, perhaps it is time it was reviewed.
Medwaymum has misunderstood my point. I was referring to the requirement of 12 to 15 out of 50 in the Medway maths test. In this and this alone would it be possible to train a chimpanzee, as the test is multiple choice and even in only this test such a possibility is highly undesirable. Some years ago the test raw score pass mark was 32 to 34, a score that is far more statistically valid and gives a proper spread of results.
Reddebs: what are the reasons that make two tests viable? One test taken my Medway and Kent children would be viable if only the two authorities could come to an agreement. Are you aware that some ‘Kent’ Grammars are rather concerned at the level of competence in literacy of those admitted, it being possible to enter a Kent GS on the basis of multiple choice answers, without writing a sentence? I have heard that some are in favour of setting their own entry tests, thus further fragmenting the system.
I read elsewhere that there is a rumour that there was a ‘leak’ regarding the subject in the English component this year. Unlikely in my opinion as Medway release very little information as to the marking criteria, the apportioning of marks, the total ‘raw’ score and just who is it that marks the tests? There have been rumours in the past that students are used, office staff etc. etc. The level of secrecy is such that such rumours will abound. A transparent system would allay some fears and rumours. I question whether the marking is moderated as I have frequently noticed massive differences in the scores allocated: it is quite common for teachers to question why bright and competent writer X is marked much lower than far less competent write Y. This includes taking age weighting in to consideration for standardisation purposes. Are the children in one school marked by one person or several? We, the public, ought to be made aware.
My reply to mad? The misconceptions and lack of information referred to is on the site in many areas. For example, where is a coherent explanation of standardisation?
This year ‘Medway’ had no contingency plan in place for the delivery of results. This is one of the most important events of the year within the education department, yet they made a complete mess of it. Some children were still awaiting their results three days later than the promised time. Senior management are paid in excess of £150 000 p.a yet could not foresee a problem! It was widely known that a postal strike was imminent. The results could have been sent by email, directly to schools where a member of staff could have disseminated them to visiting parents, a website access code could have been provided. Any of the above or a combination of them would have saved a considerable portion of the £9 000 paid out to a courier company.
I am not prepared to reveal who I am, it is not necessary. I am happy to draw attention to the poor administration, the way the public are duped into thinking that the process is fair and to assure you that mistakes are made and that incompetence within the process is endemic. After all, it has been alleged that the expensive and highly organised SATs tests, where markers must be qualified teachers and the system has several levels of moderation apparently award the wrong scores to one in six pupils. Let me give you an example of just one ‘Medway’ mistake: A few years ago, the results of two children with the same initial and surname were switched. The very bright girl was not awarded a Grammar place, the rather slow boy was. The mistake regarding the girl was rectified, but the boy went on to his Grammar place, once awarded it could not be revoked, so a more deserving child was denied a place. A fair process?
Someone quoted this as an indictment of the GCSE exam. That was not my intention. GCSE exams can be taken at several levels. Yes, I know that the 11+ is designed to be taken by the more able, it is not an exam for all.
One reader replied
‘I thought this question was quite difficult. I then sat there trying to work it out, and I was beginning to think that there is no number that fits. Then I realised that I read it as prime number not squared
I agree with the the above that any child in Y6 should know the square numbers, thus this question is not at all difficult.’ Hold on, you initially made a mistake, presumably as and adult in the comfort of own home etc. not in a strange place, surrounded by strangers, under the stress of pace and unfamiliarity with wording. It is very easy to remark how simple a question is under totally different circumstances. Try thinking like a ten year old! If you would care to read my original post, you will see that I am referring to a Head of Maths department, not a Headteacher, who may or may not have a specialism in Mathematics and may well be 'out of practice' on such questions.
Another comment on the two systems, Kent and Medway: yes, the voters may well have voted it in, but they probably did not take into account the changes that have taken place such as the movement to September for Kent and October for Medway. If the arrangement was made 15 years ago, perhaps it is time it was reviewed.
Medwaymum has misunderstood my point. I was referring to the requirement of 12 to 15 out of 50 in the Medway maths test. In this and this alone would it be possible to train a chimpanzee, as the test is multiple choice and even in only this test such a possibility is highly undesirable. Some years ago the test raw score pass mark was 32 to 34, a score that is far more statistically valid and gives a proper spread of results.
Reddebs: what are the reasons that make two tests viable? One test taken my Medway and Kent children would be viable if only the two authorities could come to an agreement. Are you aware that some ‘Kent’ Grammars are rather concerned at the level of competence in literacy of those admitted, it being possible to enter a Kent GS on the basis of multiple choice answers, without writing a sentence? I have heard that some are in favour of setting their own entry tests, thus further fragmenting the system.
