Go to navigation
It is currently Sun Dec 04, 2016 4:26 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:57 pm
Posts: 2
Firstly just to say am finding this forum very useful - many thanks. My question is this: I wanted to understand if panels - our appeal is for Bucks 11+ - are likely to have visibility of the children's previous test scores - CATS, SATS tec - independently of what the school/parents provide? Many thanks, John.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:21 pm
Posts: 11936
No - unless the HT includes it in their report - any SATs results are best submitted on headed paper or in an 'official' school report to authenticate them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:10 pm
Posts: 8200
Location: Buckinghamshire
Hi johnjs

The panel only have the information that you, the parent, submit about your child. That will include the Head's appeal summary sheet, but no more than that. The school does not submit any information about your child directly.

The only caveat is that, if the LEA rep sees a significant discrepancy or an issue in the case documents that needs more information, s/he can ring the school to discuss it. That happened in a case I was involved with last year where the Head had clearly made a rather large error in the predicted SATs on the summary sheet, and it was pointed out by the parents in their letter to the panel.

I should mention that in that case the LEA rep's investigation strongly backed up the point that the parents made in the letter, and the rep was most forthcoming about it, and in an entirely positive way. Indeed, he probably won the appeal for the child concerned.

The LEA reps may be the "opposition" at an appeal, but the experience of Bucks parents is generally that they are absolutely fair.

Sally-Anne

P.S. Guest55 has, as ever, nipped in and left a pithy response whilst I type my plodding essay! Still, you get two-for-the-price-of-one, which seems to be fairly standard these days. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:21 pm
Posts: 11936
I would also suggest you do not give partial scores for CATs e.g only quote the results you like!! This will not impress the panel.

I agree about the LA rep - in our appeal he backed us up when the panel didn't understand the data we presented and got cross with them!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7059
I sense an outbreak of unanimity! :D

My experience of Bucks LA reps was that, almost without exception, they were very fair, gave factual information only, and did not set out to undermine the parents' case.

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:57 pm
Posts: 2
Thanks very much for the quick reply from you both!

One further question: it seems that on last year's figures, a fairly high proportion of appeals at 120 for Bucks were upheld (>70%). I was wondering if there is a couple of typical reasons why appeals at 120 don't get through. Perhaps because the other mark was significantly lower, causing suspicion as to whether the 120 was a fluke, plus wider evidence not compelling enough?

Interested in your views on this point.

Thanks again, John.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7059
Dear John

Yes, it might be that the other mark was lower, and the panel decided the evidence as a whole suggested the lower mark was a better indicator of ability.

I've also heard of cases where the panel took the view that 120 represented the child's "peak". (Very good curriculum work and good KS2 predictions - the result of conscientious effort and good teaching - but uninspiring CAT scores. Too many comments such as "very hardworking" can be damaging - better to have a "quick brain" and "considerable academic potential"! )

Panels are not meant to give the benefit of the doubt. Even with a score of 120, they have to be convinced the child should have qualified.

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 1:46 pm
Posts: 374
Location: Bucks
Message removed by Ambridge - apologies


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:59 pm
Posts: 1268
‘Very good curriculum work and good KS2 predictions - the result of conscientious effort and good teaching’

Etienne,
Can I just jump in with a supplemental question here? How can an Appeals Panel judge whether a child’s good curriculum work and good KS2 predictions are the result of good teaching?

Without wanting to sound too adversarial, surely they don’t have the direct knowledge of individual teachers at a school that would qualify them to pass this judgment?

And if they’re making this judgment on the basis of a school’s reputation (rather than that of individual teachers), well I think that’s quite wrong. As we know only too well teaching standards within a generally high-achieving primary school can nevertheless vary hugely.

For example, DS had a brilliant Yr5 teacher, DD had one who was off much of the year with stress and was pretty hopeless when they were there…


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7059
Dear Rob

I may not have put that very clearly! I wasn't suggesting that a panel would set out to identify whether someone had been well taught.

My point is that a very conscientious child of above average (but not well-above average) ability, can come up with good SATs results - especially when well-taught. I'm pretty sure most panels are looking for more than this when hearing selection appeals.

Take the case of "Alice" as an example. Alice scored 120 and 117, has a “1:1â€

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016