re:raw scores and appeals

Consult our experts on 11 Plus appeals or any other type of school appeal

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

Tree
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:19 pm
Location: bucks

Post by Tree »

It's a pleasure to help MG, I have been following your appeal on the forum and i wish you all the best of luck you must have a good chance.

I was just wondering where in bucks you live are you anywhere near thame as my daughter goes to lord williams there and they seem to have excellent provision for children with aspergers and autism and as it's an oxford comprehensive the top sets seem to be roughly equivalent academically to the grammars and are maybe more flexible for children who develop late or who have a very mixed set of strengths and weaknesses in different areas and i wondered if this would be an option for you? Maybe even if you don't live too close you may have a chance on a transfer appeal because of lws specialist resource? Obviously and hopefully this won't be necessary!

All the best

Tree
Morning Glory
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:46 pm
Location: Bucks

Post by Morning Glory »

Tree

Thank you for you support.

We live Wycombe side of Bucks and believe me I have thought of everything including Comprehensive system, private education and home tutoring. All have there pros and cons.

Regards
MG
ian35mm
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 8:04 pm

Post by ian35mm »

Tree,

I'm getting to grips with your model, I think.

Two questions, though.

1. What are you taking as your mean?
2. How are you modelling your sd?

Cheers,


Ian
Opinion counts for nothing - show me the evidence!
Tree
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:19 pm
Location: bucks

Post by Tree »

Hi ian35mm

The mean and the standard deviation and the age correction factor are the 3 unknowns. I have 14 or so known raw vs standardised scores (from people who have done test paper analysis) and using a numerical method i vary the mean, standard deviation and age correction variables plugged into the equation above reiterating the variables untill you get the smallest error between the modelled scores and known scores.

It was interesting to find that the mean score is around 50 even though the tests are probably designed to have a mean score of 40 and i wonder if this reflects the coaching and selection of children that take the test ?

Hope this makes sense

tree
ian35mm
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 8:04 pm

Post by ian35mm »

Having had a look through the paper work from our own appeal (a long time ago now), it would appear that at the time the mean VR score for her cohort was 108.

A bit higher than you might expect, but only until you consider that there is the option of not taking the test in the first place. As a lot of SEN kids don't take the test and a number of parents opt their children out of the system, it was put to us that with a score of 108, our DD was statistically average!
Opinion counts for nothing - show me the evidence!
Tree
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:19 pm
Location: bucks

Post by Tree »

Presumably the 108 was a standardised score so i don't understand how that could be the average score because my reading of the standardised score
(from nfer http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/research/ass ... sation.cfm) is that 100 represents the average score of all children taking the test and that 1 standard deviation represents 15 standardised score points so if she got 108 her score would have been 0.5 sd's above the mean score. That is unless the standardisation is done on a sample of children not taking the test but i thought it was standardised by the cohort taking it ??
patricia
Posts: 2803
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 5:07 pm

Post by patricia »

Dear Tree

Bucks is different from other areas, we use a different mean currently 111.

Follows an extract taken from Bucks CC..

The 11+ tests have an average standardised score of 111, and they are standardised on a combination of an initial national standardisation and then annual local standardisations.

Patricia
Tree
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:19 pm
Location: bucks

Post by Tree »

Mmmh now that is interesting so it looks like the tests are nationaly standardised then the local results are matched to these national standardisations if the standard deviation is correct at 12 then this would mean that the local mean score of 111 would be (11/15)x12 = 9 raw score different from the national mean score. This suggests that the combination of coaching and preparation and not all children taking the 11 plus, adds an average of 9 raw score marks for the test in bucks over the rest of the country - i think that right but i'll sleep on it!
flossie
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:29 pm
Location: Middlesex

Freedom Of Information Act - Two Test One's

Post by flossie »

Dear all,

I thought the following might be of interest. I raised the question a while ago about whether all children taking both test 1's were standardised together as my daughter took the second test 1. I feel angry about this whole situation now - it seems so unfair. Her results were not standardised with a fair mix of abilities it seems. I wonder if including this information would help or hinder in appeal?

The first part of the posting below is my email to Bucks CC and the second part is the response I received.

x

DD: 30.01.99

Test 1 score: 120 raw score: 69

Dear .........

Thanks for the test analysis. I have received the standardisation explanation as well, which I do not find at all clear. Still I do not know if all test 1's both original and replacement were standardised together as if they were one test. Also what does it mean when is says the replacement test 1 children's scores were 'isolated'?

I have looked at a popular website 11plusexams.co.uk where other parents have posted their children's raw scores and it looks like DD has not had her raw score standardised properly. For instance one child achieved 119 with 66 raw score on test 1, March born. They cannot have been awarded around 5 extra points just for being two months younger surely, I don't think age standardisation is that generous. Please would you check her score has been standardised properly.

Under the Freedom of Information Act I would like to request some data.

What raw score did a child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the original test 1 paper.

What raw score did an OoC child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the replacement test 1 paper.

What raw score did an OoC child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the test 1 paper last year.

Please would you make sure that the foi team action the above request.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards


FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUEST


Thank you for contacting Buckinghamshire County Council.



Your request for information has now been considered and the information you have requested is as follows:



We have assumed for the purposes of this comparison that the tests were all taken on 27 October either last year or this year. This is because the 11+ standardisation does not necessarily equate to month of birth as the standardisation 'slot' a child will be in depends on their personal age in years and months on the date they sat each test.

What raw score did a child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the original test 1 paper. = 68
What raw score did a child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the replacement test 1 paper. = 70
What raw score did a child born in January 30 need to achieve to pass with 121 on the test 1 paper last year. = 69

We cannot comment on the example score you give from the website, as we do not know the date of the test and the exact date of birth to enable us to ascertain which 'slot' would apply.

With regards to the extra marks given to younger children; the standardisation looks at the amount by which each age band's raw score marks vary from the norm and corrects it accordingly so it varies according to each test, and by only as much as that group's performance has varied. We do know that younger children tend not to perform as strongly as older children so it tends to be the younger groups that are adjusted to the norm in this way.
Tree
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:19 pm
Location: bucks

Post by Tree »

hi flossie you mentioned a standardisation explanation what exactly did they say ?

I think the answer to your question "were the late and original testers standardised together" must be no otherwise they would not be 2 different pass marks for each cohort. Also it is clear that the second cohort was of a higher standard or the test was easier and so you needed to get a higher score to pass if you were in the second cohort which i must say does seem to be unfair?

Am i right in remembering that the replacement test 1 was the same as the test 1 from last year ?? if so then it would seem to me that you could make the point that because she was standardised with a cohort who were of a higher standard (certainly higher than the year before who took the same test) that she was disadvantaged by around 1 mark which in her particular case would have probably meant a pass if she had, for example taken the same test whith last years cohort she would probably have passed. You need to ask the appeal experts if this would be appropriate to mention but i think the evidence points to saying she had a definate disadvantage.
Post Reply