nervousmom wrote:

In the warks he said the maths was easy and he completed all of it. The results show that the maths part was his weakest area, approx 70%. He thought he had not done very well in the VR section and this was his highest so 78%!

Standardised scores don't work like that - you can't say my standardised score was 132 and the maximum was 189 so that's 70% raw score for example.

A standardised score of 132 (70% of the potential maximum) is 2.13 standard deviations above the average raw score.

We don't know the average raw score for the 2012 exam, but we do for the 2010 exam when it was 18/51. If this year was similar, then to get a maximum potential raw score of 189, 33 raw marks would equate to 5.4 standard deviations - suggesting a raw score standard deviation of 6.1 - so a 132 standard score would be equivalent to a 31/51 raw score (61%)

Similarly in VR a 119 standardised score wouldn't represent a raw score of 78%, but 1.27 standard deviations above the average. If we take the 2010 raw score averages as a guideline (44/98) then the top potential score of 153 suggests a standard deviation of around 15 - so a 119 standardised score would be about a 63/98 raw score (64%)

All figures supposition as we don't know this year's actual raw score averages of course, but they illustrate the differences created by standardisation.