I read elsewhere that there is a rumour that there was a ‘leak’ regarding the subject in the English component this year. Unlikely in my opinion as Medway release very little information as to the marking criteria, the apportioning of marks, the total ‘raw’ score and just who is it that marks the tests? There have been rumours in the past that students are used, office staff etc. etc. The level of secrecy is such that such rumours will abound. A transparent system would allay some fears and rumours. I question whether the marking is moderated as I have frequently noticed massive differences in the scores allocated: it is quite common for teachers to question why bright and competent writer X is marked much lower than far less competent write Y. This includes taking age weighting in to consideration for standardisation purposes. Are the children in one school marked by one person or several? We, the public, ought to be made aware.
My reply to mad? The misconceptions and lack of information referred to is on the site in many areas. For example, where is a coherent explanation of standardisation?
This year ‘Medway’ had no contingency plan in place for the delivery of results. This is one of the most important events of the year within the education department, yet they made a complete mess of it. Some children were still awaiting their results three days later than the promised time. Senior management are paid in excess of £150 000 p.a yet could not foresee a problem! It was widely known that a postal strike was imminent. The results could have been sent by email, directly to schools where a member of staff could have disseminated them to visiting parents, a website access code could have been provided. Any of the above or a combination of them would have saved a considerable portion of the £9 000 paid out to a courier company.
I am not prepared to reveal who I am, it is not necessary. I am happy to draw attention to the poor administration, the way the public are duped into thinking that the process is fair and to assure you that mistakes are made and that incompetence within the process is endemic. After all, it has been alleged that the expensive and highly organised SATs tests, where markers must be qualified teachers and the system has several levels of moderation apparently award the wrong scores to one in six pupils. Let me give you an example of just one ‘Medway’ mistake: A few years ago, the results of two children with the same initial and surname were switched. The very bright girl was not awarded a Grammar place, the rather slow boy was. The mistake regarding the girl was rectified, but the boy went on to his Grammar place, once awarded it could not be revoked, so a more deserving child was denied a place. A fair process?
Oldie.
Re: y is a square number etc.
I'm sorry but I'm still confused over this. I certainly agree with you on some points, however I do not believe for one moment that it would be possible to train a chimpanzee to pass the Medway test. If like you say it is possible to gain a passable score in the Math by achieving 15/50, then that will be the rock bottom score. Many other children will have achieved higher than this. But they also have to achieve a passable score in English and Verbal Reasoning.Oldie wrote: Medwaymum has misunderstood my point. I was referring to the requirement of 12 to 15 out of 50 in the Medway maths test. In this and this alone would it be possible to train a chimpanzee, as the test is multiple choice and even in only this test such a possibility is highly undesirable. Some years ago the test raw score pass mark was 32 to 34, a score that is far more statistically valid and gives a proper spread of results.
I do believe that the testing system has its flaws, of course, but the point of standardisation is that every child is comparable. If it is a harder test paper then the overal scores will be lower...the same percentage (23%) will always be passed.
What would you like to see in place of this testing, Oldie? How would you change it, out of interest?
Medwaymum.
Please read the section you highlighted. It is quite clear, but I will try one more time.
It would be possible to teach a chimpanzee to pass the Maths component alone.
This is because the pass mark is between 12 and 15 out of 50 in a multiple choice test. The multiple choice is one in every five. This means that a totally random choice could easily give a score of 10 out of 50. It would then only require a small amount of luck to score a few more and thus gain a pass in Maths alone. It is not possible to pass the whole on Maths alone. However, this element of chance or more properly, probablity, makes the test invalid in statistical terms. This is far from desirable. This mark of 12 out of 50 as a pass gave the standardised score for a pass in Maths in 2003.
How would I change the test?
a) Kent and Medway should do the same test on the same day, with parents opting for a school in one or the other. This would remove the silly statements each year that 'More passes have been granted than we have places for'. This is all sorted out when parents make their choice, but why do we have the annual scare?
b) The whole should be more transparent. Tell us how the English 'Writing' is scored. Tell us who is marking the papers. Assure us that the process is moderated.
c) Produce Maths tests that have a sensible pass mark, say 32 or 33, so that children come out of the test fee
ling that they have given it their best, instead of coming out feeling that they are a failure because it has been deliberately set at too high a standard.
d) Move the test back to January or even February in order to give the children a fair chance of development in Year 6. Yes, I know that it is a 'level playing field' whenever they take the test but I am convinced that more children would be 'ready' for it and this would give the later developers a chance to mature a little.
e) Send out the results on the same day. Have a contingency plan in place to avoid delivery problems.
f)Make the 'review' or appeal process more transparent. On past experience there can be no quality control or moderation between the several panels, I have known fairly weak children gain a place, yet far more able children with excellent evidence (books) do not. There needs to be a point of comparison. This process is designed to take care of the underperformance on the day issue and it does not with any degree of accuracy.
g) Take some account of teachers' opinions, but not too much!
h) Make previous test papers and English titles available. As previously stated, this is the only public examination where these are not available.
i) Let schools do some preparation for testing. They certainly do this for the SATs tests, so why not the 11+? Someone is sure to jump in and say that the whole year would be spent on preparing for tests. In my long experience it is tests that provide a focus, a target for children and actually show them how to use taught skills in a way that general teaching and a textbook do not prepare them for. In school preparation would also create a lessening of the two tier effect i.e some fortunate children are tutored, some are not. If all were practiced at school, all would have a fairer chance, not just those tutored.
