Does anyone know how children scored generally in the NVR this year? The timings seemed very tight. We have applied for selection review, DS scored 117 in NVR (128 NR, 114 VR). The NVR seems to me to be the least susceptible to tuition - some people can do them, some can't. Will a fairly good NVR score go in his favour for review?

The scores are standardised so there will be pretty much the same spread this year as every year.

As above. There will be approximately the same proportion of people on the same scores as last year. Some will have got 150+ on NVR, some will have got less than 100. The NVR score has already been accounted for of course, as a weighted part of the overall score, so it's relative importance is already established. The scores of each section and the combined standardised score are part of the review process, along with the academic evidence and any extenuating circumstances. No one can quantify the weight any element carries in a review because the review is a human process and therefore has a degree of subjectivity to it. 118 is a good score but you can see how many reviews on that score were successful last year. Although it's not a formulaic process, there's a strong probability that those that were successful had the strongest academic evidence perhaps with "good" extenuating circumstances which were suggestive of underperformance in the tests.

Thanks.
150+ on NVR...... OK, mind blown

It's adjusted so that about 30% of children will score 121 overall, I know this. But does this mean 30% will score >=121 on NVR as well? For example my other child totally failed NVR with under half right, but scored very highly on the other two sections, so still ended up with a high score.
I read on this forum that a head teacher had said this year's test was the hardest 11+ they had seen in 15 years. How do they guage how hard the test is as 30% still pass? The raw scores must come into it somewhere? Quite confusing - don't think I would pass the 11+

The reason why they pass a fixed about-30% ish each year, is that if they accidentally dream up a superhard paper, there will still be a top-slice of the most able pupils (I’m ignoring the tutoring effect here) deemed elegible for grammar school.
This also gets around the fact that they have changed provider, altered test structure, etc.... there will still be eg 4500 entrants and about 1500 “passes”, and <however many> places available to offer on distance grounds not score.

It is very clearly explained that each section is standardised (so that 30% get 121 or above) and then the three sections are combined according to the explained weighting proportion (so some sections are more valuable in terms of total score weighting)
And then converted into an overall adjusted score: it is this single “end score” that matters and deems your DC “elegible” or “not” for a grammar school.
They don’t NEED to give you a breakdown by section score, they just do (presumably for transparency).

I really don't think Heads are able to judge the difficulty of the paper - I'd be seriously concerned if they took that much detailed notice of the questions.

I agree. It sounds like the sort of thing a HT might say to make parents feel better.

I wondered this but in reverse. My son scored 120.75 overall but scored very badly at NVR (102). He scored 134 in VR (his English is very strong so this was no surprise) and 117 in maths. I'm concerned they'll see that it's low and it'll go against him but as someone said, the importance has already been set by using the weighting of each section. What will be will be. Wishing we had done a bit more work in the summer hols but DS was not fazed at all by the exam and so therefore I think I did the right thing. Wishing you good luck. Just 3 months to wait.