Page 1 of 1

KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:05 pm
by BlueNewt
Gobsmacked on the waiting list position for our son this morning.

We thought that the guidance sheet took into account the standardised results.

Our son is in the Yellow zone, scoring above the entry allocated on national offer day for last year.

As the scores are standardised, you can imagine my surprise when receiving a mid 40's place on the waiting list.

Grateful to know if I am the only one this year in shock.

Re: KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:35 pm
by mum of boys
So sorry - you must be gutted. There must have been more applications this year to KEGS from boys with high scores.
I think last year there were children with scores in the green zone who weren't offered places at some of the schools on offer day - they just can't predict accurately enough.

Re: KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:48 pm
by talea51
I'm so sorry. I think the scores for Kegs were very high this year, I don't know why...

Re: KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:20 pm
by Freddiefox2002
Boys scores were high across all the Essex grammars. Just look how the Southend boys schools entrance mark has shot up as well.

Re: KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:32 pm
by KSWCA
The scores are so much higher and the number of applicants increasing. DS got 330 and we were hoping for CRGS. With last years 337 in mind (and in complete denial of this years 446 minimum score) rang to check position..... 330 is 75th on the wait list. I make that 5 boys for every point scored.

Re: KEGs - how is the guidance sheet so wrong this year?

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:59 pm
by Halo
Aang posted the following on a separate thread recently, as I too was wondering why the Boys' scores needed were higher this year... In the "Collated Cut Offs 2014 Thread". It's really interesting how removing some CCHS entrants has meant a skew in scores.

"I suspect the reasons the cut-off scores are slightly higher is not so much because there are proportionally more boys this year, but that there is proportionally fewer Chelmsford girls. Although the standardised mean score is 300, this is across Southend, Chelmsford and Colchester. My analysis suggests that the actual standardised mean for Southend candidates is closer to 290 and that of Chelmsford/Colchester is nearer 310. This year, CCHS has set their own CEM exam, and a consequence of this is that proportionally more higher raw scores have been removed from the sample. However, in the process of standardisation, the mean has to be back at 300 so the standardised scores get stretched out so to speak, so whereas a score of 330 in other years would now become 333. Colchester County High Schools would show a similar increased cut-off score, except that they have increased their intake this year. It is less about the boys vs girls mix, but rather the Southend vs Chelmsford/Colchester mix.

This would also support anecdotal evidence that there will be more Southend in catchment scores which exceed the pass mark of 303, and hence fewer spaces available for Southend area OOC, and subsequently higher cut-off scores for Southend OOC..

That's my opinion, for what it is worth..."