Overall make this a fairer process for the children, make it easier on them. Stop making mistakes, take more care over these important decisions that have a major effect.
None of these measures would cost much.
I am, of course, wasting my time. This is because this years' parents, who may be interested and active now will cease to be so in a few months and next years' contingent will need to set off on their learning curve. The annual cohort is too small to change things significantly.
It would be possible to teach a chimpanzee to pass the Maths component alone.
This is because the pass mark is between 12 and 15 out of 50 in a multiple choice test. The multiple choice is one in every five. This means that a totally random choice could easily give a score of 10 out of 50. It would then only require a small amount of luck to score a few more and thus gain a pass in Maths alone. It is not possible to pass the whole on Maths alone. However, this element of chance or more properly, probablity, makes the test invalid in statistical terms. This is far from desirable. This mark of 12 out of 50 as a pass gave the standardised score for a pass in Maths in 2003.
How would I change the test?
a) Kent and Medway should do the same test on the same day, with parents opting for a school in one or the other. This would remove the silly statements each year that 'More passes have been granted than we have places for'. This is all sorted out when parents make their choice, but why do we have the annual scare?
b) The whole should be more transparent. Tell us how the English 'Writing' is scored. Tell us who is marking the papers. Assure us that the process is moderated.
c) Produce Maths tests that have a sensible pass mark, say 32 or 33, so that children come out of the test fee
ling that they have given it their best, instead of coming out feeling that they are a failure because it has been deliberately set at too high a standard.
d) Move the test back to January or even February in order to give the children a fair chance of development in Year 6. Yes, I know that it is a 'level playing field' whenever they take the test but I am convinced that more children would be 'ready' for it and this would give the later developers a chance to mature a little.
e) Send out the results on the same day. Have a contingency plan in place to avoid delivery problems.
f)Make the 'review' or appeal process more transparent. On past experience there can be no quality control or moderation between the several panels, I have known fairly weak children gain a place, yet far more able children with excellent evidence (books) do not. There needs to be a point of comparison. This process is designed to take care of the underperformance on the day issue and it does not with any degree of accuracy.
g) Take some account of teachers' opinions, but not too much!
h) Make previous test papers and English titles available. As previously stated, this is the only public examination where these are not available.
i) Let schools do some preparation for testing. They certainly do this for the SATs tests, so why not the 11+? Someone is sure to jump in and say that the whole year would be spent on preparing for tests. In my long experience it is tests that provide a focus, a target for children and actually show them how to use taught skills in a way that general teaching and a textbook do not prepare them for. In school preparation would also create a lessening of the two tier effect i.e some fortunate children are tutored, some are not. If all were practiced at school, all would have a fairer chance, not just those tutored.
Overall make this a fairer process for the children, make it easier on them. Stop making mistakes, take more care over these important decisions that have a major effect.
None of these measures would cost much.
I am, of course, wasting my time. This is because this years' parents, who may be interested and active now will cease to be so in a few months and next years' contingent will need to set off on their learning curve. The annual cohort is too small to change things significantly.
Oldie.
Re: Medwaymum.
Hi again, Oldie. I do understand that you are saying there could be an element of luck involved in guessing enough correct answers in Math. I guess what you may not understand I am saying is that you cannot pass on the Math alone, there is no such thing as passing on the math alone.Oldie wrote:Please read the section you highlighted. It is quite clear, but I will try one more time.
It would be possible to teach a chimpanzee to pass the Maths component alone.
To completely guess the math paper will give you ONE score alone, therefore as you rightly state you may achieve a reasonable score AS LONG AS you do well in the writing and verbal reasoning tasks. I guess this is why the test comprises of three different elements. Some counties (like Kent) only use multiple choice papers in all 3 subjects, however Medway ask for a written piece of creative writing that no chimpanzee could undertake, however well trained.
I would also like to point out that I have known several children, bright and able, working in level 5 of the curriculum to not pass the Medway test. Personally I think the Medway test probably fairer than the Kent as the main two subjects, math and english, are double weighted, and these are subjects that are taught in all schools, only one element (vr) is not taught at school. In Kent there are both VR and Non-VR which aren't taught at school so could be seen as more unfair.
