historical data/statistics

[Guest55]

Interesting! However it would be dangerous to read too much into this data - the recommendation must be backed up by data and the panel will know how accurate the HT recommendations were and whether the predictions look sensible give the progress.

[lea2124]

Thank you Sally-Anne

When you say 2017 do you mean children who took the test in Sept 2017 or for the Sept intake/cohort in 2017? I'm all confused.
Thanks

[Sally-Anne]

When you say 2017 do you mean children who took the test in Sept 2017 or for the Sept intake/cohort in 2017? I'm all confused.

Whenever we mention a year, it is always for the year of admission, so "2017" is the cohort that started secondary school in September 2017.

The statistics we are awaiting (2018) will be for the cohort that has just started Y7.

[lea2124]

Got it. Thank you

[marie123]

Sally-Anne - what do you mean by the 300 additional cases? Sorry - I’m new to this forum

I was interested to see the stats from last year on selection review success based on HTR. Do you have the same info for below 116?

Kind regards

[Sally-Anne]

Sally-Anne - what do you mean by the 300 additional cases?

For 2017 admission there were 695 Review cases. For 2018 that figure rose to 1069.

I was interested to see the stats from last year on selection review success based on HTR. Do you have the same info for below 116?

There is very little statistical value in analysing outcomes on scores below 116 in detail because only 60 cases were successful - a very small sample. Of those cases, the recommendation for academic potential was:

1 - 19 cases
2 - 78 cases
3 - 1 case
0 - 2 cases

Although a number of cases on 1:1 were unsuccessful, they were all sub-115, and the great majority were sub-111.

[marie123]

For 2017 admission there were 695 Review cases. For 2018 that figure rose to 1069.

Thank you for your reply. Wow - that is a huge jump! I'm just starting to get my head around all the terminology as we've just submitted my DS selection review - he got 114 in the 11+. We decided to go through review based on HT recommendation - he gave him 1:1. His CATS since yr3 have been >121 and the latest were 133. We're not sure what actually happened on the day for him

I'm just trying to get it in perspective what him chances are of a successful review..I feel we have good evidence but there is weakness in his writing predictions (EXS).

[BucksBornNBred]

Sally-Anne, I am sure I have seen a list of all qualifiers at each score and also a list of HT recommendations, success rates at review etc which can be correlated. Is that on this website?

[Sally-Anne]

No, it isn't on this site, and I'm not aware that the analysis you describe has been done anywhere.

The raw data is available on various PDFs on the BCC website:
https://www.buckscc.gov.uk/services/edu ... tatistics/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That is where I source the data for my analyses, but you have to convert the PDFs to spreadsheets (which isn't always a smooth process), and then sort and analyse from there. With around 10,000 entries on each sheet, it's a lot of Repetitive Strain Injury!

[BucksBornNBred]

I can imagine, but it is all about posture to avoid RSI

That was it - I matched the ethnicity statistics from your link with (another report) and was able to track various groups.

Thank you.