kendrick results

[sonasona]

Thanks for clarifying this Tinkers!

[Tinkers]

http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/research/ass ... sation.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This might help.

Of course some schools do this differently, and I think Reading school might actually add/remove marks depending on age, but they mark their own exam, and I'm not sure whether that's true or not.

Last paragraph
2) The inclusion of this age allowance means that a younger pupil can achieve the same standardised score as an older pupil whilst having a slightly lower raw score. As stated before, this is in order not to disadvantage summer-born children in comparison to pupils who happen to have been born, say, in the previous autumn. An important consequence of this is that, in whatever month pupils were born, roughly the same proportion will achieve the specified pass mark. This is because pupils are, in effect, only being compared with other pupils of the same age as themselves.

[jamesberks]

As per Tinkers posts the weighting levels out the advantage of being older in the year group. If they didn't selective schools would be full of children born Sept - Dec and they wouldn't be able to fit in all those birthday parties. I am more interested in Reading Boys who seem far more tight lipped than Kendrick (you actually got some raw test results!) As far as I can reverse engineer from limited data what Reading School do is ...

Set 3 tests one each in English, Maths and Reasoning. I don't know how many questions in each test but the results are first standardised to give a median score of 100 using the standard deviation for these types of tests. That gives the characteristic bell curve with 100 right in the middle of the scores for the group sitting the test. 100 is not good, it's not bad, it's just relative to all the others. As someone else mentioned it's been a bumper year with 607 sitting Reading School up from 507 last year. so getting a raw 100 is probably a better achievement this year it was last year but further from the cut off.
Reading then add age weighting which for all I know may even differ per test. (Maybe English is more highly age weighted than reasoning as a Sept 1st child has about 11/10ths more exposure to people talking than a 31 August child. Maths maybe less if the home influences test results less. This part is pure speculation on my part.)

I did say Reading School are tight lipped didn't I? Going only on results posted on another thread and my son's exact age I think the maximum weighting is about 4% for a late August child, 2% for a late Feb child and nothing for a Sept 1st birthday.

It seems fairly universal that points are always added to a child to compensate for being young rather than subtracted for being old. That's also common sense as it cuts down the number of complaining parents although it makes no difference to the actual ranking which at the end of the day is what actually counts.

Reading School's weighting is based on the *day* of birth. The result is then rounded to two figures giving approx only (sic) 30,000 different possible scores. If two children answer exactly the same for every question they'll still end up with different weighted scores unless they happen to be born on the same day.

We're misled in the direction of believing that the results are very accurate as given they're measure to 2dp (although my son has no trouble distinguishing between accuracy and precision!) To get a feel about how accurate 11+ testing is likely to be check the scatter plot on page 36 of the Sutton report on selection: (http://www.suttontrust.com/research/evi ... l-systems/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) Then go and tell your daughter she did really well. The problem facing the grammar schools is they have to select in a way which is at least objective if not accurate. Don't even get me started on multiple choice !

I don't fully understand the scores you put in the two postings but if you post the wording of the results and rough age I'd have a go at figuring it out.

[stevew61]

Had this information from a friend.

December born raw scores VR 90/100 gave 113, NVR 67/75 gave 111. So overall 112.

So DD did as she was asked and scored 90%. Having seen the papers I now know where the battle was lost but can’t share exam content for a couple of months!

A parent asked about the cut off at 109.0 so the helpful deputy head looked up a score and quoted for August born VR 86/100.

For us it looks like a slight underperformance compared to preparation and bit of age standardisation and extra candidates working against us. Seeing the papers has helped, thank you Kendrick, but now have mixed emotions.

[sonasona]

Thats a fantastic score 90% average, I'm sure it will be a happy ending

[aliportico]

Crikey, that's pretty demanding. My September-born dd3 is going to have to get nigh on 100% next October to be sure of a place!

[sonasona]

Have Kendrick scores gone through the roof this year???

Massive credit due to all DDs achieving the 109 cutoff this year

[Tinkers]

Does anyone know if you can just phone up for raw scores. If so Ill give it a shot and find out my DDs.

[Reading Mum]

I emailed for raw scores a week ago but they haven't responded to that

[Goodmum]

Hi, Sonasona.
This site has been so helpful to me that I am happy to share my June born daughters' raw scores.
SS122.5 Ave 94.33% & SS120 Ave 92.84%