Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 9:41 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Managing Expectations
PostPosted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 15
Thank goodness it's nearly over.

I can honestly say that my DD has done everything that I have asked of her. I frequently felt guilty that it was too much and then having read the posts on here felt guilty that it was not enough :lol:

I would imagine that all the children involved are doing better at school as a result of all the hard work they have put it. So they will be heading for the top set in their ultimate destination - so it has not been for nothing regardless of the outcome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:15 am
Posts: 141
If we assume there are 4250 dcs took the exam in September 2013, & that there is an equal split between boys & girls, we can use a figure of 2125 per gs.

(120/2125) x 100 = 5.6% go through, & 94.4% unfortunately miss out.

2125/120 = 17.7 ~ 18 entrants per gs place.

Therefore, if my working out is correct, for each place :

1dc is successful,

& unfortunately 17 miss out.


If anyone can check & if necessary correct these workings, I would be grateful, as I prefer to have some kind of handle on the odds :lol: .

_________________
The good guys always win in the end - Up, up & away...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:15 am
Posts: 141
However, If we assume the usual case that ~ 1500 dcs took the exam, & that there is an equal split between boys & girls, we can use a figure of 750 / gs.

(120/750) x 100 = 16% go through, & 84% unfortunately miss out.

750/120 = 6.25 ~ 6 entrants / gs place.

Therefore, if my working out is correct, for each place :

1dc is successful,

& unfortunately 5 miss out.

If anyone can check & if necessary correct these workings, I would be grateful, as I prefer to have some kind of handle on the odds. Anecdotally, this year as usual, it appears that slightly more boys take the exam than girls.

_________________
The good guys always win in the end - Up, up & away...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:58 pm
Posts: 48
The calculations you have shown per candidate gives clear indication the many DC could do very well but not get a place.

Based on the highest number of candidates it would seem that the DC would need to achieve min 95% on each papers to stand a chance.

So VR around 85/90....NVR 72/76....

Does Redbridge council provide how many officially sat these exams before results are out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 5:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:02 pm
Posts: 88
eastern wrote:
The calculations you have shown per candidate gives clear indication the many DC could do very well but not get a place.

Based on the highest number of candidates it would seem that the DC would need to achieve min 95% on each papers to stand a chance.

So VR around 85/90....NVR 72/76....

Does Redbridge council provide how many officially sat these exams before results are out.


That is very possible, I think perhaps there were more children than usual applying but I don't think there were ~2000 applicants per grammar school.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:15 am
Posts: 141
I am not sure if LBR does give out that information, but it may be worth a try e.g. under a FOI request?

With regard to the marks, it may be necessary to slightly modify the marks required. As with IQ, rather than a linear type distribution, the marks are more likely to be a Bell curve i.e. very few & tapered at either extremity, with a fat bunching in the middle.

The marks of late sitters are also subject to age standardisation.

For example, if the first test is in September & the dc is born in the 6th month (from August to September) i.e. January, that is exactly in the middle.

If the second test is taken by the dc in February, additional age standardisation applies i.e. 6+5 or 6 (months)=11 or 12.

Therefore the January born dc is treated instead as being August or September born!

(From past experience, the 2nd test was held 2 weeks before the March results in February.)

This is why I prayed that my September born DC did not fall ill, & have to take the test at a later date. Consider 12 + 5 or 6 = 17 or 18 months age-standardised :roll: !

So age standardisation affecting already high raw scores shakes things up. How many angels on the head of a pin :lol: ?

_________________
The good guys always win in the end - Up, up & away...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 5:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:02 pm
Posts: 88
That is a very good point Fat Pigeon!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:46 am
Posts: 209
eastern wrote:

Based on the highest number of candidates it would seem that the DC would need to achieve min 95% on each papers to stand a chance.

So VR around 85/90....NVR 72/76....

.


It doesn't mean that at all. It's the top 120 in rank order.

For example, the child in place 120 could have ,say, VR 73/90 and NVR 65/75.

On a more controversial note, half the children taking the 11+ are not grammar school material, it's just the "in thing" with their parents. So effectively you can half the number and that is still pretty tough competition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:23 pm
Posts: 2
Quite agree - it's the normal panic due to anticipated large number of children sitting the exams.

However, generally the same 120 will get through as would have done if the numbers were much smaller.

The whole point is - it's too late to worry now.

Best thing - start putting your plan B into action just in case you are disappointed when the results come out, instead of driving yourselves mad about something you can no longer influence.


PS - As this is my first post - I'll explain - Salman Khan is an Indian actor who is, in most ppls minds, quite 'fit' - I however am definitely NOT Salman Khan ;o)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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