Go to navigation
It is currently Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:00 am

All times are UTC

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:04 pm 

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:49 am
Posts: 17
We had our appeal on Friday. Early on we made a comment to the effect that at 118 it could be just 2 wrong answers away from 121. The panel chair immediately questioned the LEA rep who said that that was not the case taking into account standardisation. We didn't pursue the matter. However, I have been wondering ever since if it could be as much as 3 wrong answers which would imply parity. Given that the standardisation process is not transparent would we or the LEA be given the benefit of the doubt?

All hypothetical, I know, but I would like to know your thoughts.

thanks Flinty

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:29 pm 

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7030
Dear flinty

My thoughts are ...... that this line of argument is unlikely to get you anywhere at an appeal. :D

The panel is going to accept that Buckinghanshire LA has properly administered the process with NFER - unless there is evidence to the contrary (and that's not easy to come by!).

If you are unhappy with the outcome, the onus is on you to produce evidence of very high ability/extenuating circumstances, sufficient to enable the panel to overturn the LA decision.

That is how the appeal is conducted. I'm afraid you do not get the benefit of any doubt.

Just my twopence worth ........


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016