Standardised scores
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Standardised scores
Hi, I have my daughters standardised scores and wondered if anyone could tell me into which percentile they fall. I am going to use them in my appeal but would like to know what I am talking about! Thanks.
Year 2 Reading 113
Maths 108
Year 3 Reading 122
Maths 114
Year 4 Reading 132
Maths 118
Year 5 Reading 129
Maths 127
Also are these OK or can you forsee any queries being raised? Thanks in advance.
Year 2 Reading 113
Maths 108
Year 3 Reading 122
Maths 114
Year 4 Reading 132
Maths 118
Year 5 Reading 129
Maths 127
Also are these OK or can you forsee any queries being raised? Thanks in advance.
Sorry to poat again but I have yet another question! I have today been given by my daughters teacher the scores from an 11+ paper she did in class. Can anyone tell me how these translate into scores. We are in Lincolnshire and the pass is 220 meaning 110 in each paper would do.She scored 78 in VR and 83 in NVR. I did not collect the results personally my husband did and she told him they were great and my daughter says she was one of the highest in the class which is why I'm sure they must be converted somehow?
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
They will be "raw scores", which are then standardised for age.
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/standa ... scores.php
It is really a lot easier to work with either the raw scores or a percentage, because you cannot calculate the standardised mark yourself.
I am guessing that your daughter's scores are marks out of 85, but someone from Lincs will be able to tell you more. (If they are marks out of 85, then they are indeed excellent!
)
Sally-Anne
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/standa ... scores.php
It is really a lot easier to work with either the raw scores or a percentage, because you cannot calculate the standardised mark yourself.
I am guessing that your daughter's scores are marks out of 85, but someone from Lincs will be able to tell you more. (If they are marks out of 85, then they are indeed excellent!
)Sally-Anne
-
obiterdicta
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:55 pm
Etienne
I have the standardised scores for my daughter's 11+ which are 111 and 108, leaving her one mark short for Lincolnshire's pass mark of 220.
However I have not had the raw scores yet.
In converting raw to standardised what is the situation where
VR was held on Sept 20 and NVR on Sept 27 and my DD's birthday is August 25th, would she be 10 plus 0 for VR and 10 plus 1 for NVR or 10 plus 0 for both?
Thanks
I have the standardised scores for my daughter's 11+ which are 111 and 108, leaving her one mark short for Lincolnshire's pass mark of 220.
However I have not had the raw scores yet.
In converting raw to standardised what is the situation where
VR was held on Sept 20 and NVR on Sept 27 and my DD's birthday is August 25th, would she be 10 plus 0 for VR and 10 plus 1 for NVR or 10 plus 0 for both?
Thanks
Hi Obiterdicta
From the Age Standardisation tables that I have seen the normal practice is to take the Age (in years and whole months) on the date of the test. So your latter interpretation would be correct, the 2 ages would be slightly different.
However you need to bear in mind that there is often no difference in the adjustment factors for adjacent months.
You daughter was clearly very young at the date of the test(probably one of the youngest), however the Age Standardisation process is only an adjustment based on age related academic ability. It doesn't take into account of the maturity or "Emotional Age" of the child. In a formal exam environment (as opposed to a classroom based test) this can have a significant impact on the child and hence the results.
Another factor is the Lincoln 11+ exam are also very early in year6.
If you think this might have been a factor you should maybe do some research and consider mentioning this - Etienne and Sally Anne will no doubt advise. I think I recall coming across a few research papers on the subject:-
See Bell, J. F & Daniels S (1990) Are summer-born children disadvantaged? The birthdate effect in Education. Oxford Review of Education 16 (1), 67-80.
Hope this helps
Regards
Ken
From the Age Standardisation tables that I have seen the normal practice is to take the Age (in years and whole months) on the date of the test. So your latter interpretation would be correct, the 2 ages would be slightly different.
However you need to bear in mind that there is often no difference in the adjustment factors for adjacent months.
You daughter was clearly very young at the date of the test(probably one of the youngest), however the Age Standardisation process is only an adjustment based on age related academic ability. It doesn't take into account of the maturity or "Emotional Age" of the child. In a formal exam environment (as opposed to a classroom based test) this can have a significant impact on the child and hence the results.
Another factor is the Lincoln 11+ exam are also very early in year6.
If you think this might have been a factor you should maybe do some research and consider mentioning this - Etienne and Sally Anne will no doubt advise. I think I recall coming across a few research papers on the subject:-
See Bell, J. F & Daniels S (1990) Are summer-born children disadvantaged? The birthdate effect in Education. Oxford Review of Education 16 (1), 67-80.
Hope this helps
Regards
Ken
-
obiterdicta
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:55 pm
Thanks Ken R. I have taken note of that research which was new to me.
I already have this research lined up.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bb2b993c-cc51 ... 07658.html
and this:
When You Are Born Matters:
The Impact of Date of Birth on Child
Cognitive Outcomes in England
Claire Crawford
Institute for Fiscal Studies
Lorraine Dearden
Institute for Fiscal Studies and Institute of Education, University of London
Costas Meghir
Institute for Fiscal Studies and University College London
One key point I will make on appeal is that age standardisation does not iron out the "handicap" of an August birth - according to the peer tested research evidence.
I already have this research lined up.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bb2b993c-cc51 ... 07658.html
and this:
When You Are Born Matters:
The Impact of Date of Birth on Child
Cognitive Outcomes in England
Claire Crawford
Institute for Fiscal Studies
Lorraine Dearden
Institute for Fiscal Studies and Institute of Education, University of London
Costas Meghir
Institute for Fiscal Studies and University College London
One key point I will make on appeal is that age standardisation does not iron out the "handicap" of an August birth - according to the peer tested research evidence.
Dear Obiterdicta
If you were only one mark short, you really don't need much in the way of extenuating circumstances, and I wouldn't overdo this argument (valid as it is). You are quoting an awful lot of research, and it worries me that the important part of your case could become overshadowed.
What will really count is the evidence of high ability.
If you were only one mark short, you really don't need much in the way of extenuating circumstances, and I wouldn't overdo this argument (valid as it is). You are quoting an awful lot of research, and it worries me that the important part of your case could become overshadowed.
What will really count is the evidence of high ability.
Etienne