There are many families who live on the Medway/Kent border. I am one of them. I am in equal distance of my nearest Medway grammar and Kent grammar, however far enough that the distances keep changing and one year could get into one grammar but not the other. Therefore the most sensible thing is to put my child into both tests and put both grammars on the SCAF, doubling my child's chance of a grammar place.
As parents, we can only work with what we are given.
-
testbuster
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:29 am
Oldie, thanks for the interesting and informative post.
I agree there needs to be more transparency - the 11 plus seems to be run like an under the counter service, maybe due to government hostility to grammar schools.
One good thing about the Medway test is that in theory you could do brilliantly in maths and badly in English and pass, or vice versa - whereas in Kent there is a minimum score in each subject.
Yes the maths is too difficult - but at least if a child is good at maths they can get a high score without getting everything right.
Not all parents from this year's cohort will stop taking an interest now - some of us have other children and more years of worry ahead! Maybe we should be making some freedom of information requests to find out what goes on behind the scenes!
I agree there needs to be more transparency - the 11 plus seems to be run like an under the counter service, maybe due to government hostility to grammar schools.
One good thing about the Medway test is that in theory you could do brilliantly in maths and badly in English and pass, or vice versa - whereas in Kent there is a minimum score in each subject.
Yes the maths is too difficult - but at least if a child is good at maths they can get a high score without getting everything right.
Not all parents from this year's cohort will stop taking an interest now - some of us have other children and more years of worry ahead! Maybe we should be making some freedom of information requests to find out what goes on behind the scenes!
-
mumgonemad
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:14 am
Hi Oldie
As the parent of a child who sat the Medway test in January a few years ago, I firmly believe that to sit the test and get the results prior to submitting your school choices is a far better option. Back then, you had to really hedge your bets as to what order to place the schools on your form. There was a real chance that if you put a grammar first, and your child was deemed non selective, you would not then be offered your first choice of non selective school as the places would have been offered to those who put it first on the form before your child was even considered.
Fortunately for me, it worked out ok - my DD did not pass or get through on appeal but went onto our first choice of comprehensive where she's doing brilliantly in the top sets for all subjects. However, I know of many parents who were not as lucky that year and recall with horror the agonies we all went through waiting for the post.
I agree that they have had less Year 6 schooling this way, but it's still a far better system than the old one.
As the parent of a child who sat the Medway test in January a few years ago, I firmly believe that to sit the test and get the results prior to submitting your school choices is a far better option. Back then, you had to really hedge your bets as to what order to place the schools on your form. There was a real chance that if you put a grammar first, and your child was deemed non selective, you would not then be offered your first choice of non selective school as the places would have been offered to those who put it first on the form before your child was even considered.
Fortunately for me, it worked out ok - my DD did not pass or get through on appeal but went onto our first choice of comprehensive where she's doing brilliantly in the top sets for all subjects. However, I know of many parents who were not as lucky that year and recall with horror the agonies we all went through waiting for the post.
I agree that they have had less Year 6 schooling this way, but it's still a far better system than the old one.
Tracy, mumgonemad
Tracy, I would gladly 'fix' Bexley, given the opportunity. It might be an uncomfortasble experience for the little empire builders there.
Mumgonemad. I do not have a problem with the order of events, in fact I also find it far preferable to the 'old' mess of a system. However, the current system could easily be used if the tests were moved later in the year, just do the placement etc. later. It really is that simple.
I cannot understand why the move to earlier was needed. The secondary schools, so we are led to believe, want to know their numbers for the following Sept earlier. Well, their admission figures are set by the local authority, so that should not be a problem. I think it is just an excuse, the two authorities, Medway and Kent are trying to outdo one another i.e. Kent wish to 'cherry pick' the best pupils from the surrounding areas. I will believe this and publicise it until I have valid evidence to the contrary. I have been around too long to just take what I am told without thinking. Medway, on the other hand have great difficulty in even delivering results so may actually need longer. This is called incompetence in other areas.
Try running your own business with the degree of efficiency that these well staffed authorities display. It won't last long.
Mumgonemad. I do not have a problem with the order of events, in fact I also find it far preferable to the 'old' mess of a system. However, the current system could easily be used if the tests were moved later in the year, just do the placement etc. later. It really is that simple.
I cannot understand why the move to earlier was needed. The secondary schools, so we are led to believe, want to know their numbers for the following Sept earlier. Well, their admission figures are set by the local authority, so that should not be a problem. I think it is just an excuse, the two authorities, Medway and Kent are trying to outdo one another i.e. Kent wish to 'cherry pick' the best pupils from the surrounding areas. I will believe this and publicise it until I have valid evidence to the contrary. I have been around too long to just take what I am told without thinking. Medway, on the other hand have great difficulty in even delivering results so may actually need longer. This is called incompetence in other areas.
Try running your own business with the degree of efficiency that these well staffed authorities display. It won't last long.
Oldie.
