Graveney - various queries

[GraveneyLady]

I have recently learned that the standardisation has come out a bit strangely this year so it doesn't look as if we have a less academic batch of students getting in on test, as it at first appeared.

I can't tell you how many non-Wandsworth children took the test, but I can tell you how many non-Wandsworth children applied to Graveney (though not at what preference of course) - it was 991 for 2013 entry. We are right on the border of Merton so this is to be expected.

[ClappedOutMum]

Thanks, GraveneyLady.

Can you elaborate on "a bit strangely"? I'm not sure I follow if the standardised cut-off mark is lower then the only way the academic standard of the successful DCs is not lower is if the overall cohort (or at least those at the top) was much brighter. (So that someone in the top 4% this year (or whatever 253 equates to) is as bright as someone in the top 2% in previous years (when mark is 270).)

Given 3000+ takers of the test hard to see (although clearly anything can be statistically possible) that cohort was so much briger than past years.

[supermummy]

I had vowed to leave this forum but nevermind!
I think parents often give a false impression talking about the exams being easier based on standardised scores. My DD took the Graveney exam and it was packed. We used to live v close to the school when my daughters were born and what many forget is that parents in merton and lambeth may have v. few options so a Graveney place can be as fought over as Tiffins. We took the test mainly to soften the blow after just missing the TGS first round and I suspect others may have done the same. On reflection post exam we did think it was too far but at least as many from her primary took the exam as Tiffins.

The exam is VR and NVR. Not sure of the types but similar to the other grammars. DD finished the vr in 20 mins but said nvr was much harder as it was timed sections. Not sure if it was true but heard from the parents waiting that ooc get a harder test than wandsworth schools.

As it was DD got 91% - a decent mark but pretty far off in reality if she were relying on a place. As it was she got her first choice. For info only she also got over the cut off for Nonsuch but we had thought her mark was too low so it was only down as a lower preference.

So to conclude I doubt Graveney is an easier option and I suspect the timing of exams and results this year has skewed the results a bit but not that much for the top marks needed to get in.

[tiffinboys]

Quite agree with supermummy. However, easier the exam, more difficult to get higher standardized score. More children get very high raw marks.

[ClappedOutMum]

I wish there were a statistician reading all this to explain it all.

Perhaps, then, picking up on TiffinBoy's point just now and going back to my questions as to why the "cut-off" mark was so low this year, it is that the test was SO easy that many many children taking the WT (even those who had no interest in Graveney) got top marks (ie 100% of the test correct), so that it is a "negative skew" and not normally distributed (no bell curve this year). Just a thought.

Either that or we remain with a bell curve and the brighter kids just didn't apply to Graveney!

[tiffinboys]

253 is still in the top 4% of the children who took the tests. If 3000 took the test, then that would be 120th rank. Graveney offers 60 selective places. That means about another 60 would have put other schools as higher preferences and were eligible for those schools.

Coming in the top 120 out of 3000 is not an easy achievement. Is it?

[GraveneyLady]

By "a bit strangely", I mean that for any given raw score for a given age of child taking the Wandsworth Test, the standardised scores for 2010, 2011, 2012 entry are within a few points of each other, whereas for 2013 entry the standardised score for that given raw score is very much lower.

I can't really go into too much detail as I don't "own" the test - but this gives you a flavour.

[ClappedOutMum]

253 is still in the top 4% of the children who took the tests. If 3000 took the test, then that would be 120th rank. Graveney offers 60 selective places. That means about another 60 would have put other schools as higher preferences and were eligible for those schools.

True but what this ignores is that in the past years the top 60 rank all put Graveney as the top (since 270 would have been needed equating to the top 2%) - assuming 3000 did take the test. And I guess I am interested in whether there is a phenomenon here at work which explains why Graveney has all of a sudden dropped in favour amongst the brightest of the brighter kids.

I guess more than 3000 took the test (otherwise, you would get to the ridiculous position that all the top 2% put Graveney first!) - but the same point applies: consistently in past years you have needed to be in the top 2%, this year you needed to be in the top 4%. Statistical blip, or something else. Perhaps we will never know! (And I appreciated it doesn't really matter - will go for it anyway..... )

Coming in the top 120 out of 3000 is not an easy achievement. Is it?

Agreed, but easier than coming in top 60!

[tiffinboys]

Only if it is correct that all top 60 put Graveney as their first choice in the previous years.

There are other partially selective schools in Wandsworth too, besides some children may have opted for schools in other boroughs too.

[ClappedOutMum]

Only if it is correct that all top 60 put Graveney as their first choice in the previous years.

There are other partially selective schools in Wandsworth too, besides some children may have opted for schools in other boroughs too.

But if the cut-off mark is at the 98% percentile, and there were only 3000 test takers, then the top 60 must have put G first (and not any other school in or out of borough) which of course is ridiculous and hence my point that there must (logically) have been more than 3000 test takers.